"Doctor Recommended” and “Award Winning" Claims. Do you believe them?

Or let's say, do the claims like this help to shape your decision to buy the product or not.

Life has become focused on quick fixes, if the results don’t prove fast enough, we look elsewhere searching for that supposed “doctor recommended” and “award winning product" that offers, yet another, a proven quick fix. These products are purchased with the idea that immediate results will occur because of what the label says, or the commercial with the celebrity and the TV show marketing a product. However, unless you’re going to have some type of invasive surgery, that only provides short term results, there is no quick fix. The fact is, there are just endless amounts of money being wasted on proven ineffective products with the health risks and problems they pose. What is disconcerting is that anyone and any company can make the claim, “Dr. Recommended” and/or “Award Winning.” The reason being is that as long as no name is attached and no award is attached to the claim, a company can say this all day long. The only time you have to actually cite or reference is if you specifically reference someone words, award, or name. We all feel our best when we look our best, that certain confidence we get when our face looks fresh and healthy we become comfortable in our own skin. Billions of dollars each year is spent on products that promise to deliver results that will make us “feel good.” And just as many millions are paid to celebrities to announce to us from our TV screens that they themselves use this and that miracle product, and that's why they look so good..... yeah right.... Does anyone still buy it? Unfortunately, most of the time the hundred dollar miracle product does nothing, but a short term glow on the face, with chemicals, making the appearance shine to a new health so the customer feels like a new person and buys more. However, people find that in the long run with such product, even after the first few weeks of use, no miracle occurs; in fact that initial feeling that sold the product to begin with, fades. This mind game companies play with consumers stealing in a sense, but the problem is that as long as we are willing to spend the money, companies will still produce “miracle” products that do nothing more than potentially harm. Major corporations use celebrities to market their products, making the product more appealing to purchase. What consumers don’t realize is that it’s not the product that has the star looking like she or he does, it is the makeup done by a professional makeup artist and in many cases some type of botox and/or surgery. Oh, and how could I forget Photoshop, the true miracle of this century. This pressure society puts on us to conform to an idealized appearance can shape our every move. The common belief that the more attractive an individual tends to be the better that person is in relationships, at work or school, and even court. Today’s media places great importance on celebrities, typically young, slim, attractive and healthy looking (Sainsbury, 2010). Cultures center on physically attractive people performing more successfully in many aspects of life, and others are more willing to please them (Sainsbury, 2010). The way we look and feel can vary with age, mood, or clothing and is almost how we picture ourselves in our own minds. Our ideal body is how we want to appear and how we will change in accordance to our age and emotional feeling. In general, the media, society, and culture have influence on appearances beginning in early adulthood. Studies prove that body image is related to but differs from self-image, self-esteem, and self-concept. Our faces are the main point of focus during social interaction, providing conscious and unconscious expressions. Approximately two-thirds of communication is nonverbal, mediated principally by facial expression. For all these reasons discussed, companies and the media have great influence over society, almost leaving some powerless in their path of selling the “miracle” product.

US women opt for flawless skin over color cosmetics. This is study and survey. Your thoughts?

Source: Cosmeticsdesign

A national survey has suggested that American women expect their cosmetics to deliver flawless skin and sun protection, over fashion-forward colors.

"As a professional makeup artist I'm pleased to learn that American women are tuned into what so many professionals already know – beautiful skin is essential to any look," said Amy Oreasman, makeup artist to Neutrogena Cosmetics Brand Ambassador Hayden Panettiere. "It's the canvas women work with everyday and when it looks great so will everything else."

The cosmetics company teamed up with Harris Interactive, who executed the survey, to explore the complex relationship American women have with cosmetics.

The survey found the key benefits women want from their cosmetic products and makeup are directly related to beautifying their skin's appearance.

‘Flawless’ skin and minimizing wrinkles the top consumer desires

‘Flawless skin tone’ was the leading response for all women (58 percent), whilst half of women over 55 report the key benefit they want is to minimize the look of fine lines and wrinkles.

However, regardless of age, these skin-related benefits were chosen ahead of more traditional cosmetic benefits including elongated lashes, 8 percent, full-looking lips, 3 percent, and defined cheekbones, 2 percent.

