Category: Moisturizer

  • Kiehl’s Ultra Facial Cream: the Glacial Glycoprotein is #29

    Kiehl’s Ultra Facial Cream with Squalane sells three heroes on the jar: 4.5% squalane, a Glacial Glycoprotein, and Pro-Ceramides. Read the label and only one of them holds up by position. Squalane really is the 4th ingredient on the list, and Kiehl’s even prints the percentage — honest placement. But the Glacial Glycoprotein (Pseudoalteromonas Ferment Extract) is the 29th ingredient, and the Pro-Ceramide (Hydroxypalmitoyl Sphinganine) is the 31st — both sitting well below the preservative line, which means both are almost certainly present in trace amounts. A glacier is on the front of the jar; on the back it is the 29th thing in the tub.

    This is the exercise this desk runs on everything: quote the actual ingredient list, then point at where the thing on the front of the bottle really lands. Kiehl’s Ultra Facial Cream is a good one to run it on because it is one of the most-searched facial creams going — tens of thousands of jars a month move through Amazon alone — and because the jar makes three separate hero claims, which is three chances for the label to agree or disagree with the marketing. Here it does one of each.

    What is actually in Kiehl’s Ultra Facial Cream?

    Here is the full ingredient list, quoted verbatim from Kiehl’s listing on Ulta (SKU 2540234, the 0.95 oz size; Ulta notes the larger SKUs share identical ingredient text), read 16 October 2026:

    Aqua / Water, Glycerin, Dimethicone, Squalane, Bis-Peg-18 Methyl Ether Dimethyl Silane, Sucrose Stearate, Stearyl Alcohol, Peg-8 Stearate, Myristyl Myristate, Prunus Armeniaca Kernel Oil / Apricot Kernel Oil, Phenoxyethanol, Persea Gratissima Oil / Avocado Oil, Glyceryl Stearate, Cetyl Alcohol, Oryza Sativa Bran Oil / Rice Bran Oil, Olea Europaea Fruit Oil / Olive Fruit Oil, Chlorphenesin, Stearic Acid, Palmitic Acid, Carbomer, Acrylates/C10-30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer, Trisodium Ethylenediamine Disuccinate, Prunus Amygdalus Dulcis Oil / Sweet Almond Oil, Xanthan Gum, Ethylhexylglycerin, Sodium Hydroxide, Tocopherol, Glycine Soja Oil / Soybean Oil, Pseudoalteromonas Ferment Extract, Myristic Acid, Hydroxypalmitoyl Sphinganine, Salicylic Acid, Helianthus Annuus Seed Oil / Sunflower Seed Oil, Rosmarinus Officinalis Leaf Extract / Rosemary Leaf Extract, Citric Acid.

    Source: Ulta.com, Kiehl’s own retailer listing, read 16 October 2026. That is a list thirty-five entries long. One note on which formula this is: older databases, and the Kiehl’s India site, show Cyclohexasiloxane near the top of this cream. The current US listing does not — it shows Dimethicone at position 3 instead, and that is the version quoted above. If you are checking your own jar, check the panel on it, because formulas get revised.

    Nib the small round desk creature holding a magnifying glass over the back of a Kiehl's Ultra Facial Cream jar, carefully reading the long ingredient panel.
    Nib turns the famous white jar around and starts counting: water, glycerin, dimethicone — and only then the squalane the jar is named for.

    Where does the 4.5% squalane actually sit?

    At position 4 — and credit where it is due, that is honest. Kiehl’s prints “4.5% Squalane” on the front of the jar, and squalane genuinely turns up fourth, above every oil, wax and botanical in the formula. Squalane is a well-liked emollient: a lightweight, highly stable lipid (here derived from olives) that spreads easily and helps skin feel soft and supple. At position 4 with a declared percentage, this is the opposite of the usual story on this desk, where the marketed active hides near the bottom. The squalane claim is the one that survives reading the list. Hold onto that, because the other two heroes do not fare the same way.

    The quieter structural point sits one line above the squalane. Position 3 is Dimethicone — a silicone film-former — and position 5 is a second silicone emollient. So the cream contains at least as much synthetic silicone as it does the squalane it is named for. That is not a knock on silicones: dimethicone is well tolerated and genuinely good at slowing water loss from the skin’s surface. It is simply information that appears nowhere on the front of the jar or in the key-ingredient callouts, and it is worth knowing that a chunk of what makes this cream feel the way it does is silicone, not the botanical lipid on the label.

    Nib pointing a pencil approvingly at position four on a long ingredient list, giving a small nod because the marketed squalane is genuinely near the top.
    For once the hero keeps its promise: the squalane really does sit near the top, at number four, with its percentage printed on the jar.

