Colorful selection of natural lippies. Shown here: ILIA Beauty, Axiology, NU EVOLUTION Cosmetics, nūdus, Lily Lolo
When brands make misleading statements about natural beauty in the press, I find it highly unsettling. Here are two examples that come to mind.
Drunk Elephant on essential oils & natural skincare
In a recent interview for W Magazine, Drunk Elephant founder Tiffany Masterson said that she’s the only one in the industry who removed irritating ingredients from skincare. In her words: “The most surprising thing I’ve found is that I don’t understand why I’m the only one doing this. It’s crazy.”
She then proceeded to connect the use of natural skincare and essential oils with causing sensitive skin. (“I also couldn’t believe how marketing steered people with sensitive skin towards natural skincare which is the main cause of sensitive skin!”) Of course, anyone who uses well-formulated natural skincare can attest that there’s no validity to that claim. Based on her concern for sensitive skin, you’d think that her line would be devoid of harmful ingredients, but surprisingly, it’s not.
(In fact, there are many claims in her interview which beg further discussion, so there will be a continuation on Monday explaining the truth about essential oils and sensitive skin. So stay tuned to The Hub!)
Juice Beauty & Gwyneth Paltrow
At the launch of her collaboration with Juice Beauty in January 2016, Gwyneth Paltrow lamented the absence of decent natural makeup brands as the motivation behind her partnership with the company.
“I couldn’t find anything high-performance enough to achieve the results I was used to,” she told Forbes in this interview. Ms. Paltrow also projected to Fortune in 2015: “I think in the next 20 years, Juice will be referenced as, hopefully, the first mass-market organic high-performance makeup and skin care.” (Italics mine.)
What’s the problem?
Simply put, these women have got it all wrong. Myopic statements like those above damage the efforts of many other authentic natural brands and experts. For one, promoting their own businesses by denying the strength and success of the many eco-conscious brands that came before them is uncalled-for. Secondly, where have they been in the last 15 years? They have certainly missed a few things.
I’m tired of hearing celebrities or elitist beauty brands with bigger PR budgets using the press to slander other natural beauty brands—or issuing statements that are completely false and uneducated. What they’re forgetting is that it is because of the hard work and perseverance of those original grassroots companies that the natural beauty market has expanded into a billion dollar industry.
It is because of the hard work and perseverance of those original grassroots companies that the natural beauty market has expanded into a billion dollar industry.
That’s no exaggeration. According to a new market analysis released by Persistence Market Research, the global organic personal care market is expected to reach USD 22 billion by 2024. Based on that figure, it is safe to presume that the products have been working well enough to satisfy the rest of us.
Once exclusively relegated to health food stores, green beauty brands like May Lindstrom, Tata Harper, True Botanicals, Leahlani Skincare, and others, are being snapped up by iconic shops like Neiman Marcus, Barney’s, Anthropologie, J. Crew and—as of 2017—Nordstrom’s.
The visionaries
We owe it to visionaries like Jane Iredale, Logona, Intelligent Nutrients, Dr. Alkaitis, Anne-Marie Borlind, Weleda, and so many others that newer labels find an established platform on which to stand today.
In fact, it has taken them years to deconstruct the conventional beauty model, which still resorts to using potentially carcinogenic and endocrine-disrupting ingredients. It has taken years to teach consumers that natural alternatives are not only a viable option, but also profitable.
These companies paved the way by proving that toxic ingredients do not need to be in a product for it to perform as well as or even better than their conventional counterparts. Their early efforts showed everyone that people do care about what they’re slathering on their skin and hair. People do want to know what they’re applying to their lips or spraying in the air or burning in their candles.
Clearly, natural and organic products passed muster with most of us discerning folks a long time before Drunk Elephant and Juice Beauty came along. So please, Gwyneth and Tiffany. Before you open your mouths to shun an entire industry—and smear decades of groundbreaking work—remember to thank them. You’re here today because of them. Make no mistake about it.
Rant over.
Absolutely Sarita!!! I lament similarly for the dedicated Green Beauty retailer! I started Truth Beauty in 2009 … before Green was cool and no one knew about Herbivore Botanicals … now, my clients stroll in and are so excited the can get RMS at Sephora … and my heart breaks a little each time…. I am a small business and believed in the efficacy of Green Beauty … it’s not solely about the $ for me…. it has always been that those with the bigger pocket books will get more of the rewards … I wish as a society we could do a better job recognizing actual pioneers!
