Do Claims about the Naturalness and Dose of Cosmetics Ingredients Affect the Public’s Perception of Their Safety?
Media articles have claimed that “synthetic mineral oil saturated hydrocarbons (MOSH)”, which are used in many cosmetics such as lip balms, are unsafe at any dose and should be replaced with natural alternatives. This paper examines whether these claims are correct and whether the perceived safety o...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2020-09-01
|
| Series: | J |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8800/3/3/23 |
| _version_ | 1797554499080945664 |
|---|---|
| author | Louise Chandon |
| author_facet | Louise Chandon |
| author_sort | Louise Chandon |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Media articles have claimed that “synthetic mineral oil saturated hydrocarbons (MOSH)”, which are used in many cosmetics such as lip balms, are unsafe at any dose and should be replaced with natural alternatives. This paper examines whether these claims are correct and whether the perceived safety of these substances is influenced by the language used in the media. To achieve these goals, it first provides an extensive review of the toxicology literature, finding no support that MOSHs are unsafe at current usage levels. It then reviews the psychology literature to examine the effects of labelling a cosmetic ingredient as “natural” rather than “synthetic” and the effects of dose information. A 2 × 2 between-subjects experiments involving adult lip balm users shows that, as hypothesized, the perceived safety of lip balms increases when they are described as containing “naturally sourced mineral oil” rather than “synthetic mineral oil saturated hydrocarbon (MOSH)”, which are both correct descriptions. In addition, the perceived safety increases when the substance is described as being present in a low vs. a high dose, regardless of whether it was described as natural or synthetic. Overall, safety perceptions for common cosmetic substances can be significantly influenced by the language used in media reporting. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T16:32:02Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-921b728c354a423087d17a90d32254c7 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2571-8800 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T16:32:02Z |
| publishDate | 2020-09-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | J |
| spelling | doaj.art-921b728c354a423087d17a90d32254c72023-11-20T12:44:54ZengMDPI AGJ2571-88002020-09-013329931210.3390/j3030023Do Claims about the Naturalness and Dose of Cosmetics Ingredients Affect the Public’s Perception of Their Safety?Louise Chandon0Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2AZ, UKMedia articles have claimed that “synthetic mineral oil saturated hydrocarbons (MOSH)”, which are used in many cosmetics such as lip balms, are unsafe at any dose and should be replaced with natural alternatives. This paper examines whether these claims are correct and whether the perceived safety of these substances is influenced by the language used in the media. To achieve these goals, it first provides an extensive review of the toxicology literature, finding no support that MOSHs are unsafe at current usage levels. It then reviews the psychology literature to examine the effects of labelling a cosmetic ingredient as “natural” rather than “synthetic” and the effects of dose information. A 2 × 2 between-subjects experiments involving adult lip balm users shows that, as hypothesized, the perceived safety of lip balms increases when they are described as containing “naturally sourced mineral oil” rather than “synthetic mineral oil saturated hydrocarbon (MOSH)”, which are both correct descriptions. In addition, the perceived safety increases when the substance is described as being present in a low vs. a high dose, regardless of whether it was described as natural or synthetic. Overall, safety perceptions for common cosmetic substances can be significantly influenced by the language used in media reporting.https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8800/3/3/23safetyperceptioncosmeticsmediaclaim |
| spellingShingle | Louise Chandon Do Claims about the Naturalness and Dose of Cosmetics Ingredients Affect the Public’s Perception of Their Safety? J safety perception cosmetics media claim |
| title | Do Claims about the Naturalness and Dose of Cosmetics Ingredients Affect the Public’s Perception of Their Safety? |
| title_full | Do Claims about the Naturalness and Dose of Cosmetics Ingredients Affect the Public’s Perception of Their Safety? |
| title_fullStr | Do Claims about the Naturalness and Dose of Cosmetics Ingredients Affect the Public’s Perception of Their Safety? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Do Claims about the Naturalness and Dose of Cosmetics Ingredients Affect the Public’s Perception of Their Safety? |
| title_short | Do Claims about the Naturalness and Dose of Cosmetics Ingredients Affect the Public’s Perception of Their Safety? |
| title_sort | do claims about the naturalness and dose of cosmetics ingredients affect the public s perception of their safety |
| topic | safety perception cosmetics media claim |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8800/3/3/23 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT louisechandon doclaimsaboutthenaturalnessanddoseofcosmeticsingredientsaffectthepublicsperceptionoftheirsafety |