    Why does the preservative tell you where the glacier is?

    Because of how ingredient lists are legally ordered. Under US labeling rules (21 CFR 701.3), ingredients above 1% must be listed in descending order of weight, but anything present at 1% or less can be listed in any order after them. So you cannot read exact percentages off a label — but you can often find the line where the formula crosses below 1%, and preservatives are the usual marker, because they are typically used at a fraction of a percent and capped low by regulation. Phenoxyethanol, the preservative here, sits at position 11; in the EU it is capped at 1% in cosmetics. Everything from roughly position 11 downward, then, is in that sub-1% tail.

    That is the context for the second hero. The Glacial Glycoprotein — listed by its INCI name, Pseudoalteromonas Ferment Extract — is at position 29. It is a fermentation extract originally traced to bacteria from Antarctic glaciers, and Kiehl’s markets it as helping skin hold onto moisture. Whatever it does, it does it from the 29th slot, far below the preservative line. The position cannot give you an exact number, but it tells you plainly this is at or below 1%, and realistically a trace. A glacier is one of the trio Kiehl’s leads with; on the label it is behind the sweet almond oil, the xanthan gum and the vitamin E. (If you want the raw ingredient profile independent of the brand’s framing, incidecoder keeps a plain entry for Pseudoalteromonas Ferment Extract.)

    Nib looking between the front of the Kiehl's jar, which shows a glacier graphic, and the ingredient panel on the back where the glacial glycoprotein sits near the very bottom of the list.
    Nib spots the gap: a glacier on the front of the jar, but the glacial glycoprotein is the 29th ingredient on the back.

    What about the Pro-Ceramides?

    The third hero, the Pro-Ceramide, is Hydroxypalmitoyl Sphinganine at position 31 — two slots further down than the glacier, and firmly in the same sub-1% tail. It is a synthetic ceramide precursor rather than one of the ceramides (NP, AP, EOS and so on) that make up the skin’s own barrier, and ingredient references tend to list it as an emollient and skin-conditioning agent. The honest read is the same as for the glycoprotein: its position tells you it is a trace addition, and I am not going to claim more about what it does or does not do at that level than the position supports. If you want the neutral ingredient write-up, incidecoder has an entry for Hydroxypalmitoyl Sphinganine.

    One aside for anyone who reads the full list and gets a jolt from seeing “Salicylic Acid” at position 32 — that is not an added BHA exfoliant. According to the independent review at squalaneclub.com, which cross-checked this list against two additional ingredient registries, the salicylic acid comes in as the preservative for the glacial glycoprotein raw material, listed by the supplier as water, pseudoalteromonas ferment extract, salicylic acid and sodium hydroxide. In other words, it rode in with ingredient 29; it is not there to resurface your skin. At that depth it would be a trace in any case.

    Squalane (#4)
    The marketed 4.5% hero, genuinely near the top with its percentage printed on the jar. The honest claim.
    Dimethicone (#3) + silicone (#5)
    At least as much synthetic silicone as squalane; mentioned nowhere on the front.
    Phenoxyethanol (#11)
    The preservative, marking roughly where the formula drops below 1%.
    Glacial Glycoprotein (#29)
    Pseudoalteromonas Ferment Extract — a front-of-jar hero, sitting at or below 1%.
    Pro-Ceramide (#31)
    Hydroxypalmitoyl Sphinganine — the third hero, also a trace addition in the sub-1% tail.
    Nib holding up the long ingredient list and pointing the pencil at two entries near the bottom, the glacial glycoprotein and the pro-ceramide, sitting close to the end of the panel.
    Nib marks the two quieter heroes: the glycoprotein at 29 and the pro-ceramide at 31, both tucked into the bottom third of the list.

    So is Kiehl’s Ultra Facial Cream a bad moisturizer?

    No — and that is not the point of reading the label. This is a competently built cream. Squalane high up, glycerin second doing the real humectant work, silicones to seal the surface, a spread of plant oils and a bit of vitamin E: that combination will leave most people’s skin feeling soft, and the squalane claim is more honest than a lot of the jars that pass this desk. The thing worth knowing is narrower. Of the three heroes Kiehl’s puts on the front, one (squalane) is where the marketing says it is, and two (the glacier and the pro-ceramide) are trace additions near the bottom of a list thirty-five entries long. If you are buying this cream for the Antarctic glacial glycoprotein, you are buying a cream whose main moisturizing work is being done by glycerin, silicone and squalane, with the glacier along for the story.

