Tag: 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 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.

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 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 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’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.

October 16, 2026
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 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.

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 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 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’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.

October 15, 2026

Drunk Elephant Protini: The Peptides Start at Ingredient #10

Drunk Elephant Protini is sold as a “polypeptide” firming moisturizer with a nine-peptide complex. On the label, the first peptide — sh-Oligopeptide-1 — appears at ingredient number ten, after water, an emollient, glycerin, three emulsifiers, a seed oil, a ferment and a botanical extract. The copper compound in the formula is Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14, which is not the same molecule as copper tripeptide-1 (GHK-Cu), the copper peptide most of the published research is actually about.

We quote ingredient lists so you can check them yourself. Here is Protini’s, verbatim from the Drunk Elephant product page (drunkelephant.com, fetched 13 October 2026, HTTP 200), and corroborated word-for-word by a major US retailer’s listing for the same product (SKU P427421). Ingredient Desk is published by the team behind Evil Goods, who make a copper peptide serum of their own; we say so here, in the footer, and anywhere an Evil Goods product comes up.

Water/Aqua/Eau, Dicaprylyl Carbonate, Glycerin, Cetearyl Alcohol, Cetearyl Olivate, Sorbitan Olivate, Sclerocarya Birrea Seed Oil, Bacillus/Folic Acid Ferment Extract, Nymphaea Alba Root Extract, sh-Oligopeptide-1, sh-Oligopeptide-2, sh-Polypeptide-1, sh-Polypeptide-9, sh-Polypeptide-11, Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14, Heptapeptide-15 Palmitate, Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7, Palmitoyl Tripeptide-1, Alanine, Arginine, Glycine, Histidine, Isoleucine, Phenylalanine, Proline, Serine, Threonine, Valine, Acetyl Glutamine, Coconut Alkanes, Coco-Caprylate/Caprate, Sodium Hyaluronate, Aspartic Acid, Linoleic Acid, Linolenic Acid, Lecithin, Butylene Glycol, Polyvinyl Alcohol, Sodium Lactate, Sodium PCA, PCA, Sorbitan Isostearate, Carbomer, Polysorbate 20, Polysorbate 60, Lactic Acid/Glycolic Acid Copolymer, Hydroxyethyl Acrylate/Sodium Acryloyldimethyl Taurate Copolymer, Xanthan Gum, Isomalt, 1,2-Hexanediol, Caprylyl Glycol, Chlorphenesin, Phenoxyethanol, Tocopherol, Sodium Benzoate, Phenylpropanol, Glyceryl Caprylate, Symphytum Officinale Callus Culture Extract.

What is actually in Drunk Elephant Protini?

The front of the jar leads with peptides. The first nine ingredients are not peptides. In descending order of how much is in the jar, they are:

Water — the solvent almost every water-based cream is built on.
Dicaprylyl Carbonate — a light emollient ester, the kind of silicone alternative that gives a cream its slip.
Glycerin — a humectant, one of the most reliable and least expensive moisturizing agents there is.
Cetearyl Alcohol — a fatty alcohol that thickens and helps emulsify.
Cetearyl Olivate and Sorbitan Olivate (5 and 6) — a pair of olive-derived emulsifiers that hold oil and water together.
Sclerocarya Birrea Seed Oil — marula oil, a genuinely nice emollient with antioxidants.
Bacillus/Folic Acid Ferment Extract — a fermented folic acid ingredient Drunk Elephant markets as a hero.
Nymphaea Alba Root Extract — pygmy waterlily extract, the brand’s “stem cell” botanical.

None of this is a criticism. It is a perfectly competent moisturizer base — marula oil and a folic-acid ferment are more interesting than most. The point is only that these eight ingredients, not the peptides, make up the bulk of what you are applying. That is what “descending order of predominance” means, and it is worth knowing before we get to the part the name is selling.

Nib, a small round pencil-sketch creature, holds a magnifying glass up to a tall jar labelled Polypeptide, squinting at the fine print on the back. — Nib reads the back of the jar, not the front. The front says polypeptide; the back has fifty-eight lines to get through first.

Where do the peptides actually appear?

US cosmetic labels have to list ingredients in descending order of how much is present, down to one percent. Below one percent, a brand can list things in any order it likes. That rule is set out in 21 CFR 701.3 — subsection (a) requires descending order; subsection (f)(2) is the under-one-percent exemption. So ingredient position is not an exact percentage, but above that one-percent line it is a real signal of how much is in the jar.

Here is where Protini’s nine peptides sit:

Position	INCI name	What it is
10	sh-Oligopeptide-1	growth-factor-type peptide (EGF-style) — the first peptide in the list
11	sh-Oligopeptide-2	growth-factor-type peptide (IGF-1-style)
12	sh-Polypeptide-1	growth-factor-type peptide (bFGF-style)
13	sh-Polypeptide-9	growth-factor-type peptide
14	sh-Polypeptide-11	growth-factor-type peptide
15	Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14	the copper peptide — a seven-amino-acid chain with a fatty-acid tail and copper
16	Heptapeptide-15 Palmitate	signal peptide
17	Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7	signal peptide (often sold as Rigin)
18	Palmitoyl Tripeptide-1	signal peptide — a palmitoylated GHK chain, without the copper

The peptides occupy positions ten through eighteen. The one directly after them, at nineteen, is alanine — an individual amino acid. On most labels, the appearance of free amino acids marks the point where you have crossed below the one-percent line. The whole nine-peptide complex, in other words, almost certainly lives in the slice of the formula that sits under one percent combined. That is normal for peptides; they work at low concentrations. It is simply not what “polypeptide cream” implies to someone reading the front.

Nib stands at the foot of a long numbered ladder of ingredients, pencil pointing up at rung number ten where the first peptide sits. — The first peptide waits nine rungs up the list. Everything below it is the moisturizer most moisturizers already are.

Is the copper peptide in Protini the one the research is about?

At position fifteen is Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14. When most people say “copper peptide” they mean something else: copper tripeptide-1, also written GHK-Cu (CAS 89030-95-5), a three-amino-acid chain bound to copper. GHK-Cu is the compound with the long history — a 2025 review of tripeptides in skin calls it one of the most-used peptides in the cosmetic industry and names copper tripeptide-1 as its INCI identity. Protini does not contain copper tripeptide-1. It contains a different, palmitoylated copper peptide.

That difference matters for how you read the research. A 2026 systematic review of GHK-Cu describes forty-plus years of pre-clinical work, then adds the honest part: the clinical evidence “remains thin and fragmented,” most trials are small, and the findings have not been validated in large human studies. So even for the best-studied copper peptide, the human evidence is promising rather than settled. For Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14 specifically, the published literature is thinner still — which is not the same as saying it does nothing, only that you should not read GHK-Cu’s forty-year file as if it belonged to this molecule. If you want the plain-English version of what a copper peptide even is, we wrote one (that is our site, Evil Goods).

Nib holds up two labelled test tubes side by side, one marked Copper Tripeptide-1 and one marked Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14, looking from one to the other. — Two copper peptides, two different names. Nib checks which one the research is actually about.

What is everything below position eighteen?

The back half of the list is mostly supporting cast. Positions nineteen through twenty-nine are individual amino acids — alanine, arginine, glycine and the rest — which act as natural moisturizing factors and as the building blocks peptides are made from, but are not themselves peptides. Sodium hyaluronate, the much-hyped hydrating ingredient, sits all the way down at position thirty-two, well below that one-percent line.

Two preservatives sit near the very bottom: chlorphenesin at position fifty-two and phenoxyethanol at fifty-three. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review panel concluded chlorphenesin is safe at present practices of use and concentration. Alongside that, the patch-test literature carries a handful of case reports of allergic contact dermatitis from products containing it — the CIR report itself cites several. These are rare reactions at low rates, not a reason to avoid the ingredient, but worth knowing if your skin has flagged a preservative before. That is the honest shape of it: broadly safe by the review body’s assessment, with a small sensitization signal in the case reports.

Nib sits cross-legged at the bottom of the ingredient list reading a tiny footnote next to the word Chlorphenesin, a stack of case-report papers beside him. — Down at position fifty-two, Nib stops to read the footnotes a few people have left on the preservative.

So is Drunk Elephant Protini worth it?

If you like how it feels and it suits your skin, the position of an ingredient does not undo that — a good emollient base is a real thing to buy. What the label does tell you is that you are paying a peptide-cream price for a cream whose peptides sit below one percent, built on a base you could find in far cheaper moisturizers. Whether that trade is worth it is a judgement about your own skin and budget, not something the front of the jar settles for you. If you specifically want copper peptides, it is worth knowing which copper peptide you are buying and how thin the human evidence still is for any of them — including the one in our own Copper Peptide Blue Honey Serum, which uses copper tripeptide-1.

FAQ

Where do the peptides start in Drunk Elephant Protini?: At ingredient number ten, sh-Oligopeptide-1. The first nine ingredients are water, an emollient ester, glycerin, three emulsifiers, marula seed oil, a folic-acid ferment and a waterlily extract.
What is sh-Oligopeptide-1?: A synthetic growth-factor-style peptide (an EGF analog) used in skincare at low concentrations. It is the first of Protini’s nine-peptide complex.
Is the copper peptide in Protini GHK-Cu?: No. Protini contains Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14. GHK-Cu is copper tripeptide-1, a different molecule and the one most of the published research is conducted on.
What does ingredient order tell you about a moisturizer?: US rules require listing in descending order of amount down to one percent (21 CFR 701.3). So an ingredient’s position is a real signal of how much is present — above the one-percent line, at least. Below it, order no longer reflects quantity.
Is chlorphenesin safe?: The Cosmetic Ingredient Review panel concluded it is safe at the concentrations cosmetics use. A small number of allergic contact dermatitis case reports exist in the patch-test literature, which is a sensitization note rather than a general warning.

Nib closes a thick notebook, magnifying glass tucked under one arm, giving a small satisfied nod next to the finished ingredient list. — The label told the whole story. It just told it in order of how much is in the jar.