Hello Jennifer. You’re in England and I’m in the U.S., but I understand what you’re saying. A few weeks ago I walked through the San Francisco Neiman Marcus store and saw they now sell the Tata Harper line. It made me uncomfortable to see that. I don’t want the pure brands I’ve had to work to find, try, and choose to use to be purchased by corporations and altered. I shop from the brand websites or from independent beauty stores like yours, and I do it because I recognize that the innovation comes to me through them. I began learning about green beauty in part by going to places near me such as Credo Beauty and Veer & Wander in San Francisco, and Good Stock in Oakland. I buy all of my skincare, bodycare, and makeup from the maker or from a store like yours. Sephora is not a store I enjoy. At all. I wish you well with your business.
Oh I totally hear you, Jennifer. I’d much rather support your store than Sephora. While I do think that it’s great for the brands who get picked up by the chain stores, it is tough to compete against them for the smaller establishments who put them on the map to begin with. Keep doing what you’re doing. Establish your unique niche in the beauty space. We still need you!! XO
Yes, Yes, Yes and YES!!! Thank you for writing this and sharing Sarita, so well written!
Thank you, Leah! I’m so happy that you are part of the clean evolution. We couldn’t do it without you and Leahlani Skincare. <3
Totally agreed Sarita! Together we are paving the way for the global artisan green beauty industry one step at a time.
You might enjoy these more recent statistics too: https://formulabotanica.com/global-organic-beauty-market-22bn-2024/
Thank you, Lorraine! I’ve updated the link to cite your post instead.
Thank you Sarita. I couldn’t agree more. As a relatively new fledgling brand, I am so grateful for the many fabulous green brands that have paved the way. To deny the existence of these brands is either mind bogglingly ignorant or ridiculous deception. Thank you for highlighting this in your article.
Absolutely, Joanna! Thank you for founding a brand that recognizes that. There are so many ways to build a business and knocking down others in the industry doesn’t have to be one of them. Good luck to you!
*grins from ear to ear*
*grins back* 😉
Hear, hear! Thank you Sarita, you rock! 🙂
Love all the small green beauty brands that join the clean beauty revolution.
Thank you so much, Debbie! Me too. 🙂
Brava, Sarita! Thank you from the deepest of my heart for writing this post and always, always being a strong voice for clean/natural and holistic beauty. Everything you say is so true! Bringing awareness to this is key – it’s how we will continue to thrive: openly, sincerely, and with reverence for the brands that seek to make a healthy impact in the world. Shameless profiteering in the clean beauty niche can’t hide!
Word! Thank you, Marissa. XO
Ugh, thank you! Tiffany from Drunk Elephant has been peddling this nonsense for a while now.
http://www.byrdie.com/essential-oils-for-skin/slide3
And, in addition to some fundamentally false statements (“the only reason essential oils are used is for scent”), the dermatologist in that article says to be ESPECIALLY careful of organic ingredients because not using pesticides means those plants grow alongside weeds and other potential allergens. So pesticides are preferable…apparently. Such terrible and incomplete information and it’s remarkably dismissive of the work clean brands put into their products. Or the environmental impacts of synthetic ingredients.
Thank you, Alyse, for sharing this article. I’m going to quote it in Monday’s follow up post. I get it that this has been her experience with essential oils, but that doesn’t give her license to keep making false and uneducated statements. And that part about pesticides…oh my! Where to begin?
Well said! I couldn’t agree more with your points. False or unresearched blanket statements from reps of companies like these need to stop! How about a little transparency.
What a great post! So well said and I couldn’t agree more! 🙂
I read the W Magazine interview and thought it was off base. Thanks for voicing your concern!
