The depths of being shallow


The beauty products industry is a dynamic one – with new terminology being slathered on our faces faster than we can age. But, do we really know what’s in the products?


These are some commonly used descriptors on beauty products. They are meant to increase the inclination of purchase. Do we really know what these words mean? If it is fragrance-free, but it smells like mouldy bread, is it still a viable option? Are we just inclined to purchase items with the word “free” in them? Of course, if you have sensitive + allergy prone skin like me, you’d appreciate all of these pieces of information – else you have to endure red+swollen face at work the next day!

Do consumers really read into the ingredients and understand the functions of such ingredients?  Or is the face of endorsement more appealing than the Science of beauty products? Established brands may not necessarily manufacture the ‘safest’ products for your skin. This is just the skin-care products I am talking about. I shan’t move on to cosmetics because there are fewer ingredients which are recognisable than not.

Perhaps, if we take a step into understanding the Science behind what we purchase for superficial reason, we could take greater care of our beauty on a deeper scale (cellular and physiologically!).

The person who initiated “Beauty is only skin deep” was most likely not aware of the depths of being shallow.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s