October 13, 2026

Peter Thomas Roth Water Drench: Hyaluronic Acid Is the 6th Ingredient

On the Peter Thomas Roth Water Drench Hyaluronic Cloud Cream label, Sodium Hyaluronate — the INCI name for hyaluronic acid — is the sixth ingredient, listed after two separate silicone compounds. The product is sold on a “30% Hyaluronic Acid Complex,” but that “30%” names a proprietary blend, not the concentration of hyaluronic acid in the cream. The second ingredient, before glycerin, is Dimethicone.

I like reading the ingredient list on a product whose whole name is a promise. “Water Drench.” “Hyaluronic.” “Cloud Cream.” Peter Thomas Roth’s Water Drench Hyaluronic Cloud Cream ($55 for 1.7 oz at Dermstore and Macy’s as of October 2026) leans its entire pitch on a “30% Hyaluronic Acid Complex.” So I went and read the label — and the hyaluronic acid turns out to be sixth on the ingredient list.

Nib, a small round pencil-sketched creature, holds a magnifying glass up to a jar labelled 30% and squints at the small print on the back. — Nib reads the back of the jar, not the front. The “30%” is on the front.

What does “30% Hyaluronic Acid Complex” actually mean?

It means less than it sounds like, and the word doing the quiet work is Complex. A “complex” is a supplier- or brand-defined blend. Peter Thomas Roth does not publish what is in the complex or what fraction of the formula it represents, so “30%” cannot be read as “30% hyaluronic acid.”

There is a physical reason it cannot. A 30% sodium hyaluronate solution would be a stiff, barely-pourable paste, not a light cream — hyaluronic acid is an extraordinary water-binder even at tiny amounts. In leave-on skincare, HA typically sits between 0.2% and 1%, as a 2025 review in Pharmaceutics summarising its cosmetic use lays out in the published literature. Against that calibration, a cream genuinely built on 30% HA would not behave like a cream at all.

The likelier reading is ordinary and not sinister: brands often buy a pre-made aqueous blend that is itself, say, 30% HA by weight, then use it at a few percent of the finished formula. That would leave real HA somewhere around 1–2%, which is exactly what a position-6 placement implies. I can’t confirm the arithmetic without a disclosure or a certificate of analysis, and neither can you — which is the point.

Nib points a pencil at a long vertical INCI list taped to the wall, tracing down past the top entries to a line highlighted sixth from the top. — Counting down the list: water, silicone, glycerin, solvent, a second silicone — then hyaluronic acid.

Where does the hyaluronic acid actually sit?

Here is the top of the list, quoted verbatim. INCI is ordered by concentration down to 1%, so position is the most honest number a label gives you for the ingredients near the top.

Sodium Hyaluronate is the sixth ingredient. Ahead of it: Water, Dimethicone, Glycerin, Dipropylene Glycol, and a second silicone, Dimethicone/PEG-10/15 Crosspolymer. Everything listed above it — water, a silicone, glycerin, a solvent, and a second silicone — is present at a higher level than the named hero, and two of those are silicones.

#	Ingredient (INCI)	What it is
1	Water/Aqua/Eau	Solvent base
2	Dimethicone	Silicone film-former / occlusive
3	Glycerin	Humectant
4	Dipropylene Glycol	Solvent / humectant
5	Dimethicone/PEG-10/15 Crosspolymer	A second, cross-linked silicone
6	Sodium Hyaluronate	Hyaluronic acid — the named hero

None of that makes it a bad moisturizer. Glycerin is a workhorse humectant and silicones have a real job, which is the next question. But “Water Drench” paints a picture of a formula carried by water and hyaluronic acid, and the label describes one carried by water and silicone.

The full US ingredient list, verbatim:

Water/Aqua/Eau, Dimethicone, Glycerin, Dipropylene Glycol, Dimethicone/PEG-10/15 Crosspolymer, Sodium Hyaluronate, Yeast Extract, Ceramide AP, Ceramide EOP, Ceramide EOS, Ceramide NP, Ceramide NS, Sambucus Nigra Fruit Extract, Sodium PCA, Tocopherol, Saccharide Isomerate, Caprooyl Phytosphingosine, Caprooyl Sphingosine, Saccharomyces/Iron Ferment, Saccharomyces/Copper Ferment, Saccharomyces/Silicon Ferment, Saccharomyces/Magnesium Ferment, Saccharomyces/Zinc Ferment, Olea Europaea (Olive) Leaf Extract, Cholesterol, Citric Acid, Sodium Citrate, Methyl Gluceth-20, Sodium Chloride, Trisiloxane, Propylene Glycol, Ceteareth-25, Potassium Sorbate, Sodium Benzoate, Behenic Acid, Butylene Glycol, Lauryl PEG-9 Polydimethylsiloxyethyl Dimethicone, Cetyl Alcohol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Mica, Phenoxyethanol.

Source: a major US retailer’s product listing (catalog ID P416160), read 1 October 2026, matching the ingredient list published on peterthomasroth.com. This is the US formula; a 2024 Canadian listing for the same product shows a different silicone profile with Sodium Hyaluronate at position 8, so the formula may vary by region and over time.

Nib pokes the surface of a smooth silky blob of cream with a pencil, watching it slide, a small thought-bubble showing a droplet of silicone oil. — The silky, slip-on-skin feel most people read as “hydration” is largely the silicone at position 2.

What is the silicone at position 2 doing?

Dimethicone is a silicone film-former. It sits on the skin as a thin, breathable layer that slows water loss and gives that instantly-smooth, slip feel — the sensation a lot of people interpret as “deeply hydrating” the moment they rub it in. A 2023 review in the Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology describes exactly this occlusive, film-forming role, and an ingredient explainer at Dermapedia puts the everyday moisturizer range at roughly 1–10%.

There is nothing wrong with dimethicone. It is well-tolerated and it genuinely helps skin hold moisture by occlusion. The honest observation is narrower: in a cream named “Water Drench,” the thing most responsible for the drenched feeling is a silicone, not the water or the hyaluronic acid on the front of the box.

Nib holds up a stopwatch reading 72 and looks sceptically at a tiny vial labelled with the number sixteen, a tape measure showing a very short length. — The “72-hour” ingredient is the sixteenth on the list. Nib checks the stopwatch against the dose.

What about the “72-hour hydration” claim?

That claim rides on a different ingredient: Saccharide Isomerate, sold as Pentavitin, which is the sixteenth ingredient — after all five ceramides, the elderberry extract, Sodium PCA and vitamin E. It is a carbohydrate that binds to the skin’s own natural moisturizing factor rather than a form of hyaluronic acid.

Here is the part worth knowing: the manufacturer, DSM-Firmenich, demonstrates the 72-hour effect at a 3% concentration in its own studies, with a recommended use range of 1–5%. Position 16 — below five ceramides that themselves are usually present at a fraction of a percent — is consistent with the low end of that range. That doesn’t make the 72-hour figure false. It means the number comes from a specific tested dose, and the label gives you no way to know whether this formula matches it.

So is it a good buy at $55?

It’s a competent, pleasant moisturizer with a real ceramide blend, glycerin, a humectant carbohydrate and some hyaluronic acid. If the silky finish and a well-rounded humectant mix are what you’re after, it does that. What it is not is a cream carried by hyaluronic acid, which is what the name and the “30%” badge imply. You’re paying a premium partly for a marketing number that describes an undisclosed blend.

If the thing you actually want is a product where the active is named on the label instead of buried in a complex, that’s the whole design brief behind our own Copper Peptide Blue Honey Serum (full disclosure: Ingredient Desk is published by the team behind Evil Goods) — copper peptides, hyaluronic acid, Manuka honey and niacinamide, named on the product rather than wrapped in a percentage you can’t trace. I’d still rather you read its label the same way you just read this one.

Frequently asked questions

Does Water Drench Cloud Cream contain 30% hyaluronic acid?: No. The “30% Hyaluronic Acid Complex” names a proprietary blend; its composition and percentage are not disclosed. Sodium Hyaluronate (the INCI name for HA) is the sixth ingredient on the US label.
What is the first active after water?: Dimethicone, a silicone film-former, is the second ingredient — ahead of glycerin and the hyaluronic acid.
Where does the “72-hour hydration” claim come from?: From Saccharide Isomerate (Pentavitin), the sixteenth ingredient. Its maker demonstrates the effect at 3%; the recommended range is 1–5%.
Is the formula the same everywhere?: Not necessarily. A 2024 Canadian listing showed a different silicone profile and HA at position 8. This piece uses the US formula read on 1 October 2026.

Nib sits on top of the closed jar, pencil behind one ear, holding up a small sign reading 'read the back' with a satisfied grin. — Nib’s one rule of the ingredient desk: the front of the jar is the pitch, the back is the formula. Read the back.

October 12, 2026

IT Cosmetics Confidence in a Cream: The Peptides Are #36 and #37

IT Cosmetics markets Confidence in a Cream on a “Peptide-Lipid Complex,” but the two peptides that make up that complex — Palmitoyl Tripeptide-1 and Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7 — are ingredients 36 and 37 in a 38-item list, sitting below the fragrance allergens and just above the perfume itself. Two of the cream’s other headline ingredients, niacinamide and squalane, are near the top and backed by disclosed percentages. The peptides are not. Here is where each one actually sits.

Confidence in a Cream ($49 for 2 oz) is one of the most reviewed anti-aging moisturizers on the shelf, and its pitch leans on niacinamide, squalane, and a branded “Peptide-Lipid Complex.” Niacinamide and squalane hold up to a reading of the label. The third is the one worth slowing down on — not because anything is hidden, but because the word “complex” does a lot of quiet work.

Nib, a small round pencil-sketch creature, holds a magnifying glass up to a jar labelled Confidence in a Cream, squinting at the fine print on the back. — Nib reads the back of the jar, not the front.

What does the ingredient order actually tell you?