Yes, certainly thankful for all green beauty masters who are working hard in this industry! I can’t help but play devil’s advocate for Drunk Elephants essential oil claim. I don’t think she’s the first removing essential oils from products, but maybe other brands aren’t making it a main branding point. Just in my cabinet alone, brands like Kypris (serum III), Osmia (Naked body oil), and Primally Pure (sensitive unscented deodorant) offer products without essential oils for those with sensitive skin. So these brands have figured out that essential oils may have adverse effects on skin or at least a segment of their consumers’ skin? Kypris specifically claims its serum is made, “without the inclusion of essential oils to accommodate especially sensitive complexions.” So I guess I don’t know where to stand on the essential oil debate in products. Sure, I use lavender dots on my skin at night, but all over? No. I’d love to hear more of your/other’s take on the issue in your Monday post. After all, we continuously find out things we once thought were good for us aren’t actually so good for us.
You’re absolutely right, Jess. There ARE brands that offer products without essential oils. However, and where I take issue with Masterson, is in her erroneous statements regarding essential oil use. There is so much about what she said that was inaccurate that I’d have to dissect the entire article. The bottom line is: get to know your own skin well. Some product lines use essential oils and sensitive skin has no issue with it, whereas the same sensitive skin would react poorly to another line. It varies based on the brand and on individual skin. So I don’t think there is a one size fits all answer to it, which is the problem with Masterson’s claims. Monday’s post will help!
I’m also of the same mindset as Jess re the inclusion of essential oils in daily skincare. I’m not affiliated with Tiffany from DE in any way, but I don’t have a problem with her focus on the conscious elimination of EO’s from her line, nor of her characterization of them as being sensitizers (like other brands have that you haven’t mentioned here, but Jess did). It was never a conscious decision for me to like/ dislike them, but after some trials of products that contain lavender oil in particular, I did notice a visible low grade irritation on my skin after usage. Also, being aware of the growing knowledge/ research base of EO’s up until now, Robert Tisserand is now not even a 100%, all-the-time advocate of daily long term application of products containing them (EO’s) on the skin. He’s even gone so far as to say he wouldn’t be surprised if Europe mandates to eliminate them from skin care within 10 years. (apologies that I don’t have the article to link you to). So, as much as the green community thinks the ‘other side’ needs to take a step back, I do wonder if we can’t all take a step back and occupy the same space together in some sort of harmonious fashion while more objective study, observation and research is undertaken in the name of science. Everyone in this community – old guard as well as new – will claim they have credence to be here…and I don’t disagree. For now (actually, for always) let the consumer decide for themselves which camp of ‘green mindset’ they wish to subscribe to. It’s all valid contribution, and I don’t happen think that the answer to demonization of something you believe in (the offending blanket comments from the ‘other side’), is to offer more demonizing blanket comments about that side. Let’s engage in conversation and not immediate blanket retaliatory rebukes. That is the low level of behavior that seems more and more common with younger generations enabled by the easy anonymity of social media. We need to be better that that and utilize rational measured thinking when deciding how we react to something we don’t agree with. That said, your blog is wonderful and useful in this day and age, and I enjoy its content.
Hi Eliza, thank you for your input and for the kind words about my blog. It is certainly not my intention to demonize anyone, and if that came across in my rant, then I fully apologize. When a skincare line chooses not to use essential oils, I have absolutely no problem with that. It is totally their prerogative, and often, those products minus the eo’s work better on my skin too. However, what I take issue with is the inaccuracies in many of Masterson’s comments, starting with the first one that I quote about being the only one to do what she’s doing. That sentence alone set off my alarm bells because it’s blatantly false. Somebody here quoted a BYRDIE post (which I’ll be quoting again on Monday’s follow up post), and it was a much more even-handed article showing several angles of the essential oils debate and not taking any of Masterson’s statements at face value but rather questioning them. I do believe we must question the blanket statements. Had she left it as her personal experience with those ingredients and not made it about natural skincare being the CAUSE of sensitive skin (woah there!), then there wouldn’t have been anything to say about it. But to vilify natural skincare, well, we all know that not one thing is to blame for that. I hope to clarify more on Monday! Stay tuned.
