Clinique’s ads Youth Surge daytime moisturizers with sunscreen are said to leverage sirtuin technology to tackle lines and wrinkles. Before we discuss sirtuins and skin, it is worth asking what the company means by “leverage.” By stating in their ads that their product is “Leveraging sirtuin technology,” they could mean gaining advantage from this technology, paying to use this technology, or, really, whatever they want it to mean. It doesn’t say the technology is making a difference and changing the structure of your skin. Look closely at the claims for the Youth Surge products and you’ll see that every statement they make is a purely cosmetic claim. “Visible effects” could mean anything—visible effects of what? “Seem to evaporate” doesn’t mean that lines and wrinkles will really go away, it could mean that water evaporates, and the word “seems” doesn’t mean it is actually happening. “Skin gains strength” is a strange claim that might lead you to believe it will build collagen or appear more taut, but it could really mean just about anything you want it to mean. That’s the art of cosmetic ad copy.
Now, back to sirtuins. Sirtuins are proteins that are involved in regulating biological processes by controlling the chain of events that cause these processes to occur, which is why they’re often referred to as information regulators. The anti-aging connection has to do with their potential to regulate cellular processes responsible for aging. It is believed that if certain sirtuins can be modified to work against the mechanisms of aging that the results might be visible on skin: think fewer wrinkles, less sagging, and greater resiliency. Although sirtuin manipulation has no research showing it can affect wrinkles, that didn’t stop Clinique from jumping on the youthful skin connection and parlaying the research about sirtuins and degenerative diseases into skin-care products. And what about all of Clinique’s other “de-agers” that don’t contain sirtuins? Are they of lesser value for skin because they’re behind the times? Should Clinique stop selling those?
What seems promising is that topical application of specific sirtuins derived from yeast (in this case Saccharomyces lysate) and the antioxidant resveratrol (in this case from the root of the plant Polygonum cuspidatum) seem to have a protective effect on skin in the presence of oxidative and ultraviolet light stress. However, more research is needed before we’d suggest anyone run out and look for products that increase sirtuin activity in their skin. Plus, we don’t know the risk associated with manipulating sirtuins, whether they might have negative side effects.
The problem is twofold. First, there is limited research showing how much and what type of sirtuin is needed topically to cause desirable cellular changes leading to younger looking skin. Plus, the bioavailability of a topically applied source of sirtuins is questionable given that we don’t know how efficiently they penetrate intact skin. (Testing skin cells in a lab setting with concentrated doses of ingredients that stimulate sirtuins is an entirely different story from actual use.)
Second, and an even bigger concern, is that whenever normal cellular processes are manipulated, you run the risk of causing a potential overproliferation of cells. In other words, how would the sirtuin-influenced cells know when too much of a good thing becomes a health-threatening problem? How long is too long to keep skin cells active? How much manipulation of biological processes starts a cascading negative chain of events that could lead to unwanted consequences such as cancer (Sources: Current Medicinal Chemistry, 2008, pages 1887–1899; Journal of Drugs in Dermatology, June 2007, pages 14–19; Nature Reviews: Drug Discovery, June 2006, pages 493–506).
As has become standard for Clinique, this daytime moisturizer with sunscreen includes reliable UVA protection (from titanium dioxide, though a higher percentage would be preferred) and is loaded with antioxidants, cell-communicating ingredients, and, to a lesser degree, skin-identical substances. Unfortunately, jar packaging won’t keep the majority of these state-of-the-art ingredients stable during use. Youth Surge’s sunscreen is the only “age decelerating” effect you can rely on, but we’d advise you to look for equally impressive formulas in better packaging. If you decide to try this anyway, it’s best for normal to dry skin; those with oily skin will find it way too creamy.
Leveraging Sirtuin technology, Clinique science uses youth-extending agents to create a daily moisturizer with visible effects. Lines and wrinkles seem to evaporate, replaced by plump, vibrant skin alive with collagen and elastin. Skin gains strength over environmental agers. Looks younger, longer.