US cosmetic labels follow a rule most shoppers never learn: ingredients are listed in descending order of concentration, but only down to 1%. Below that threshold, a brand may list the remaining ingredients in any order it likes. That rule comes from the FDA’s labeling regulation at 21 CFR 701.3, and it is the whole reason label position is readable at all. Above 1%, order means something. Below it, order means almost nothing — which is itself a kind of information, because it tells you an ingredient is in the “under one percent” group.

So the useful trick is to find a marker whose typical use level is known, and read everything after it as “at or below roughly that.” The standard marker is a preservative.

Nib runs a pencil down a long ingredient list pinned to the desk, counting the entries with the pencil tip. — Thirty-eight entries. Nib counts them twice.

Where is the “Peptide-Lipid Complex” on the label?

Here is the full ingredient list for the standard SKU, read from the IT Cosmetics product page (itcosmetics.com, product ITC_1137, read 2026-10-07) and matched word-for-word against a second major US retailer’s listing for the same SKU (read 2026-10-07):

AQUA / WATER / EAU, GLYCERIN, NIACINAMIDE, CETEARYL ALCOHOL, HYDROXYETHYLPIPERAZINE ETHANE SULFONIC ACID, GLYCERYL STEARATE, SQUALANE, DIMETHICONE, MYRISTYL MYRISTATE, ETHYLHEXYL PALMITATE, BUTYROSPERMUM PARKII BUTTER / SHEA BUTTER, PHENOXYETHANOL, PEG-100 STEARATE, CAPRYLYL GLYCOL, SODIUM POLYACRYLATE, TOCOPHEROL, CITRIC ACID, SODIUM HYALURONATE, CAPRYLIC/CAPRIC TRIGLYCERIDE, PENTYLENE GLYCOL, PENTAERYTHRITYL TETRA-DI-T-BUTYL HYDROXYHYDROCINNAMATE, HYDROLYZED RICE PROTEIN, CERAMIDE NP, ADENOSINE, TRISODIUM ETHYLENEDIAMINE DISUCCINATE, COLLOIDAL OATMEAL, HYDROXYPALMITOYL SPHINGANINE, BUTYLENE GLYCOL, LIMONENE, CARAMEL, CITRAL, LINALOOL, CARBOMER, SODIUM LACTATE, POLYSORBATE 20, PALMITOYL TRIPEPTIDE-1, PALMITOYL TETRAPEPTIDE-7, PARFUM / FRAGRANCE.

Count to the end. There are 38 entries. The two peptides that IT Cosmetics names as the “Peptide-Lipid Complex” land here:

Position	Ingredient	How it is marketed
3	Niacinamide	“4% Niacinamide” — disclosed, and the position agrees
7	Squalane	“3% Squalane” — disclosed, and the position agrees
12	Phenoxyethanol	Preservative. The sub-1% marker.
18	Sodium Hyaluronate	“hyaluronic acid” — below the marker
23	Ceramide NP	“barrier” — below the marker
29 / 31 / 32	Limonene / Citral / Linalool	fragrance allergens, listed individually
36	Palmitoyl Tripeptide-1	“Peptide-Lipid Complex”
37	Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7	“Peptide-Lipid Complex”
38	Parfum / Fragrance	end of list

The two peptides are the last two functional ingredients on the label. They sit below the three fragrance compounds the EU requires to be named individually, and above only the perfume base itself.

Nib points the pencil near the very bottom of the list, eyebrows raised, having found the two peptides sitting just above fragrance. — The thing on the front of the bottle, found near the bottom of the list.

Does a low position mean the peptides do nothing?

No — and this is the part the position alone cannot tell you. Peptides like these work at parts-per-million levels. The CIR safety review of these exact ingredients (Johnson et al., International Journal of Toxicology, 2018) reports typical use concentrations under 10 ppm, with surveyed maximums around 0.002%. A more recent framework paper (PMC, 2026) puts the leave-on maximum for this class at roughly 20 ppm. At those levels, a peptide belongs exactly where it sits — at the bottom of the list, in the sub-1% group. A peptide near the top would be the surprising thing, not this.

IT Cosmetics’ limited-edition version of the cream discloses a “2.5% Peptide-Lipid Complex.” If the two peptides are each present at ppm levels, then most of that 2.5% is the lipid carrier the peptides are delivered in, not the peptides themselves. That is how peptide raw materials are sold — a trade blend, a small active fraction in a larger carrier. It is not a trick. It is worth saying out loud only because “Peptide-Lipid Complex” on the front of the jar invites you to picture something the number 36 does not support.

What holds up here, and what to weigh?

Credit where it is due: IT Cosmetics states 4% niacinamide and 3% squalane on the page, and both sit above phenoxyethanol, which is consistent with those numbers. That is more transparency than most brands offer, and the formula is a genuinely well-built moisturizer on those two counts. The peptides are the one place where the marketing and the label part ways — not in honesty, but in emphasis.

If you are specifically shopping for a peptide moisturizer — one built around peptides rather than led by niacinamide and squalane with peptides at the end — the question becomes what a formula designed around that active actually looks like. We make skincare at Evil Goods, and we put our copper peptides on their own line for exactly this reason; we wrote up why that was a deliberate formulation choice here (that is our site). Read it as one answer to the question, not as a like-for-like swap: our product page shows a curated key-ingredient panel, not a full INCI declaration, so it is not a fair position-by-position comparison against IT Cosmetics’ complete list. Different disclosures, different claims — judge each on its own label.

Nib taps the pencil on the word PHENOXYETHANOL midway down the list, drawing a small line to mark the one-percent boundary. — Nib marks the preservative — the line everything below sits under.

One note for sensitive skin

Three fragrance allergens — limonene (#29), citral (#31), and linalool (#32) — are listed separately from “parfum,” which under EU rules means each is present above the 0.001% leave-on labeling threshold. Sensitization to these is real but uncommon, and the clinic figures that exist (around a few percent of already patch-tested patients, per SCCS opinions) are drawn from people who self-select for sensitivity. If you have a known fragrance allergy, this is worth a glance. If you do not, it is just context.

Frequently asked questions

Where do the peptides sit in Confidence in a Cream?: Palmitoyl Tripeptide-1 is position 36 and Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7 is position 37 of 38, just above the fragrance base.
Does that mean the peptides are useless?: No. These peptides are used at parts-per-million levels (CIR 2018), so a low list position is expected rather than alarming. Position tells you concentration band, not whether an ingredient works.
Are the niacinamide and squalane claims accurate?: They are consistent with the label. IT Cosmetics discloses 4% niacinamide and 3% squalane, and both sit near the top of the list, above the preservative, which matches those figures.
Why does the limited edition say “2.5% Peptide-Lipid Complex”?: That figure refers to the whole commercial complex, including the lipid carrier the peptides are delivered in — not to the peptide dose itself.

Nib sets the magnifying glass down, satisfied, next to a tidy note that reads: position is not the same as dose. — Position is a signal, not a verdict. Nib writes it down and moves on.

October 7, 2026

First Aid Beauty Ultra Repair Cream: Ceramide Is the 21st Ingredient

First Aid Beauty’s Ultra Repair Cream is marketed on ceramides for the skin barrier, but on the label Ceramide NP is the 21st of 22 inactive ingredients — the second-to-last thing in the tub, nine positions below phenoxyethanol, a preservative used at up to 1%. The single amount we can read on the label is the colloidal oatmeal, disclosed as 0.5% only because US law classifies this cream as an over-the-counter drug. None of that makes it a bad moisturizer; it is a competent one. It just means the ceramide the marketing leans on is a trace-level ingredient, and the shea butter nobody puts on the front of the jar is present at a far higher level than the ceramide is.

Ultra Repair Cream is one of the best-selling “eczema” moisturizers in the US — thousands of reviews at each major beauty retailer, a National Eczema Association seal, and a pitch built on a familiar trio: colloidal oatmeal, ceramides and shea butter. So it is worth doing the one thing the front of the jar never invites you to do: turn it around and read the whole list, in order. When you do, two of those three heroes sit in very different places than the marketing suggests.

Where does the ceramide actually sit on the label?

Here is the ingredient list, quoted verbatim. The active ingredient is listed separately from the inactives because this product is a registered OTC drug — more on why in a moment. This ordering is from First Aid Beauty’s own product page, read 25 September 2026, and the identical order appears on a major beauty retailer’s listing for the same jar, read the same day. The FDA’s own drug database (DailyMed, NDC 69423-556) lists all the same ingredients, which is how we can say the list below is complete rather than truncated.

Active ingredient: Colloidal Oatmeal 0.5%.
Inactive ingredients: Water, Stearic Acid, Glycerin, C12-15 Alkyl Benzoate, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Glyceryl Stearate, Glyceryl Stearate SE, Cetearyl Alcohol, Butyrospermum Parkii (Shea) Butter, Dimethicone, Squalane, Phenoxyethanol, Caprylyl Glycol, Xanthan Gum, Allantoin, Sodium Hydroxide, Disodium EDTA, Chrysanthemum Parthenium (Feverfew) Extract, Camellia Sinensis Leaf Extract, Glycyrrhiza Glabra (Licorice) Root Extract, Ceramide NP, Eucalyptus Globulus Leaf Oil.

Read down the inactives and the shape of the formula is clear. Water is #1. Stearic acid (#2) is the main structural lipid, a fatty-acid emulsifier. Glycerin (#3) is the primary humectant. Then a synthetic ester and a medium-chain triglyceride (#4–5), a run of emulsifiers, and at #9 shea butter. Ceramide NP does not appear until #21 — twenty inactives in, second from the bottom, with only eucalyptus oil beneath it.

Product name / pitch

Ultra Repair Cream — ceramides and colloidal oatmeal are the front-of-jar story

Ceramide NP position

#21 of 22 inactive ingredients

Phenoxyethanol position

#12 — a preservative capped at ~1%

Shea butter position

#9 — well above the ceramide

Colloidal oatmeal

0.5%, disclosed by law as the OTC-drug active

Source of list

First Aid Beauty’s own page and a major retailer’s listing, both read 25 Sep 2026; cross-checked against FDA DailyMed

The jar sells ceramides. Nib turns it around to find where the ceramide actually is.