I read the article and Tiffany is not saying all natural ingredients are bad, only essential oils. She is clearly an advocate of harmless ingredients too. To me when she states she can’t believe “nobody else is doing this”, she is talking about removing several classes of ingredients she has found to be potentially problematic for skin, not only essential oils but many synthetics too. It’s working really well for thousands of people actually so what is the problem? It doesn’t hurt you or anyone else for that matter. It’s an opinion and philosophy just like any other brand has, such as Tata Harper, who claims all synthetic ingredients are toxic, which is not true. It’s strange for you to demonize someone but you don’t even bother to get the other side, only yours. Also, how is Tiffany Masterson “misleading” people? Essential oils have been proven to sensitize and irritate skin, the cons outweigh the pros. I’m not affiliated with any brand, but I find your article to be full of holes. Drunk Elephant is an outstanding brand and just because you don’t agree with it, doesn’t give you the right to misrepresent what it is. By the way, if you read the reviews, it is helping people. Do you have a problem with that?
Hi Elizabeth. I’m glad that Drunk Elephant has been working for you and “thousands” of others, as you say. That’s great. I’ve got nothing against the brand or the founder, nor was it my intention to demonize them (very strong word there, I might add). What I do have a problem with are the inaccuracies in her comments in the W Mag article, as well as in other press. I felt that they were important to address. I too have no ties to any brand, nor am I invested in any brand. However, I am invested in calling for greater truth, and when someone makes erroneous statements, I feel compelled to challenge them. I have not seen Tata Harper say that about synthetic ingredients. Can you please show me where you saw that? You are free to differ with me as that is the benefit of expressing opinions. Yet here is where I must question one of your statements: “The cons of essential oils outweigh the pros.” I would like to see the studies on that. Meanwhile, until I see the proof, I will have to disagree entirely. I believe that all skin is different and will respond to various ingredients in different ways. My post on Monday will share more about essential oils and their function and purpose. Eo’s have been in therapeutic use for hundreds, perhaps thousands, of years and a few comments will not damage them. But those comments must be examined before it does get out of hand. It would be tragic if the regulating bodies chose to stop use of eo’s due to misguided information. Truly.
I really doubt that if EOs are great and beneficial like you say they are, that regulatory would do anything about banning them. Do you really think that Tiffany Masterson is going to have an effect on the future of essential oils? I don’t see the problem with her opinion or your opinion. We all get to choose which brands we want to support and she has a right to her opinion. Doesn’t even matter if it’s true. It’s a philosophy. All brands have one. How does this hurt you? Especially if people are benefiting from her philosophy?
Hi Erin. I didn’t say anything about banning essential oils in the post. What I did say is that the cumulative effect of misinformation like Tiffany Masterson shares can potentially become a detriment to the natural industry. How does this hurt me? Well, I believe, if unchecked, such misleading statements could definitely hurt all of us. Our history is full of stories about skilled herbalists and healers who were shunned by society or, worse, killed as witches. Those were dark times for natural remedies which could have helped many people. Yet those healers had to hide and work undercover. It has literally taken centuries to dispel the myths surrounding natural products. So yes, when I see misinformation, I do consider it a duty to shed light on the truth. That’s not an opinion, that’s a fact. I’m not denying her a right to her opinion. It’s just that she should get her facts straight before she does so.
Well ranted! Anything to gain a voice. Where’s the integrity? Truly disappointing & so clearly out of touch.
Thanks, Melissa. I wonder about that too. I wish they knew what they were dismissing.
YES!! Thank you for writing such an insightful post. So much truth you speak.
Thank you, Lou! I really appreciate that.
Sarita, thank you for this post here. I totally agree it’s a shame when brands make hyperbolic or comparison statements that could potentially disparage the work of other brands or ignore the small but mighty brands out there.
I will say however (to echo a few others) that I get where Drunk Elephant is coming from (though I wish they had phrased it better) and I love there products because they don’t smell at all. Some of us are highly sensitive scents, and I am one of them. This actually includes most essential oils. Lavender may be calming and relaxing to some people, but to me it is one of the strongest essential oils. Since my husband and I removed many chemical ingredients from our home a few years ago, added fragrances went with them. My husband doesn’t really care about clean living as much as I do, but even he is now overwhelmed with the super-fragrant world outside our home. I’m still shocked at how strong “natural” scents or essential oils can be – and how stressful and irritating they can be for some of us. I love organic beauty and trying new brands, but many rely heavily on essential oils or flower essences. For example I love the texture and ingredients theoretically in Tata Harper products, but I find I can’t use many of her products in the evening because I can’t fall asleep because the natural flowery scents are so strong.