    If what you actually want is a moisturizer where the ingredients doing the work are the short list of things you can read on the front, that is a different kind of formula — fewer ingredients, no sub-1% tail of trace heroes to decode. That is the whole idea behind our own tallow moisturizer at Evil Goods (Ingredient Desk is published by the team behind Evil Goods, and I point to it here because this entire piece is about which ingredients are actually present in a meaningful amount). It is not a verdict on Kiehl’s; it is the other end of the same label-reading exercise. Whatever you choose, the ingredient panel on the back is the honest document, and the front of the jar is the advertisement.

    FAQ

    What is the first ingredient in Kiehl’s Ultra Facial Cream with Squalane?
    Water, followed by glycerin, dimethicone and then squalane at position 4 of 35. Kiehl’s prints “4.5% Squalane” on the jar, and the squalane’s placement at number 4 is consistent with that.

    Where does the Glacial Glycoprotein sit in the ingredient list?
    At position 29 of 35, listed by its INCI name Pseudoalteromonas Ferment Extract. It sits well below the preservative (phenoxyethanol, #11), which means it is present at or below 1% — almost certainly a trace amount, despite being one of the three heroes on the front of the jar.

    Where is the Pro-Ceramide?
    Hydroxypalmitoyl Sphinganine is at position 31, in the same sub-1% tail as the glycoprotein. It is a synthetic ceramide precursor, generally listed as an emollient, and its position indicates a trace addition.

    Why is salicylic acid in the list?
    At position 32 it is not an added exfoliant. An independent cross-check of the list reports it comes in as the preservative for the glacial glycoprotein raw material (supplied as water, pseudoalteromonas ferment extract, salicylic acid and sodium hydroxide), not as a BHA added by Kiehl’s.

    Is squalane the same as squalene?
    They are related but not identical. Squalene is a naturally occurring lipid that oxidizes easily; squalane is its hydrogenated, shelf-stable form. The cream uses squalane, here derived from olives, which is why it stays stable in the jar.

    Nib the round desk creature holding up the Kiehl's ingredient panel like a trophy and pointing at it with a pencil, as if to say the back of the jar is the document that tells the truth.
    Nib’s parting note: three heroes on the front, but the panel on the back shows only one of them near the top — and that is the document worth reading.
  • Clinique Dramatically Different: urea at #9’s neighbor, dyes at the end

    Clinique’s Dramatically Different Moisturizing Lotion+ markets three heroes — “pure urea,” “pure glycerin” and “3 pro-lipids.” Read the actual label and the base is water, then mineral oil, then glycerin, then petrolatum: two of the four biggest ingredients are petroleum-derived occlusives. The urea Clinique leads with sits at position 8 of 24. Right behind it, at position 9, is lanolin alcohol — a known contact allergen that appears in none of the marketing — on a product badged “allergy tested” and “safe for sensitive skin.” At the very bottom of the panel, below even the preservative, sit three synthetic dyes that color the lotion and do nothing for skin.

    This is the usual game on this desk — quote the label, then show where the ingredient on the front of the bottle really lands in the list. Clinique’s DDML+ is a good one to run it on because it has been sold since 1968, it is Clinique’s stated number-one moisturizer, and almost everyone has seen the little amber bottle. The front of that bottle and the ingredient panel on the back tell slightly different stories.

    What’s actually at the top of the Clinique bottle?

    Here is the full ingredient list, quoted verbatim from Clinique’s own product page (clinique.com, formulation code ILN50644, read 15 October 2026):

    Water\Aqua\Eau, Mineral Oil\Paraffinum Liquidum\Huile Minérale, Glycerin, Petrolatum, Stearic Acid, Glyceryl Stearate, Sesamum Indicum (Sesame) Oil, Urea, Lanolin Alcohol, Triethanolamine, Hordeum Vulgare (Barley) Extract\Extrait D’orge, Cucumis Sativus (Cucumber) Fruit Extract, Propylene Glycol Dicaprate, Sodium Hyaluronate, Butylene Glycol, Helianthus Annuus (Sunflower) Seed Extract, Pentylene Glycol, BHT, Disodium EDTA, Tetrasodium EDTA, Phenoxyethanol, Red 33 (CI 17200), Yellow 6 (CI 15985), Yellow 5 (CI 19140)

    Source: clinique.com, the brand’s own listing, read 15 October 2026. Clinique adds its own caveat on that page — “ingredient lists may change or vary from time to time… refer to the ingredient list on the product package you receive” — which matters here more than usual (see the formulation note below). Numbered, the top of the list reads: Water (#1), Mineral Oil (#2), Glycerin (#3), Petrolatum (#4). Two of the four largest ingredients by weight — mineral oil and petrolatum — are petroleum-derived occlusives. Neither is harmful; both are effective at sealing in moisture. The point is simply where they sit. In a $34 “dermatologist-developed” moisturizer, mineral oil is present at a higher concentration than glycerin, than the marketed urea, than any botanical, and than the hyaluronic acid. Clinique groups the occlusives under the branded phrase “3 pro-lipids”; the most likely trio from the formula is mineral oil (#2), petrolatum (#4) and sesame oil (#7), though Clinique does not spell out which three it means, so treat that mapping as an inference rather than a confirmed fact.

