You were the first to develop an application to decipher cosmetics , how did you come up with the idea?
It is above all the work of a scientific team that has been able to identify a major consumer expectation. We were formulators, very involved in the issues of multiple chemical exposures in which cosmetics participate. We received a lot of questions about the composition of care and hygiene products from consumers. We thought that a decryption app could be particularly useful in responding to this expectation that we felt was extremely strong. An expectation that I had myself, since my commitment to transforming the supply of everyday products was born from my meeting with one of my associates, a doctor in industrial pharmacy, at a time when my eldest son had just been diagnosed with extremely severe cognitive disorders. We wondered about the origin of these disorders while, at the same time, many studies showed the role of endocrine disruptors in certain brain dysfunctions.
Very quickly the app, in direct contact with consumers, opened the discussion on controversial ingredients . We answered their questions instantly. The success was immediate, without any advertising. Today, Clean Beauty has reached more than 1 million downloads.
How is Clean Beauty different from other apps?
It does not rate cosmetic products. It analyzes the list of ingredients and identifies the presence of controversial ingredients. Clean Beauty relies on the list printed on the product and not on the barcode, as other apps do. No error possible on the composition unless the photo is poorly taken. Clean Beauty allows the consumer to analyze on the spot what they have in their hands. The app also provides precise, rigorous and scientific information on the ingredients thanks to the very efficient documentation of our laboratory.
You have chosen to only report the presence of a controversial ingredient, without indicating its percentage and without giving a rating, why?
For us, it is not the percentage but the presence of the ingredient that raises questions. And especially the overall and general multiple exposure of the individual to this ingredient. Today, we are witnessing an evolution in the assessment of chemical risk. The famous precept of the alchemist Paracelsus "it is the dose that makes the poison" is being undermined by the lack of control of our exposure and by endocrine disruptors that are breaking this rule, with low-dose exposure seeming more problematic than high-dose exposure. Beyond this problem, there is also the problem of interaction between ingredients, the cocktail effect.
When it comes to cosmetics, a woman applies up to 200 different ingredients to her skin per day. Added to this is exposure to other substances in the environment (food, household products, furniture, etc.). Our app therefore does not rate, it informs: "this cosmetic contains controversial ingredients that add to your overall exposure."
What are your plans?
Clean Beauty remains as it is with, of course, a perpetual updating of information according to scientific and regulatory developments. On the other hand, we have created another management tool for beauty brands, and their research and development departments. Beautylitic is a software to help them clean the formulas of all their products so that all controversial ingredients disappear. We know that the ingredient of a cosmetic product is the second purchasing criterion after the price. The industry is therefore obliged to transform its offer under pressure from consumers. The study of household products is also a subject but it is very difficult to access their composition.
What is the emergency for you today?
Endocrine disruptors, impalpable substances that are very complex. There are cocktail effects between them but also with other substances and environmental factors. They are incriminated in many diseases and we know that their effects are declared over several generations. In my opinion, brands do not make it a priority enough. It is a major issue, a public health priority and the precautionary principle should prevail.
