Spend a mint on luxury beauty products? Here’s why they might not actually work
LUXURY beauty creams that promise an array of age-defying effects might not actually work “in real life”, a TV investigation has claimed.
Channel 4’s Supershoppers examined products by high-end brands, and discovered the benefits touted are often based on test tube results, the reported.
The 50ml moisturiser, which costs £44, “reduces the look of first signs of ageing, like dullness and fine, dry lines [and] refreshes skin with lasting hydration”, according to the promotional material.
Dr Sanders commented: “It's quite common for something to work in vitro and not work in real life at all - so really to use an in vitro claim on a pack is jumping the gun a bit, so I don't think it really should be something you can use to promote a product.”
The Estee Lauder website states that the product is “in vitro” tested.
The documentary asked Estee Lauder if they had based the product claims on anything other than laboratory testing.
A spokesperson commented: “Estée Lauder fully stands behind all of its product performance claims, which are supported by testing that includes clinical and consumer testing on real women as well as in vitro laboratory testing.”
Presenters Anna Richardson and Andi Osho also cut through the scientific jargon often used on luxury products.
“Dermatologist tested” means the test was supervised by a qualified skin doctor, while “dermatologically tested” means anyone could have examined it.
Neal’s Yard was asked if they thought the test was sufficient, to which a spokesperson said: “As an ethical company, honesty and transparency are our core values.
“Although our products are labelled 'Dermatologically Tested' they are tested to the highest standards either by a dermatologist, or under the strict supervision of a dermatologist who also validates all results and any reactions.