I appreciate out helpful essential oils can be for some. I hope my coworker really feels uplifted from the geranium oil she burns on top of her himalayan salt lamp on her desk, but it sure does give many of us headaches among other things.
I think it’s great there are so many brands and more coming that can choose different angles to approach – and I welcome more that don’t add scents or essential oils – but I would certainly hope they use respectful language and acknowledge the work and different purposes of other brands.
Thank you, Maggie, for sharing your experience with essential oils. There is absolutely room for brands and products without them. I’m not denying that and I’m thrilled that you found something that works for you. My follow up post explains some of the reasons why that would happen with certain products. Like you, I wish that Masterson would review her facts and stop throwing natural skincare under the bus. There are MANY factors of sensitive skin, but all natural products can not assume the blame for them all. Thanks for taking the time to read and comment!
An excellent rant, Sarita. There are so many pioneer brands, some of which you’ve named, and even more, who have been around during the last four decades (!). But it proves my point, something I keep telling over and over again, that it’s today more vital than ever for those pioneer brands to become dramatically more visible to the younger customers who might not have heard of them but instead, read the “toxic” (pun intended) claims like those you’ve quoted or fell for cheap claims some of the greenwashed bloggers *dramatic look, eyebrow raised in the “you know who” manner* made just for the money. So yes: pioneer brands, listen up! Your rich heritage and your story are only an advantage if they’re widely known.
Also, I’m fairly befuddled: if “I couldn’t find anything high-performance enough to achieve the results I was used to” is the major worry for Miss Paltrow, then what on Earth was she used to exactly?
Oh that line of Miss Paltrow’s does make me wonder why she has a site full of natural products. Can it be that she never tried Ilia Beauty? Kjaer Weis? And so many other options. I’d say: do some more market research before claiming to be the “first.” Very frustrating to those pioneer brands, I’m sure. But you’re right. It’s time for an update so that they’re appealing to a new generation of users. Problem solved! Thank you for reading and commenting.
Thought provoking and intelligent read, as usual! Stuff like this makes me soooo angry 🙁
It’s tough to read misinformation without being proactive. That’s why I took to my blog for instant clarification on the very obvious falsehoods that are being circulated. Thank you for reading and commenting, Aliya. XO
Thank you so much, Sarita! We need your eloquence and activism so much.
Thank you, Ava, for reading and for supporting this post. XO
This was so disappointing to hear since I am a fan of Drunk Elephant’s products. Thanks for this very informative post. I thought it was well written.
Dear Niki, if the brand is working for you, then please don’t let this post discourage you. I merely felt the call to clarify some information that didn’t ring true. I hope that brands are careful to do their research before making blanket statements that are false. I’m happy you found the post well-written. I appreciate that. I’m glad that Drunk Elephant has worked for you! It’s not easy finding a good fit. 🙂
Yikes! We do agree that there are some ingredients out there that can cause “sensitized skin” versus having naturally “true sensitive” skin–big diff. So glad that you’re standing up for natural beauty brands that have been tried & true, Sarita! As a growing community, natural beauty enthusiasts should continue to educate members on decades-long practices rather than generalizations.
Thank you so much, Yilla. I appreciate that. This was one big educational moment that I hoped would be valuable to share. False information runs rampant and warrants clarity so that consumers can make informed decisions. Thank you for commenting!
Great post!!!
Wow, THANK YOU for this “rant”, you said it all…I love reading your posts, they are always so honest, educated, true and funny, keep on putting the word out there, because I reckon we are many, many ready to back you up. Love and hugs from cloudy Brussels, Belgium.
TATA Harper products are ineffective and overpriced. Won’t spend a cent on her junk science.
Also, even if products are “GREEN” “ORGANIC” of otherwise people still have allergies and brands don’t specify origins of its aha’s/bha’s. Lactic Acid=milk=lactose intolerant?? Salicylic Acid=aspirin, Mandelic Acid=almonds=nut allergies.
Retinol-so diluted in most products, its useless. They put just enough to keep people hooked and spending $$$. Also the new “hot” thing-high end beauty supplements etc.
Being over 60 and having used many, many products, green or not, high end, or drugstore, there should be a crack down on empty promises, products with no allergy warnings, and out and out lies most beauty brands tout.