“While color cosmetics add drama, we're thrilled to see women embracing their own beauty and choosing products that work harder to help deliver a perfect complexion,"

Recognition of the dangers of UV rays

The dangers of UV rays were also highlighted in the survey, with women turning to their cosmetics products to help prevent future skin damage.

Fifty-six percent of American women wear cosmetics and makeup with SPF to provide protection from harmful UV rays with older women more likely to wear SPF cosmetic products and makeup all year round.

Despite the increased popularity of the ‘natural look’, the study found makeup application still remains an integral part of many women's morning routines.

Forty-two percent of women said if they had to choose between makeup and breakfast when pressed for time before work, they would choose to apply makeup.

Nearly half of women, 46 percent, say they view using or wearing cosmetic products and makeup as an extension of their overall skincare routine.

Interesting.... your thoughts?

Spreading of misleading Information on Sunscreens and the EWG

By guest writer Elizabeth Wagner BABA, MSCJ, PhD Criminal Justice Learner (ABD)

The media created by skin care companies increasingly makes the public think their product is capable of achieving a significant and lasting improvement of sun-damaged skin This advertising is misleading and confuses the public into believing skin care products purchased over the counter are capable of miracles. Once applied to the skin, most over the counter products sit at the surface of the skin and do not penetrate deeply where the damage needs are, therefore no effects occur except a waste of money.

What the public needs to know is that the majority of over the counter products do not have associated data and evidence from studies (studies produce knowledge and facts) to prove the effectiveness of their products. Such evidence is available in peer-reviewed articles. As long as society vales a tanned complexion, and the media continues to promote tanning either from the sun or from tanning beds, the effects of skin damage will continue to rise. The public needs valuable information, information that has evidence to the effectiveness of applying sunscreen. What society does not need, is a false reports from websites such as the Environmental Working Group, or EWG.

Latest EWGs claim that sunscreens are ineffective, lack the scientific credibility. The result of such is the negative feedback on companies that are truly working to decrease the incidents of sun cancer and other damage caused by the sun. Companies that are developing sunscreens that not only prevent sun damage, but promote health of people are finding reports that discredit the use of sunscreens. However, there is no scientific evidence that proves such.

The EWG establishes its own scientific and regulatory safety assessment process for sunscreen products and ingredients. Further, a sunscreen product rating system developed by the EWG guides their opinions and experts have proven the data promoted by the EWG as inaccurate and unreliable. Most alarming, is the citing of increasing skin cancer rates and questioning of sunscreen efficacy in preventing cancer by the EWG. The problem is a failure to consider the skin cancer rates as a result of excessive sun exposure from not reading true statistics produced by scholars from actual scientific studies (Bailey, 2010).

Medical research has proven well established data to the consensus that sunscreen use helps to protect against skin cancer. The 2010 EWG sunscreen report claims that sunscreens break down when exposed to sunlight and instantly stop working. However, sunscreen developers take this breaking down into consideration to develop the most effective product. Companies are not going to continue to develop sunscreens if they didn’t support the prevention of cancer and other health problems.

The time, money, and research it takes in developing a sunscreen is the life and blood of the company. Years spent on research as a result of the statistics on cancer and other health problems is what makes the most effective and safe sunscreen. Overall, the EWG lacks the rigor and reliability of formal, expert evaluation, and does not have peer-reviewed data (articles produced by scholar experts) to support their claims, misleading consumers. As a scholar myself, I understand and value the importance of peer-reviewed articles. To be published and presented as fact, articles and claims have to be evaluated and tested rigorously, often taking many months or years to perfect.

Peer review is essential before results of a study can be accurately interpreted or used to support conclusions. The process of peer-reviewing involves scholars and practitioners spending a conservable amount of time justifying the results of studies and claims. In the end, peer-reviewed articles become the knowledge we know and what our children in the future will be taught. As the highest form of knowledge, peer-reviewed articles set the knowledge base for the world we know.

The EWG report has no peer-reviewed articles or studies to back its findings. The scholarly world does not accept information from websites like the EWG or Wikipedia. The fact of the matter is that if it is not peer reviewed, it is not fact. Endless websites offer information on the value and effectiveness of their products, however, they lack the studies to prove such and the result are consumers who are misled into buying their products, which have no benefits what’s so ever. If you want valuable information seek the right sources, do not believe everything that is on the internet, as most of what you see is posted by every day people like yourself.