What does position #21 tell you about how much ceramide is in there?

Honesty first: a position on an INCI list is not a precise concentration readout. US cosmetic labelling law lets a manufacturer list everything present at 1% or less in any order it likes — the descending-by-weight rule only applies down to the 1% line. The FDA explains this in plain terms in its Cosmetics Labeling Guide.

But there is a useful anchor in this particular list, and it is the preservative. Phenoxyethanol sits at #12. It is used at a maximum of about 1% — that is the standard cosmetic cap, and at that level it is well tolerated (a large patch-test review found a sensitization rate under 0.3%: van Zuuren et al., J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol, 2019). So everything from position #12 downward is at roughly 1% or less. Ceramide NP is nine positions below the preservative. That puts it well under 1% — almost certainly a trace. We are not going to invent a percentage First Aid Beauty does not publish, but the label itself brackets the answer.

How much does that matter? A clinical review of moisturizers versus barrier repair in atopic dermatitis put it bluntly: Elias & Schmuth (Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 2018) note that “some popular moisturizers also include a ceramide, but when provided, its content is usually too low to impart measurable benefits, but is often included for marketing purposes.” The same authors argue that for a genuine barrier-repair effect in atopic dermatitis the three physiologic lipids together should reach roughly 5% or more — and that is the combined ceramide-plus-cholesterol-plus-fatty-acid mixture, not a lone ceramide at position #21. This is not proof the cream does nothing; plenty of people find it a pleasant, effective moisturizer. It is a reason to be sceptical that the ceramide specifically is doing the heavy lifting the name implies.

Phenoxyethanol, the preservative, is #12. Nine lines further down, at #21, Nib finally reaches the ceramide.

Why do we know the oatmeal is 0.5% but not the ceramide?

This is the quietly interesting part. The colloidal oatmeal concentration is on the label — 0.5% — not because First Aid Beauty volunteered it in a spirit of transparency, but because it is legally required to. Colloidal oatmeal is the ingredient that carries the product’s eczema claim — the “relieves / soothes dry, distressed skin, even eczema” language on the packaging — and in the US that kind of claim makes the product a non-prescription (OTC) drug regulated under the FDA’s skin-protectant monograph. An OTC drug must declare its active ingredient and that ingredient’s strength on the label; a cosmetic ingredient carries no such duty. DailyMed lists the product as a HUMAN OTC DRUG with oatmeal as the single active at 0.5% and everything else — ceramide included — as inactive.

So the asymmetry on the label is really a regulatory artefact. We can read the oatmeal number because a drug law forces it into the open; we cannot read the ceramide number because cosmetic law does not. It is a neat illustration of how much of what a jar tells you is decided by which rulebook applies, not by which ingredient the brand is proudest of.

Is the shea butter the real workhorse here?

Look at position #9. Shea butter sits above dimethicone, above squalane, and eleven places above the ceramide — comfortably in the part of the list where ingredients are still above 1%. Squalane (#11) is in there too, also above the ceramide, and First Aid Beauty does not put squalane on the front of the jar at all. In other words, the ingredients doing the most emollient work in this tub — the base of stearic acid, glycerin, shea butter, triglycerides and silicone — are largely not the ones the marketing leads with. That is not a scandal. It is a well-built, fairly standard emollient cream. The gap worth noticing is between that honest formula and a name that invites you to picture a jar built around ceramides.

One caveat on the shea, because we would rather flag it than hide it: First Aid Beauty’s own page currently shows “Hydrogenated Shea Butter” slightly lower in the list than the “Butyrospermum Parkii (Shea) Butter” that the retailer listings show at #9. That looks like a reformulation caught mid-update, and it does not move the ceramide, which sits at #21 across every source we checked. If it matters to you, read the list on the physical tube you actually buy — packaging is the definitive source, and it changes.

Two versions disagree on the shea butter. Nib checks: the ceramide is #21 on both.

So what should a shopper actually take from this?

Read the list, in order, on whatever you are about to buy, and find your hero ingredient in it. If a cream is sold to you on ceramides and the ceramide is second-from-last, that is not a reason to panic — it may still be a fine moisturizer — but it is a reason not to pay a ceramide premium for it. The same trick works on any jar: the front sells you a hero; the back tells you where that hero really ranks.

If what you want is a moisturizer whose named ingredients are actually near the top of the list, that is a legitimate thing to shop for. Reading this knowing Ingredient Desk is published by the team behind Evil Goods, one alternative built on that principle is a tallow-based moisturizer, where the fats doing the work are the fats on the front of the jar rather than a water-and-emulsifier base — if you want to understand that kind of formula before deciding, our explainer on what a beef tallow moisturizer actually is (ours) walks through it. Whether a tallow cream suits your skin is a separate question with its own trade-offs, and we are not going to compare percentages neither company fully publishes. The only comparison worth making is the one this whole piece is about.

Nib’s takeaway, in pencil: read the back of the jar, not the front.

FAQ

Where does the ceramide rank in First Aid Beauty Ultra Repair Cream?
On the current US label (First Aid Beauty’s own page and a major retailer’s listing, both read 25 September 2026), Ceramide NP is the 21st of 22 inactive ingredients — second from the bottom, with only eucalyptus oil below it.

How much ceramide is actually in it?
First Aid Beauty does not publish its formula percentages, so no exact figure can be stated. Ceramide NP sits nine positions below phenoxyethanol, a preservative capped at about 1%, which places it well under 1% — consistent with a trace level, though the precise amount is not knowable from the label.

Why is the colloidal oatmeal concentration (0.5%) on the label but not the ceramide’s?
Because the product is classified as an over-the-counter drug in the US: colloidal oatmeal is its active ingredient and OTC drug law requires the active and its strength to be declared. Ceramide NP is an inactive cosmetic ingredient, which carries no such disclosure requirement. FDA DailyMed lists the product as a HUMAN OTC DRUG with oatmeal at 0.5% as the only active.

Does Ultra Repair Cream still “work” for dry skin if the ceramide is that low?
Quite possibly — it is a competent emollient cream and carries a National Eczema Association seal. The point here is narrower: the ceramide the marketing leads with is a trace-level ingredient, while the shea butter, glycerin and other emollients further up the list are doing most of the moisturizing.

Ingredient Desk is published by the team behind Evil Goods. Prices, formulas and labels change; we date what we read and link the source so you can check it.

Label read, top to bottom. The ceramide is real – it just sits at number twenty-one.

September 25, 2026

Drunk Elephant Protini: The 9 Peptides Are #10–18. Then Come 10 Amino Acids.

Drunk Elephant Protini is named for polypeptides and
marketed on “nine signal peptides.” On the ingredient list, those nine
peptides sit together at positions #10 through #18 — genuinely mid-list, not
buried at the bottom. The catch is not where they sit. It is what comes right
after them: ten individual amino acids at positions #19 through #28, which the
brand groups under the same peptide-complex language. An amino acid is not a
peptide; it is what a peptide is made of. Those are different things.

Most of the labels we read here end with the marketed hero hiding somewhere
below the preservatives — retinol at #26, hyaluronic acid at #25. Protini is
the opposite case, and that is exactly what makes it interesting. Drunk Elephant
put its nine peptides where you would hope to find them, in one tidy block near
the top of the list. So the usual gotcha does not apply. The interesting
questions are different: what are those nine peptides, does the research support
what they are named for, and what is that long run of ingredients that follows?

Nib, a small round pencil-sketch creature, holds a magnifying glass to a jar of moisturizer whose front reads Polypeptide, then peers past it at a long ingredient list running down the side. — Named for polypeptides. Nib turns the jar around to find where the nine actually live.

Where do the nine signal peptides actually sit?

Here is the full list, quoted verbatim as it appears on the product page at
Ulta.com,
fetched 16 September 2026 (item #2588434). The list on the product’s page at
a second major beauty retailer, read the same week, is identical word for word,
down to the spacing.

Water/Aqua/Eau, Dicaprylyl Carbonate, Glycerin, Cetearyl Alcohol, Cetearyl Olivate, Sorbitan Olivate, Sclerocarya Birrea Seed Oil, Bacillus/ Folic Acid Ferment Filtrate Extract, Nymphaea Alba Root Extract, sh-Oligopeptide-1, sh-Oligopeptide-2, sh-Polypeptide-1, sh-Polypeptide-9, sh-Polypeptide-11, Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14, Heptapeptide-15 Palmitate, Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7, Palmitoyl Tripeptide-1, Alanine, Arginine, Glycine, Histidine, Isoleucine, Phenylalanine, Proline, Serine, Threonine, Valine, Acetyl Glutamine, Coconut Alkanes, Coco-Caprylate/Caprate, Sodium Hyaluronate, Aspartic Acid, Linoleic Acid, Linolenic Acid, Lecithin, Butylene Glycol, Polyvinyl Alcohol, Sodium Lactate, Sodium PCA, PCA, Sorbitan Isostearate, Carbomer, Polysorbate 20, Polysorbate 60, Lactic Acid/Glycolic Acid Copolymer, Hydroxyethyl Acrylate/Sodium Acryloyldimethyl Taurate Copolymer, Xanthan Gum, Isomalt, 1,2-Hexanediol, Caprylyl Glycol, Chlorphenesin, Phenoxyethanol, Tocopherol, Sodium Benzoate, Phenylpropanol, Glyceryl Caprylate, Symphytum Officinale Callus Culture Extract.

The nine peptides the product is named after run from
sh-Oligopeptide-1 at position #10 to
Palmitoyl Tripeptide-1 at position #18 — nine names in an
unbroken block. Above them are eight ingredients that are none of them a peptide:
water, an emollient ester, glycerin, two fatty-alcohol emulsifiers, a pair of
olive-derived emulsifiers, marula oil, and two ferment extracts. On an ingredient
list, where things are ordered roughly by weight down to about the 1% mark, that
puts the peptide block mid-list rather than at the top. Not hidden, not headline.
Somewhere in the honest middle.