Active: Octinoxate (7.5%), Titanium Dioxide (1.4%), Other: Water, Cetyl Ethylhexanoate, Butylene Glycol, Octyldodecyl Neopentanoate, Glyceryl Stearate, Peg-100 Stearate, Glycerin, Olea Europaea (Olive) Fruit Extract, Coleus Barbatus Extract, Sigesbeckia Orientalis (St. Paul's Wort) Extract, Triticum Vulgare (Wheat Bran) Extract, Polygonum Cuspidatum Root Extract, Saccharomyces Lysate Extract, Algae Extract, Hydrolyzed Rice Extract, Betula Alba (Birch) Bark Extract, Padina Pavonica Thallus Extract, Coffea Robusta Seed Extract, Astrocaryum Murumuru Seed Butter, Citrus Reticulata (Tangerine) Peel Extract, Laurdimonium Hydroxypropyl Hydrolyzed Soy Protein, Hydrogenated Lecithin, Creatine, Ethylhexyl Palmitate, Polyethylene, Pentylene Glycol, Caffeine, Behenyl Alcohol, Linoleic Acid, Cetyl Alcohol, Isoniacinamide, Cholesterol, Lecithin, Sorbitol, Aminoguanidine Hcl, Trehalose, Silica, Sodium Rna, Dipalmitoyl Hydroxyproline, Disodium Nadh, Sodium Hyaluronate, Aminopropyl Ascorbyl Phosphate, Methicone, Caprylyl Glycol, Decarboxy Carnosine Hcl, Potassium Sulfate, Adenosine Phosphate, Ethylhexyl Stearate, Glycine, Phytosphingosine, Acrylates Copolymer, Propylene Glycol Dicaprate, Acetyl Hexapeptide-8, Hydroxyproline, Proline, Xanthan Gum, Alumina, Sodium DNA, Potassium Carbomer, Hexylene Glycol, Carbomer, Disodium EDTA, Phenoxyethanol, Potassium Sorbate
Clinique was Estee Lauder's first attempt to expand its market with a completely separate line and image. Shortly after its 1968 debut at U.S. cosmetics counters, Clinique became known as the indispensable line for the woman under 30 concerned with breakouts, oily skin, and fragrance-free products (meaning less likely to cause allergic or sensitizing skin reactions). That's likely just what Lauder execs had in mind, because their namesake line's image and positioning was geared more toward the mature woman.
Clinique's tremendous success (the company's products are sold in over 13,000 department stores and in 110 countries) reshaped the way cosmetics lines identified themselves, sending the concept of line loyalty out to pasture. Today, cosmetics companies expand their market either by buying already established companies or by creating new ones, and Lauder has been adept at doing both. Of course, cosmetics companies keep this multiple-personality identity hidden from the consumer. If the general buying public realized that these apparently different companies were so intertwined with each other, how could they flaunt their independence and claim that their unparalleled formulations are secret or the best? It's hard to think Lauder (or any company) would, even if they could, keep secrets from one branch separate from the others. And as evidneced by the formulary similarities between brands, they don't!
The niche Clinique built launched the concept of cosmetics being "allergy-tested," "hypoallergenic," "100% fragrance-free," and "dermatologist tested." Of those marketing claims the only one with significance is "100% fragrance-free," which, for the most part, Clinique maintains (although it does have some fragrant extracts in a few products). Regarding allergy testing, unless you can see the results, what difference does it make if a product makes that claim? What if the test showed 20% of the women who used it had a sensitizing reaction, dryness, or irritation? Would Clinique highlight this, or is it just easier to default to the generic allergy-tested claim and leave such details out? The answer as to which option is easier is clear. Moreover, "hypoallergenic" is a term not regulated by the FDA, so any product can use the word without having to substantiate the claim. "Dermatologist tested" is also bogus, because without published test results the term can easily mean nothing more than that a dermatologist picked up the product, looked at the container, and said "This looks good." And what about the dermatologists on Clinique's payroll? How do we know they're not the ones involved in testing, rather than sending the products out for independent, impartial evaluation (though how impartial can any study be that's paid for by the company making the product)?