    Nib the small round desk creature holding a magnifying glass over the back of a Clinique Dramatically Different Moisturizing Lotion bottle, reading the ingredient panel carefully.
    Nib turns the famous amber bottle around and reads the back: water, mineral oil, glycerin, petrolatum — before the hero ingredients even begin.

    Where does the urea Clinique markets actually sit?

    At position 8 — and in fairness to the formula, that is honest placement. Clinique leads its DDML+ marketing with “pure urea,” and urea genuinely turns up above every botanical (barley #11, cucumber #12, sunflower #16), above the hyaluronic acid (#14), and above all the preservatives. Urea at this kind of position does real work: it is a humectant that helps skin hold water and, at higher strengths, a mild keratolytic that softens rough patches. This is actually the opposite of the usual story on this desk, where the hero ingredient hides near the bottom. Here the marketed active is prominent. The one caveat is the word “pure.” Urea is urea — “pure” is a reassuring adjective, not a different or better molecule. So the urea claim holds up on the label in a way many hero-ingredient claims do not; it is the ingredient sitting right after it that the marketing stays quiet about.

    Nib pointing a pencil approvingly at position eight on a long ingredient list, giving a small nod because the marketed hero ingredient is genuinely near the top.
    For once the hero ingredient keeps its promise: urea really does sit near the top, at number eight.

    What is lanolin alcohol doing at position 9?

    Sitting one line below the urea, unmentioned anywhere on the front of the bottle, is lanolin alcohol. It is a wool-wax derivative — related to, but not the same as, the lanolin (wool fat) many people picture — and it is the fraction most associated with lanolin contact allergy. That matters because DDML+ carries the claims “allergy tested,” “dermatologist-tested” and “safe for sensitive skin,” and lanolin alcohol is one of the more established contact allergens in dermatology patch-test panels.

    Here is where I have to be careful, because the evidence has a specific shape. In people with existing dermatitis who get patch-tested, lanolin alcohol tests positive in roughly 1.2% to 6.9% across North American studies, and individual patch-test series of dermatitis patients have reported rates near 9% — higher still when a wider panel of lanolin derivatives is tested alongside it. But those are dermatitis-clinic populations, not the general public. A 2024 open-access review, “Hypersensitivity to Lanolin: An Old–New Problem” (which summarizes that patch-test literature), describes the so-called lanolin paradox: it has relatively low sensitizing potential on healthy skin but can trigger reactions on already-compromised skin. So the fair reading is not that this lotion will give you a rash — most people will be fine with lanolin alcohol — but that a product sold on “safe for sensitive skin” contains, at position 9, an ingredient a dermatologist would flag for exactly the sensitive, dermatitis-prone skin the claim targets, and never names it.

    Nib looking back and forth between the front of the Clinique bottle reading allergy tested and the ingredient panel on the back where lanolin alcohol is listed, eyebrows raised.
    Nib spots the gap: “allergy tested” on the front, a classic patch-test allergen quietly at number nine on the back.

    What sits at the very bottom of the panel?

    Three synthetic colorants: Red 33 (CI 17200), Yellow 6 (CI 15985) and Yellow 5 (CI 19140), at positions 22, 23 and 24 — after even the preservative (phenoxyethanol, #21) and the two chelating agents (#19, #20). At that depth they are present in trace amounts, and their skincare function is none. What they do is color the lotion: without them the formula would be white or off-white, and with them it matches the recognizable Clinique amber. That is a brand-aesthetics decision, not a skin-care one, and it is worth knowing you are paying for the tint.

    All three are permitted by the FDA for cosmetic use, so this is not a safety alarm. The one factual note worth adding is about Yellow 5: the FDA specifically requires products to name FD&C Yellow No. 5 on the label because, in its words, “some individuals may have hypersensitivity reactions” to it — which is why you can read it by name here at all. I did not find a published patch-test rate for these three dyes specifically in leave-on face moisturizers, so I will not invent one. The honest summary: three dyes, zero skincare benefit, there to make the lotion look like Clinique.