Marketed hero: Nine “signal peptides”
Position on label: #10 through #18, one contiguous block
What sits above them: Eight ingredients, none a peptide
Ingredients on the label: Fifty-eight
Source of list: Ulta.com (fetched 16 Sep 2026) and a second major retailer, same week — identical

So this is not a “the hero is at #26” story. Credit where it is
due: the peptides are real and reasonably placed. The story is what they are, and
whether the research backs the word on the front of the jar.

Nib runs a pencil down a numbered column and rests it on a tight block of nine little peptide tags clustered together between positions ten and eighteen. — The nine signal peptides sit together at positions ten through eighteen – mid-list, not buried.

Do the peptides do what the name promises?

Five of the nine — the sh-Oligopeptide and sh-Polypeptide entries at
positions #10 through #14 — are cosmetic-grade analogs of growth factors.
sh-Oligopeptide-1, at #10, is the INCI name for a synthetic epidermal growth
factor analog. This is where the evidence gets thin, and it is worth being
precise about how thin.

A 2023 review in Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology looked specifically
at topical sh-oligopeptide-1 and concluded that its preclinical bioactivity as a
functional growth factor has not been demonstrated, meaning clinical trials that
treat it as equivalent to functional recombinant growth factor may not rest on a
valid foundation (Martínez-Carpio,
2023, PubMed). That is an evidence-quality critique, not a safety alarm: the
question is whether the molecule does the job it is named for, not whether it is
harmful.

Zoom out to the whole category and the picture is consistent. A systematic
review of topical growth-factor preparations — 33 studies, nine randomized
controlled trials, 1,180 participants — found modest improvements in
texture and fine lines versus baseline, with three of the comparative RCTs showing
no statistically significant difference between treatments, and the studies
limited by heterogeneity and weak placebo controls
(Quinlan et al.,
Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2023, PubMed). Modest and inconsistent is
the honest reading — not dismissal, not endorsement.

The last two of the nine are a different, better story. Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7
and Palmitoyl Tripeptide-1, at #17 and #18, are the two peptides marketed together
as Matrixyl 3000. A 45-person randomized, placebo-controlled study reported around
52% wrinkle reduction over twelve weeks — better evidence than the growth
factor peptides above them, though the trial was manufacturer-commissioned and the
two peptides are always tested as a pair, so the data cannot separate them
(peptidings.com,
2026). So within the nine, the picture is mixed: the two at the bottom of the
block have the most credible support, and the five growth-factor analogs above
them the least.

What is that long run of ingredients after the peptides?

This is the part of the label worth reading slowly. Directly below the nine
peptides, positions #19 through #28 are ten individual amino acids in a row:
alanine, arginine, glycine, histidine, isoleucine, phenylalanine, proline, serine,
threonine and valine, with acetyl glutamine at #29. Drunk Elephant groups these
under the same “Signal Peptide Complex” language it uses for the
peptides — but they are not peptides.

Nib stands beside a neat row of ten identical amino-acid blocks, counting them on stubby fingers, with a small sign above the row reading not peptides. — Then ten single amino acids in a row. An amino acid is what a peptide is made of, not a peptide.

The distinction matters and it is not pedantry. A peptide is two or more amino
acids joined by a peptide bond; that bond is what lets it act as a signal. A free
amino acid on its own is the raw material, not the assembled thing. The ten listed
here are among the cheapest commodity inputs in a cosmetic chemist’s cabinet,
and they do a real, modest job as surface humectants — they are Natural
Moisturizing Factor components, the same molecules your skin already uses to hold
water. That is fine. What is worth noticing is the effect on the label: the
peptide-and-amino-acid run stretches from position #10 all the way to #29, twenty
consecutive entries, which reads as a peptide powerhouse when read for length.
Ten of those twenty are single amino acids.

Label positions	What sits there	What the position implies
1–9	Water, emollients, emulsifiers, marula oil, two ferments	The base and texture — none of them a peptide
10–14	Five growth-factor analogs (sh-Oligo/Polypeptides)	Real peptides, mid-list; cosmetic bioactivity contested
15–16	Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14, Heptapeptide-15 Palmitate	Copper peptide plus a palmitoylated heptapeptide
17–18	Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7, Palmitoyl Tripeptide-1	Matrixyl 3000 pair — best-studied of the nine
19–29	Ten amino acids + acetyl glutamine	Cheap humectants; not peptides
32	Sodium Hyaluronate	Below the whole peptide/amino-acid block

To be fair to the formula: none of this is deceptive on the label itself. The
list is honest and complete. It is the marketing language wrapped around it —
counting ten amino acids toward the impression of a peptide complex — that a
slow read pulls apart.

Nib holds up two copper coins side by side - one large and dented and labelled old, one small and shiny and labelled new - comparing them through the magnifying glass. — Two different copper peptides. The one here is the newer, less-studied cousin of the classic GHK-Cu.

Is the copper peptide in here the one with the research behind it?

At position #15 is Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14 — a copper-bearing
peptide. It is easy to assume this is the copper peptide with the long research
record. It is not. The copper peptide that has been studied since the 1970s is
Copper Tripeptide-1, better known as GHK-Cu. Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14 is a
newer, oil-soluble variant marketed on superior delivery, but with a much shorter
research history. GHK-Cu has been studied since the 1970s across many independent
papers; Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14 is the payload peptide in a newer
encapsulated delivery system (trade-named X50), and the evidence cited for it is a
single 30-person, 28-day manufacturer in-vivo test rather than a body of
independent work (INCIDecoder,
Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14). Neither is a bad ingredient. They are just
not the same molecule, and the older one is the one with the deeper record.

That contrast is worth flagging because we make a copper peptide product and it
uses the other one. Evil Goods’
Copper
Peptide Blue Honey Cream (our product) is built on Copper Tripeptide-1
— the GHK-Cu with the longer research record — alongside Manuka honey,
niacinamide and olive squalane. It is the same product format, a cream rather than
a serum, which makes it the fair thing to compare against here. In the interest of
the same scrutiny we just applied to Protini: Evil Goods does not publish a copper
concentration for ours, so we cannot tell you how much is in there any more than
Drunk Elephant can tell you about its nine peptides. Ingredient Desk is published
by the team behind Evil Goods, so read our comparisons knowing that.

What about the clinical study on the box, and the last ingredient?

Drunk Elephant’s marketing cites a study: 31 people, eight weeks, with
high percentages reporting improvement in tone, texture and hydration. A couple of
points are worth knowing before you weigh those numbers. It does not appear to be
peer-reviewed — no published paper turns up — and at 31 participants
with no control arm described, it is the kind of small brand-commissioned consumer
panel that is prone to the assessment bias these trials are known for. That does
not make it invalid; it simply cannot be verified, so treat the figures as
in-house marketing data rather than independent evidence.

One last note for the completists. The final ingredient on the list is Symphytum
Officinale Callus Culture Extract — comfrey, but specifically the plant-cell
callus culture form, which is produced to minimize the pyrrolizidine alkaloids
that are the usual concern with comfrey root and leaf. At the very bottom of a
long list, present in trace amount, in the callus form: there is nothing
here to raise an eyebrow at. We mention it only because a reader scanning the
label for “comfrey” deserves to know which comfrey it is.

So is it worth it?

On its own terms, Protini is a more honest label than most we read. The nine
peptides are real and mid-list, not buried. Two of them are genuinely
well-supported. The open questions are the five growth-factor analogs, whose
cosmetic activity the research does not yet back; the ten amino acids counted
toward the peptide story that are not peptides; and a copper peptide that is the
newer, less-studied cousin of the classic one. If you like the texture and go in
understanding that “nine signal peptides” is a mixed bag rather than
nine proven actives, it is a defensible cream at its price. Just read it as what
the label says, not what the front of the jar implies.

FAQ

Where do the peptides sit in Drunk Elephant Protini?
The nine marketed signal peptides run from position #10 to #18 in one block,
below eight ingredients that are not peptides. That is mid-list — not buried,
but not the top of the label either.

Are the amino acids in Protini the same as the peptides?
No. Positions #19 through #28 are ten individual amino acids. An amino acid is a
single building block; a peptide is two or more of them bonded together. Free
amino acids are cheap humectants, not the signal peptides the product is named
for.

Does Protini have the copper peptide with the most research?
Not the classic one. It contains Copper Palmitoyl Heptapeptide-14 at #15, a newer
oil-soluble variant, rather than Copper Tripeptide-1 (GHK-Cu), which has the
longer, decades-deep research record.

Is the clinical study on Protini reliable?
It is a 31-person, eight-week brand-commissioned panel with no control arm
described and no peer-reviewed publication found. Treat the percentages as
in-house marketing data rather than independent evidence.

Do topical growth-factor peptides actually work?
A systematic review of the category found modest, inconsistent improvements in
texture and fine lines, with weak placebo controls across studies. For the
cosmetic-grade EGF analog specifically, a 2023 review concluded its functional
bioactivity has not been demonstrated.

Nib closes a small notebook titled Ingredient Desk, sets the magnifying glass down beside the fully-read jar, and gives a satisfied nod. — Label read, top to bottom. The peptides are real and mid-list. What is unproven is what each one does.

September 16, 2026

Cetaphil Moisturizing Cream: Niacinamide Is the 11th Ingredient

Cetaphil rebuilt its Moisturizing Cream in 2021 and now leads every ad with niacinamide. On the label, niacinamide is the 11th name on a list that runs to twenty-three — sitting after the emulsifiers, the silicones and a fatty alcohol. The pair doing the actual moisturizing, glycerin and petrolatum, are second and third, and they did not change. So the new formula is largely the old workhorse with a niacinamide story wrapped around it.

Cetaphil is one of the three creams US dermatologists name most often for dry skin, alongside CeraVe and Vanicream. The Moisturizing Cream is its flagship tub. In 2021 the brand reformulated it: out went the parabens, in came niacinamide, panthenol and sweet almond oil. Every piece of marketing now opens with “a dermatologist-backed blend of niacinamide.” The label tells a slightly different story about where that niacinamide falls in line — and it is worth reading in order.