Clinique declined any participation in my book or for this site, which included refusing to send us copies of the allergy studies they maintain have been performed for every product they sell. I find their unwillingness to help odd because, for the most part, I genuinely like most of their products. In fact, more than any other department-store line except Estee Lauder, Clinique is leading the way with cutting-edge, state-of-the-art moisturizers and serums. They have their act together for sunscreens and have expanded their decades-old three-step skin-care routine to include water-soluble cleansers instead of bar soap. They also now have a second "Dramatically Different" moisturizer that's well-suited for those with normal to oily skin.
The Clinique consultants, dressed in medical-looking white lab coats (Clinique's image in that sense was ahead of the times given today's plethora of doctor-designed skin-care lines), do their best to speak intelligently about skin-care routines, but for the most part they're trained to sell the products rather than to provide information about what substantiated research has shown about the skin's needs to look and feel its best. The good news for you is that the chemists behind Clinique's arsenal of products have been keeping up on this exciting information, and formulating superior products in response. I wouldn't blindly and solely bank on Clinique as your skin-care solution, but more than ever what they offer is, despite some far-out claims and problematic products, what epitomizes advanced skin care for all ages. Shop carefully and you'll leave confident that you are purchasing products with solid science, not just marketing hype, behind them.
In late 2008 Clinique joined forces with pharmaceutical company Allergan to launch a subset of products labeled as Clinique Medical. These products are sold only at doctor's offices, and are positioned as being scientically-designed to complement those looking for the best skin care after undergoing cosmetic corrective procedures. As expected, despite the link with Allergan and the exclusive-to-doctors retail channel, there isn't anything vastly different about Clinique Medical compared to the regular Clinique line. And the whole marketing angle is just bizarre when you consider that since Clinique's inception they've tied their claims and formulas to the expertise of their "guiding dermatologists". They're selling Clinique Medical as "best in class" skin care diminshes the regard which the company should be holding for several of their other state-of-the-art products (those rated Paula's Pick qualify as such). Needless to say, most of the Clinique Medical products are recommended, but don't think for a second that they're superior to or more professional than the best of Clinique's main line. All Clinique products are fragrance-free unless noted otherwise.
Note: Clinique is categorized as one that tests on animals because their products are sold in China. Although Clinique does not conduct animal testing for their products sold elsewhere, the Chinese government requires imported cosmetics be tested on animals, so foreign companies retailing there must comply. This requirement is why some brand’s state that they don’t test on animals “unless required by law”. Animal rights organizations consider cosmetic companies retailed in China to be brands that test on animals, and so does the Paula’s Choice Research Team.
For more information about Clinique, owned by Estee Lauder, call (800) 419-4041 or visit www.clinique.com.
Clinique continues to offer a vast palette of colors and textures, especially in their huge and imposing selection of foundations, many of which feature effective sunscreens. That single category has become the most compelling reason to shop Clinique's makeup collection. Without a doubt the numerous formulas offer something for every skin type and almost every skin color. The shade selection has improved considerably, with more neutrals and a broader range than ever before. You still need to use caution and watch out for peach-toned duds, but for the most part finding a natural-looking match shouldn't be a frustrating experience, and the counter personnel are happy to provide samples. Although the foundation and powder shades take darker skin tones into account, the blush, eye pencil, and most of the lipstick shades do not. Perhaps that will change in the future, as Clinique beautifully updated their eyeshadow collection with ultra-smooth textures and deeper colors that show up on darker skin.
Compliments are also due for Clinique's updated makeup tester units. They are well-organized, labeled with product name and price, and easily accessible without a salesperson's help. And speaking of salespeople, most of the Clinique consultants I encountered went above and beyond to provide assistance and to answer any questions I had. Those white lab coats don't mean medical expertise, but I'll take outstanding customer service over pseudoscience any day!
The bottom line is that, despite a few shortcomings, Clinique is one of the most comprehensive (and comparably affordable) department-store makeup lines, and it is completely understandable why they enjoy such broad appeal.