Tested on animals:Yes
The chief danger of this daytime moisturizer with sunscreen is that it is so absurdly overpriced that you are not likely to apply it liberally. With liberal application to face and neck, you’ll be replacing this every two months, if not more frequently, which adds up to more than $2,500 per year! Without question you can get the protection this product provides for significantly less money, and better formulas, too!
This could’ve been a decent broad-spectrum sunscreen for normal to dry skin, but the problems add up to issues for your skin that you shouldn’t ignore. Though it does contain avobenzone for UVA protection, it isn’t stabilized with octocrylene or any other suitable ingredient, which means it is unlikely to give you the stated level of UVA protection after you apply it.
While this does contain some interesting ingredients for skin, the amounts are not impressive, especially given the cost (and that’s an understatement). An additional problem is the irritating plant extracts as well as fragrance, both natural and synthetic (see More Info to learn why irritation and fragrance are bad for skin).
The radiance this product adds to your skin is from mica, not from gold. Mica is an ordinary, inexpensive ingredient used throughout the cosmetic industry to add shine, but that’s not skin care, it’s a makeup effect. One other point: Although we often do not comment on the presence of dyes, this product contains red and yellow synthetic dyes to give it a gold cast. That’s to make the cream look like it has a large amount of gold—it doesn’t; there is only a trace amount. But, even if it were all gold and nothing else, that is about jewelry, not skin care.
When it comes to skin care, it almost goes without saying there are far better and far less expensive sunscreens than this. Our team’s one regret is that the women who really should be reading this review most likely aren’t, so if you can pass this info on to them, you will help them save their skin and their money, too!
- Provides broad-spectrum sun protection with avobenzone for UVA protection.
- Contains antioxidants for additional environmental protection.
- Vastly overpriced.
- Cost is likely to discourage liberal application, which is essential to achieve the amount of sun protection stated on the label.
- Several ingredients in this moisturizer pose a risk of irritation, which keeps skin from looking and acting younger.
- Numerous fragrance ingredients increase the risk of irritation from the other problematic ingredients.
Why Irritation is a Problem for All Skin Types
Irritation, whether you see it on the surface of your skin or not, causes inflammation and as a result impairs healing, damages collagen, and depletes the vital substances your skin needs to stay young. For this reason, it is best to eliminate, or minimize as much as possible, your exposure to known skin irritants, especially when there are brilliant formulas available that do not include these types of problematic ingredients (Sources: Inflammation Research, December 2008, pages 558–563; Skin Pharmacology and Physiology, June 2008, pages 124–135, and November-December 2000, pages 358–371; Journal of Investigative Dermatology, April 2008, pages 15–19; Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, March 2008, pages 78–82; Mechanisms of Ageing and Development, January 2007, pages 92–105; and British Journal of Dermatology, December 2005, pages S13–S22).
Irritation from Fragrance
Daily use of products that contain a high amount of fragrance, whether the fragrant ingredients are synthetic or natural, causes chronic irritation that can damage healthy collagen production, lead to or worsen dryness, and impair your skin’s ability to heal. Fragrance-free is the best way to go for all skin types. If fragrance in your skin-care products is important to you, it should be a very low amount to minimize the risk to your skin (Sources: Inflammation Research, December 2008, pages 558–563; Skin Pharmacology and Physiology, June 2008, pages 124–135, and November-December 2000, pages 358–371; Journal of Investigative Dermatology, April 2008, pages 15–19; Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, March 2008, pages 78–82; Mechanisms of Ageing and Development, January 2007, pages 92–105; and British Journal of Dermatology, December 2005, pages S13–S22).