A disclosure before we go on: Ingredient Desk is published by the team behind Evil Goods, a tallow skincare brand. We read labels for a living and we sell an alternative for dry skin. We will point at ours once, clearly labelled, near the end. Everything about Cetaphil below comes from Cetaphil’s own US page, a retail listing, and the peer-reviewed literature — dated and linked so you can check us.

Nib does the thing most of us skip at the shelf: reads the whole list, in order.

What does the Cetaphil Moisturizing Cream label actually say?

Here is the full ingredient list, quoted verbatim from Cetaphil’s own US product page (cetaphil.com, read 11 September 2026). The same list, in the same order, appears on the Ulta retail listing:

Water, Glycerin, Petrolatum, Dicaprylyl Ether, Dimethicone, Glyceryl Stearate, Cetyl Alcohol, Helianthus Annuus (Sunflower) Seed Oil, Peg-30 Stearate, Panthenol, Niacinamide, Prunus Amygdalus Dulcis (Sweet Almond) Oil, Tocopheryl Acetate, Pantolactone, Dimethiconol, Acrylates/C10-30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer, Carbomer, Propylene Glycol, Disodium Edta, Benzyl Alcohol, Phenoxyethanol, Sodium Hydroxide, Citric Acid

Ingredient lists are ordered by descending concentration down to roughly 1%, after which the order stops meaning much. Cetaphil’s page notes that formulas are updated and asks you to check the physical package, so treat this as the list on the brand’s US site on the date above rather than an eternal truth. This is the current, post-2021, paraben-free formula; the number on your own tub is the only source that settles what is in it today.

The first three entries build the cream. Niacinamide, the ingredient on the front of the box, arrives in eleventh.

Where does the niacinamide actually sit?

Niacinamide is name number eleven, on a list that ends at twenty-three. In front of it are water, glycerin, petrolatum, an emollient ether, the silicones, an emulsifier, a fatty alcohol, a seed oil, another emulsifier (PEG-30 stearate, typically used at roughly 1–3%), and panthenol. In other words, the lead marketing ingredient falls into the second half of the formula, just behind an emulsifier that itself sits at a low single-digit percentage.

Cetaphil does not disclose the niacinamide concentration, and we are not going to invent one. What position #11 tells you is only this: it is below the ingredients ahead of it, one of which is used at about 1–3%. The independent clinical literature on niacinamide clusters its measured effects at 2–5%. A 2006 study in the Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy (Draelos et al., PMID 16766489) tested 2% on facial sebum; a 2000 paper in the British Journal of Dermatology (Tanno et al., PMID 10971324) showed nicotinamide raising ceramide biosynthesis in skin at similar concentrations. Whether Cetaphil’s cream lands inside that window is not something the label lets you know. The inference is yours to draw; we will not put a number on it that the brand itself declines to.

Present, yes. At what percentage? The label does not say, so neither do we.

So what is actually moisturizing your skin?

The answer is in the first three lines. Glycerin at #2 is a humectant — it pulls water toward the skin. Petrolatum at #3 is the occlusive that seals it in. That pairing is the whole of the cream’s long-hydration story, and it is worth being precise about petrolatum, because “petroleum byproduct” alarms people more than the evidence justifies.

Petrolatum is an FDA-recognized OTC skin protectant (21 CFR § 347.10), permitted as an active at 30–100% in that category. In Cetaphil’s cream it is listed as a cosmetic ingredient rather than a labelled active, but the regulatory grounding for what it does is well established, and it is one of the best-evidenced barrier ingredients in dermatology. Crucially, glycerin and petrolatum sat at the top of the pre-2021 formula too. The reformulation added niacinamide, panthenol, sweet almond oil and vitamin E on top of a chassis that was already a competent dry-skin moisturizer. The new box is not a new cream so much as a new narrative around the same opening entries — which is not a criticism of the cream, only of reading the front of the box instead of the side.

The top of the list is doing the work. It is the same top of the list it had before the relaunch.

Is there anything a “sensitive skin” buyer should note?

One entry is worth a calm mention. Propylene glycol appears at position #18 — a humectant and solvent, present here at a low concentration given where it falls in the list. It is worth flagging only because this cream is marketed as hypoallergenic and for sensitive skin, and propylene glycol has a documented, if modest, contact-allergy rate. It is a well-characterised skin sensitiser reviewed in the dermatology literature (Dermatitis, 2018, PMID 29059092), with cosmetics the most common exposure route. A low position reduces that risk; it does not erase it. This is not a claim that the product harms anyone — most people use propylene glycol formulas with no trouble at all — only a note that a sensitiser with a known patch-test signal is on the list of a product sold specifically to sensitive skin.

What the formula does not contain is also worth a line. There are no ceramides and no hyaluronic acid, the pair that define its shelf-neighbours CeraVe and Neutrogena Hydro Boost. Cetaphil’s barrier support comes from petrolatum and glycerin instead, with niacinamide potentially assisting at whatever level it is present. That is a legitimate approach with strong evidence — it is simply a different one from what the packaging’s ingredient-forward language implies.

What should you actually take from the label?

Read the order, not the front. On this tub, the entries you can be confident are doing the heavy lifting — glycerin and petrolatum — are second and third, and they are the same ones the cream had before its 2021 relaunch. The niacinamide the marketing leads with is eleventh, at a percentage the brand does not disclose and the label cannot confirm sits in niacinamide’s evidenced range. None of that makes it a bad cream. It makes it a petrolatum-and-glycerin cream with a niacinamide label.

If you are here because your dry skin wants an occlusive that seals moisture in and you would rather it come from an animal fat than a petroleum derivative, that is the whole argument behind our own tallow for dry skin — grass-fed beef tallow, which is naturally rich in the fatty acids skin uses. We are not going to tell you it out-performs petrolatum in a trial, because that trial is not ours to cite. We will tell you honestly that it is a different occlusive with a much shorter research record, and let you weigh that against a cream whose active backbone is a well-studied petroleum jelly.

Frequently asked questions

Where is niacinamide on the Cetaphil Moisturizing Cream ingredient list? It is the 11th name on the list, which runs to twenty-three, after water, glycerin, petrolatum, an emollient ether, the silicones, an emulsifier, a fatty alcohol, a seed oil, a second emulsifier and panthenol.

Did Cetaphil change the formula? Yes. In 2021 the brand removed parabens and added niacinamide, panthenol, sweet almond oil and vitamin E. Glycerin and petrolatum, the top of the list, were unchanged.

What is the strongest moisturizer in the formula? By position, glycerin (#2, a humectant) and petrolatum (#3, an occlusive). Petrolatum is an FDA-recognized OTC skin protectant.

What percentage is the niacinamide? Cetaphil does not disclose it. Position #11 puts it below an emulsifier typically used at 1–3%; the independent literature clusters niacinamide’s measured effects at 2–5%. The label does not let you confirm where this cream falls.

Read the order, not the front of the box. The label was telling the truth the whole time.

September 11, 2026

Neutrogena Rapid Wrinkle Repair: Retinol Is Ingredient #26

On the label of Neutrogena Rapid Wrinkle Repair Retinol Face Moisturizer, retinol — the ingredient the product is named after — appears in position 26 on the list. It sits after the fragrance (#20), after the PTFE (#22) and after a long run of preservatives and thickeners. By the convention that INCI lists run roughly in descending order of concentration, the hero active is one of the last things in the jar.

This is one of the best-selling retinol moisturizers in American drugstores. Retinol is in the product’s name, on the front of the box, and at the top of every line of marketing copy Neutrogena writes for it. So it is worth reading the one thing the marketing does not put on the front: the full ingredient list, in order.

What does the label actually say?

Here is the complete INCI list, quoted verbatim. The order is what matters — cosmetic ingredient lists are required to run in descending order of concentration down to 1%, after which the order is a manufacturer’s choice. The position of an ingredient is therefore a rough floor on how little of it can be present.

Water, Pentaerythrityl Tetraethylhexanoate, Glycerin, Dimethicone, PPG-15 Stearyl Ether, Stearyl Alcohol, Cetearyl Alcohol, Butylene Glycol, Glyceryl Behenate, Ceteareth-20, Isohexadecane, Cyclopentasiloxane, Dimethicone Crosspolymer, Polyethylene, Sodium Polyacrylate, Phenoxyethanol, Caprylyl Glycol, Sodium Acryloyldimethyltaurate/VP Crosspolymer, Polyacrylamide, Fragrance, C13-14 Isoparaffin, PTFE, Chlorphenesin, Polysorbate 20, Hydrolyzed Myrtus Communis Leaf Extract, Retinol, BHT, Sodium Hyaluronate, Disodium EDTA, Laureth-7, Sodium Hydroxide, Ascorbic Acid

Sourced from the product’s entry on the ingredient decoder INKEEDecoder (read 10 September 2026), corroborated by the live listing on the retailer’s own product page, which carries the same sequence with a handful of its own spelling slips. Both are third-party transcriptions of the packaging rather than the manufacturer’s own database, so treat the list as the label as sold, not a formula spec. Neutrogena markets this active as “Retinol SA”; that is a branding term, and the INCI simply reads Retinol.

Nib, a small round creature drawn in loose pencil sketch, holds a large magnifying glass up to a long product ingredient label, squinting to read a word near the very bottom. — Nib doing the one thing the front of the box never asks you to: reading to the end of the list.

Where does the retinol actually sit?

Retinol appears in position 26. To put that in order, here is the back half of the list — the part after the water, the silicones and the emulsifiers have all been named.