    The base (#1–4)
    Water, Mineral Oil, Glycerin, Petrolatum — two of the top four are petroleum-derived occlusives.
    Urea (#8)
    The marketed “pure urea” hero, genuinely above the botanicals, the HA and the preservatives.
    Lanolin Alcohol (#9)
    A known contact allergen on an “allergy tested” product, named nowhere in the marketing.
    Red 33, Yellow 6, Yellow 5 (#22–24)
    Three synthetic dyes at the very bottom; they color the lotion and nothing more.
    Nib holding up the ingredient list and pointing the pencil at the final three entries, three colorants sitting at the very bottom of the panel.
    Nib reaches the end of the list and finds the last three entries are dyes — present to make the lotion amber, not to do anything for skin.

    Does “allergy tested” mean anything on a label?

    Not in any regulated sense. The FDA is blunt about this family of terms. On its “Hypoallergenic” Cosmetics page the agency states there are “no Federal standards or definitions that govern the use of the term ‘hypoallergenic’” and that it “knows of no scientific studies which show that ‘hypoallergenic’ cosmetics or products making similar claims actually cause fewer adverse reactions than competing conventional products.” Its Allergens in Cosmetics guidance adds that “it isn’t enough to check for terms like ‘hypoallergenic,’ ‘fragrance-free’ or ‘for sensitive skin,’ as there is no federal standard or definition that governs the use of these terms in the U.S.”

    So “allergy tested,” “dermatologist-tested” and “safe for sensitive skin” are marketing statements a brand may apply on its own terms. They are not meaningless — a brand may well run its own testing — but they are not a regulated guarantee, and Clinique does not publish the protocols behind them, so there is no way to say from outside what that testing does or does not cover. The one document that is complete and checkable is the ingredient panel, which is exactly why it is worth reading. If you are drawn to DDML+ for “sensitive skin,” the sensible move is to read that panel — specifically the lanolin alcohol at #9 — against your own history, and to check the formulation code on your own bottle, because Clinique has run at least two versions (an older ILN39477 and the current ILN50644) that differ in real ways, including whether BHT is present and whether the sunflower ingredient is an abrasive seedcake or a plain seed extract.

    If what you actually want is a moisturizer where the things you can read on the label are the things doing the work — rather than a petroleum base dressed up as “pro-lipids” with a tint at the end — that is the comparison our own Evil Goods write-up of tallow versus lotion walks through (Ingredient Desk is published by the team behind Evil Goods, and we point to it here because this whole piece is about what sits where in the bottle). It is not a verdict on Clinique; it is just the other side of the same label-reading exercise. Whatever you pick, the panel on the back is the honest document and the front of the box is the advertisement.

    FAQ

    What is the first ingredient in Clinique Dramatically Different Moisturizing Lotion+?
    Water, followed by mineral oil, glycerin and petrolatum. Two of the four largest ingredients by weight — mineral oil and petrolatum — are petroleum-derived occlusives, grouped in Clinique’s marketing under the phrase “3 pro-lipids.”

    Where does urea sit in the ingredient list?
    At position 8 of 24, above the botanical extracts, the hyaluronic acid and the preservatives. That is genuinely prominent placement for a marketed hero ingredient. “Pure urea” is a marketing phrase — urea is urea.

    Does the lotion contain lanolin?
    It contains lanolin alcohol at position 9 — a wool-wax derivative and a recognized contact allergen in dermatology patch testing. It is not named in Clinique’s marketing, which carries “allergy tested” and “safe for sensitive skin” claims. Most people tolerate it; those with dermatitis-prone or already-compromised skin are the group most likely to react.

    What sits at the very bottom of the ingredient panel?
    Red 33 (CI 17200), Yellow 6 (CI 15985) and Yellow 5 (CI 19140) — three synthetic colorants at positions 22–24. They give the lotion its amber tint and have no skincare function. All three are permitted by the FDA for cosmetic use; the FDA requires Yellow 5 to be named on labels because some people may have hypersensitivity reactions to it.

    Does “allergy tested” on the label mean it won’t cause a reaction?
    No. The FDA says there is no federal standard or definition governing terms like “hypoallergenic,” “allergy tested” or “for sensitive skin,” and knows of no studies showing such products cause fewer reactions than conventional ones. The ingredient panel is the document to read instead.

    Nib the round desk creature holding up the Clinique ingredient panel like a trophy and pointing at it with a pencil, as if to say the back of the bottle is the document that tells the truth.
    Nib’s parting note: the little amber bottle is iconic, but it’s the ingredient panel on the back — not the words on the front — that actually tells you what you’re buying.