Position	Ingredient	What it is doing
20	Fragrance	Perfume — a common contact allergen, here ahead of the active
22	PTFE	Polytetrafluoroethylene, the raw material of Teflon; a slip/smoothing agent, no skin-treatment role
26	Retinol	The named hero active
28	Sodium Hyaluronate	The “hyaluronic acid” the box also advertises
32	Ascorbic Acid	Vitamin C, last on the list, present as an antioxidant buffer

Both of the actives Neutrogena advertises on the front of the box — retinol and hyaluronic acid — appear near the very end of the list, at positions 26 and 28. The fragrance and the PTFE both appear earlier, which is to say in larger quantity. None of that is a secret; it is printed on the carton. It is just printed in the order the marketing would rather you did not read.

Nib stands beside a tall stack of jars and tubes almost as big as it is, counting on its stubby fingers, a pencil tucked behind where an ear would be. — Counting down the list to ingredient twenty-six takes a while — which is rather the point.

How much retinol does a position like that imply?

Neutrogena does not disclose the retinol concentration in this cream in the US, so the honest answer is that we can only reason from the position. Sitting at position 26, below a long run of ingredients that are themselves used at a fraction of a percent, the retinol is almost certainly present in trace amounts — most likely well under 0.1%.

Why does 0.1% matter? Because that is roughly where the published evidence starts. In one 2022 in-vivo patch-test study, retinol above 0.1% w/w was where the researchers saw histological remodelling of photoaged skin; 0.1% sat at the threshold and higher concentrations were clearer. A separate 2022 review of topical retinoids notes that retinol at around 0.25% is considered comparable to 0.025% tretinoin, with weaker, dose-dependent effects at lower strengths. This is a small, still-developing evidence base — a handful of studies, not settled fact — but it points one way: below about 0.1%, there is not much to point at.

For contrast, Neutrogena’s newer Rapid Wrinkle Repair Retinol Renewal Serum — a different product — lists retinol far higher in its formula and states 0.1% in its own retailer Q&A. The classic cream analysed here is the one most people have in their bathroom, and it is the one where the active sits at the bottom.

Nib peers at a measuring beaker holding a single tiny drop, drawn in sketchy pencil lines, one eyebrow raised in mild disbelief. — A position near the end of a 32-item list is a rough floor on how little can be in the jar.

Is fragrance before retinol a problem?

It is at least an odd choice in a treatment product. Retinol itself is a known irritant: a 2024 five-day occlusive patch-test study found that retinol produced clinically significant redness resembling mild irritant contact dermatitis in the tested subjects. That study was small — 18 participants, a single population — so read it as a signal, not a verdict. Fragrance is separately one of the most frequently flagged contact allergens in dermatology, which is why treatment-focused formulas often leave it out. Here it appears at #20, ahead of the active, in a product whose whole selling point is an ingredient that can already sting sensitive skin.

There is also a regulatory footnote worth its own sentence. In 2024 the EU formally capped retinol in face creams at 0.3% and added a mandatory label warning; Commission Regulation 2024/996 applies there from November 2025. That is a European rule and does not apply in the United States, where there is no equivalent FDA concentration limit for OTC retinol in cosmetics. The gap is worth knowing about, not worth overstating.

Nib holds up two labels side by side, looking back and forth between them, its round body leaning with curiosity rather than anger. — The interesting question is never ‘is this bad’ but ‘where does the thing on the front actually sit’.

What would a formula that leads with its active look like?

The useful comparison is not a good product versus a bad one — it is a formula that buries its hero versus one that puts it near the top. When copper peptides are the point of a product, for instance, copper tripeptide-1 tends to appear high in the list rather than 26th, because there is no reason to advertise an active and then dose it as an afterthought. Our own Copper Peptide Blue Honey Serum (that is an Evil Goods product — this site is published by the Evil Goods team, and we say so openly) is built that way: the named actives sit where you would expect the thing on the front of the bottle to sit. You do not have to take our word for it — the test is the same one we just ran on Neutrogena. Read the list, find the ingredient the product is named after, and see how far down it is.

That is the whole method, and it works on any jar in your cabinet. The front of the box tells you what a product wants to be about. The ingredient list, read to the end, tells you what it is actually made of.

Frequently asked questions

Where is retinol on the Neutrogena Rapid Wrinkle Repair moisturizer label?: Retinol appears in position 26, after the fragrance (#20) and the PTFE (#22), based on the INCI as transcribed by INKEEDecoder and corroborated by the retailer listing (both read 10 September 2026).
Does that mean the cream contains almost no retinol?: It implies a low concentration — position is only a rough floor, and Neutrogena does not disclose the exact figure for this cream in the US. A position that far down is consistent with a trace amount, most likely under the ~0.1% where the published evidence begins.
Is a low-retinol moisturizer useless?: Not necessarily — it is still a competent moisturizer, and some people prefer a gentle, low dose. The point is narrower: the marketing sells the retinol, and the label puts it near the bottom.
Is the fragrance a safety issue?: Fragrance is a common contact allergen and both fragrance and retinol are known irritants, so a treatment product that lists fragrance ahead of its active is a fair thing to notice. Patch-test evidence here is from small studies; individual reactions vary.

A final wide sketch of Nib sitting cross-legged on top of a closed jar, magnifying glass resting on its knee, giving a small satisfied nod at a completed ingredient list. — Nib’s rule of thumb: whatever is on the front of the box, go and find it on the back — and see how far down it fell.

September 10, 2026

Olay Regenerist: Niacinamide Is #4. The Peptide Is #11.

On the ingredient list read for Olay Regenerist
Micro-Sculpting Cream on 6 September 2026, niacinamide sits at position
four — high up, in the range where it does real work — so the front
of the jar is telling the truth about the B3. But the “Amino-Peptide”
the marketing leans on, palmitoyl pentapeptide-4, is eleventh, behind a synthetic
polymer and a silicone, and the hyaluronic acid is thirteenth. Two of the three
headline actives sit in the trace band near the bottom of the formula. The
unusual part: this particular peptide is supposed to be a trace, so
“it’s low on the list” is not the same as “it does
nothing.”

Olay Regenerist Micro-Sculpting Cream — the “Red Jar” —
is one of the best-selling anti-aging face creams in American mass retail,
stocked across the big drugstore and supercenter chains. Its whole pitch is a complex: Vitamin B3,
Amino-Peptides, Hyaluronic Acid and antioxidants, all named on the front. It is a
tidy, believable list of the ingredients a good moisturizer should have.

The back of the jar — the actual list, ordered by weight down to about
the one-percent mark — lets you see where each of those four actually
lands. We read the whole thing. One of the four earns its billing. Two are near
the bottom. Here is where everything sits, and why the low positions mean
different things for different ingredients.

One note before the list: Olay has more than one formula in circulation.
This analysis is of the original formula still described on most retailer
listings, sourced below. A newer “triple collagen peptide” version
appears on olay.com; if the jar in your hand names three peptides and no
hyaluronic acid, you have the reformulated one, and the positions here will
differ. Check your own label.

Where does each marketed active actually land on the label?

Here is the full list, quoted verbatim. It was retrieved from the Ulta Beauty
product listing for Regenerist Micro-Sculpting Cream (SKU 2147262) via the
search index on 6 September 2026 — Ulta blocks direct scraping, so
direct URLs return a 404, but the identical forty-name string appeared across
four separate Ulta result snippets and is corroborated by the Walmart.com listing
for the same product, read the same day. Olay notes formulas are subject to
change, so confirm against the packaging on the jar you buy:

Water, Glycerin, Isohexadecane, Niacinamide, Isopropyl Isostearate, Aluminum Starch Octenylsuccinate, Nylon-12, Dimethicone, Panthenol, Tocopheryl Acetate, Palmitoyl Pentapeptide-4, Sodium PEG-7 Olive Oil Carboxylate, Sodium Hyaluronate, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Ceratonia Siliqua (Carob) Fruit Extract, Stearyl Alcohol, Polyethylene, Cetyl Alcohol, Behenyl Alcohol, Sodium Acrylates Copolymer, Titanium Dioxide, Benzyl Alcohol, Methylparaben, Ethylparaben, Dimethiconol, Polyacrylamide, Fragrance, PEG-100 Stearate, Propylparaben, Cetearyl Glucoside, Cetearyl Alcohol, C13-14 Isoparaffin, Disodium EDTA, Citric Acid, Stearic Acid, Palmitic Acid, C12-13 Pareth-3, Laureth-7, Sodium Hydroxide, Mica.

Now place the four headline actives on it:

Niacinamide (Vitamin B3): Position 4 — high, likely a functional amount
Palmitoyl Pentapeptide-4 (the “Amino-Peptide”): Position 11 — trace, which for this peptide is the working range
Sodium Hyaluronate (Hyaluronic Acid): Position 13 — in the ≤1% band
Tocopheryl Acetate (the antioxidant): Position 10 — a cheap, abundant vitamin E ester
Source of list: Ulta listing (SKU 2147262) via search index, 6 Sep 2026; corroborated at Walmart.com

Ingredients are listed in descending order of weight down to roughly the
one-percent mark, so position is a rough proxy for how much is in the jar. Two
positions do most of the storytelling here: niacinamide at four, and the peptide
at eleven with the HA at thirteen. They mean opposite things, and the honest
version of this piece treats them differently.

Nib the small round pencil-sketch creature holds a magnifying glass up to a squat red jar labelled Regenerist, squinting at the tiny ingredient type on the back rather than the big Vitamin B3 and Amino-Peptides wording on the front. — The front sells a whole complex. Nib flips the Red Jar over to read where each name really lands.

Does niacinamide earn its place at number four?

Yes, and it is worth saying so plainly before getting to the parts that are
overstated. Niacinamide at position four, above the emulsifiers, the peptide, the
HA and the fragrance, is consistent with a meaningful concentration —
probably in the low single digits by percentage, though Olay does not disclose a
number, so “probably” is the strongest word warranted.

That matters because niacinamide is one of the better-supported cosmetic
actives for the things this cream is sold to do. The anchor study is a
twelve-week, fifty-subject randomized trial by Bissett and colleagues (2004),
which reported improvements in fine lines, texture and hyperpigmentation from a
5% niacinamide formulation. The evidence base sits roughly in the 2–5%
range. Position four is compatible with that band. So when Olay puts “Vitamin
B3” on the front and niacinamide near the top of the list, the marketing and
the formula agree. That is the honest starting point, and it is not nothing
— plenty of creams name an ingredient on the front that turns up in the
trace tail.

Position	Ingredient	What it does
2	Glycerin	Humectant; the main water-binding workhorse
4	Niacinamide	Vitamin B3; the marketed hero, high enough to be functional
8	Dimethicone	Silicone emollient; the smooth skin feel
11	Palmitoyl Pentapeptide-4	The “Amino-Peptide”; a trace ingredient by design
13	Sodium Hyaluronate	Hyaluronic acid salt; a supporting humectant in the ≤1% band

The base doing the sensory work is conventional and fine: water, glycerin,
branched-alkane and ester emollients (isohexadecane at #3, isopropyl isostearate
at #5), an absorbent starch for that dry, powdery finish (#6), a slip polymer
(nylon-12, #7) and dimethicone (#8). That is a competent mass-market moisturizer
base. Nothing wrong with it. It is just not the part on the front of the jar.

Nib runs a pencil down a numbered ingredient list and taps a big drum labelled Niacinamide near the top at position four, nodding approvingly. — Niacinamide at number four. High up, a functional amount, and the marketing is telling the truth here.

Why is the “Amino-Peptide” all the way down at eleven?

This is where it would be easy to be unfair, so here is the careful version.
Palmitoyl pentapeptide-4 — the ingredient Olay markets as the
“Amino-Peptide,” better known in the trade as Matrixyl — sits at
position eleven, behind a synthetic polymer (nylon-12), a silicone (dimethicone),
panthenol and the vitamin E ester. By volume it is almost certainly a trace
ingredient.

The trap is concluding that trace means useless. For this particular peptide,
it does not. The published clinical work uses it at strikingly tiny
concentrations: a peptides-in-skincare review tabulates the palmitoyl
pentapeptide-4 trial formulation at 0.0003%
(Peptides in
skincare, PMC, 2025), and the industry’s own safety panel reports the
highest leave-on cosmetic use concentration at 0.0012%
(CIR
Safety Assessment, Palmitoyl Pentapeptide-4, 2023). Three parts per million is
the dose that showed an effect. So a peptide sitting at position eleven, at a
trace level, is behaving exactly as the literature says it should. Position eleven
is not evidence this peptide is inert.

The fair criticism is narrower, and it is about emphasis, not efficacy. The
marketing gives “Amino-Peptides” roughly equal billing with the B3 on
the front of the jar, as though they were comparable pillars of the formula. In
the list, one is at four and the other is a trace at eleven. Both facts can be
true — the peptide works at trace levels and the front-of-jar
prominence is louder than its share of the formula. What you cannot tell from the
label, because Olay does not disclose it, is whether the peptide is at the
0.0003% that was studied or somewhere else entirely. The position tells you it is
small; it cannot tell you it is the studied dose.

Nib peers through the magnifying glass at a single tiny droplet marked Peptide at position eleven, sitting behind larger barrels labelled Nylon and Dimethicone. — The Amino-Peptide at eleven, tucked in behind a synthetic polymer and a silicone. Tiny by volume, by design.

What about the hyaluronic acid at thirteen?

Sodium hyaluronate — the INCI name for hyaluronic acid — is at
position thirteen, in the part of the label where everything is present at about
one percent or less. Like the peptide, HA works at low concentrations, so a low
position is not proof of a token amount. But there is a wrinkle worth one honest
sentence.

Some current retailer pages still market this product as containing
“Hyaluronic Acid” as a key ingredient, while the newer formula listed
on olay.com does not appear to include sodium hyaluronate at all. On the original
formula quoted above, the HA is genuinely present at position thirteen. If you
have picked up the reformulated jar, it may not be in there despite the shelf tag
— which is exactly the kind of thing worth checking on your own label
rather than taking from a retailer’s marketing copy. We could not resolve
the discrepancy without a physical label read, so we are flagging it, not
asserting it.

If what you actually want is a moisturizer where the things named on the front
are the things doing the bulk of the work — no trace tail to squint at
— that is a different kind of product. We make a beef-tallow one: here is
the Evil Goods
tallow moisturizer, built from grass-fed tallow, Manuka honey, cold-pressed
olive oil and vitamin E, with no under-one-percent list to read. Full disclosure:
Ingredient Desk is published by the team behind Evil Goods, so read that link
knowing it is ours. The contrast we are drawing is about label structure —
a short list versus a forty-name one — not a claim that one cream
out-performs the other, which would need a study neither product has.

Nib holds a small stoppered vial marked Fragrance up to the light next to an open reference book, eyebrows raised, reading a patch-test chart. — Down at twenty-seven sits Fragrance, the one line on the label the desk always reads twice.

Is the fragrance at position twenty-seven worth noting?

For a leave-on cream applied twice a day, yes, once, with the strength of the
evidence and no more. “Fragrance” sits at position twenty-seven on
this list. Fragrance is the most common cause of cosmetic contact allergy, and
the prevalence is measurable rather than hypothetical: patch-test literature puts
fragrance contact allergy at roughly 0.7–2.6% of the general population, and
substantially higher — into the 5–11% range and above — among
people who get patch-tested for dermatitis
(Mowitz et al., contact
dermatitis to fragrances, 2020;
fragrance contact
allergy review, PMC, 2024).

Read that the right way. Fragrance at position twenty-seven does not mean this
cream will irritate your skin, and it does not mean it has harmed anyone —
most people use fragranced moisturizers without any trouble, and the amount here
is undisclosed. What it means is that a daily-use, leave-on product carries a
declared fragrance, and if your skin reacts to scented skincare, that is
information you want before you commit to applying it morning and night. The label
tells you; the front of the jar, which leads with actives, does not.

One more label detail for the careful reader: this formula carries three
parabens — methylparaben (#23), ethylparaben (#24) and propylparaben (#29).
Parabens are among the most-studied cosmetic preservatives and are permitted at
regulated levels; their presence is a formulation choice worth knowing about, not
a verdict. The newer olay.com formula swaps them for phenoxyethanol, which is one
of the clearer signals that you are holding a reformulated jar.

How do you read any ingredient list this way yourself?

The method needs no chemistry background and works on any product. Find the
real ingredient list — the long one on the back, not the “key
ingredients” callout the brand writes for you. It is ordered by weight down
to about the one-percent mark, so where a name sits is a rough proxy for how much
is in the jar. Then take each ingredient the front is selling and find how far
down it actually is.

Two shortcuts help. First, once you hit a run of things at trace levels
— PEG emulsifiers, EDTA, a single fragrance line, preservatives — you
are into the under-one-percent tail, and everything from there down is present at
roughly a percent or less each. Second, and this is the part most people miss: a
low position does not automatically damn an ingredient. Some actives, like
palmitoyl pentapeptide-4, genuinely work at trace amounts, so “it’s
near the bottom” needs a second question — is this an ingredient that
works low, or one that has simply been added in a token amount so it can go on the
front of the box?

For Olay Regenerist, the answer splits cleanly. Niacinamide at four is doing
real work at a real amount, and the front of the jar is honest about it. The
peptide at eleven is a trace, which for that peptide is fine, but the marketing
bills it as a co-star. The HA at thirteen is small and, on the newer formula, may
be gone. Read the label and it tells you which of the four names you are actually
paying for. The marketing department writes the front; it does not get to rewrite
the back.

FAQ

Does Olay Regenerist Micro-Sculpting Cream have niacinamide, and how
much?
On the original-formula list read on 6 September 2026, niacinamide is
the fourth ingredient of about forty — high enough to be a functional
amount, most likely in the 2–5% range that the research supports, though
Olay does not disclose the number.

Where is the peptide on the label, and does its low position mean it
does not work?
Palmitoyl pentapeptide-4, the “Amino-Peptide,” is at position eleven.
That is a trace level — but published trials use this peptide at about
0.0003%, so trace is its working range. The low position is not evidence it is
inert; the fair point is that the marketing bills it as a co-star to the B3 while
it is a fraction of the formula by volume.

Does the cream contain hyaluronic acid?
On the original formula, sodium hyaluronate is at position thirteen, in the
under-one-percent band. A newer “triple collagen peptide” formula on
olay.com does not appear to list it, even though some retailer pages still market
hyaluronic acid as a key ingredient. Check your own label to see which version
you have.

Should I worry about the fragrance in it?
Fragrance is at position twenty-seven. Fragrance is the most common cause of
cosmetic contact allergy — roughly 0.7–2.6% of the general population,
higher among people patch-tested for dermatitis. That is worth knowing for a
twice-daily leave-on product if your skin reacts to scent; it is not proof the
cream will irritate you, and the amount is undisclosed.

Why are there two different ingredient lists for this product?
Olay has an original formula (with parabens, nylon-12 and sodium hyaluronate) and
a reformulated “triple collagen peptide” version (three peptides,
phenoxyethanol instead of parabens, and no listed hyaluronic acid) in
circulation. This analysis is of the original. The quickest tell: three parabens
means the original; phenoxyethanol and three peptides means the reformulated one.

Nib sets down the magnifying glass, closes a little notebook titled Ingredient Desk, and gives a small satisfied nod beside the fully-read red label. — Label read, front claim checked against the back. The B3 is real; the peptide is a trace; the HA is small.

September 6, 2026

Tag: moisturizer

What is actually in Kiehl’s Ultra Facial Cream?

Where does the 4.5% squalane actually sit?

Why does the preservative tell you where the glacier is?

What about the Pro-Ceramides?

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

FAQ

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

Where does the urea Clinique markets actually sit?

What is lanolin alcohol doing at position 9?

What sits at the very bottom of the panel?

Does “allergy tested” mean anything on a label?

FAQ

What is actually in Drunk Elephant Protini?

Where do the peptides actually appear?

Is the copper peptide in Protini the one the research is about?

What is everything below position eighteen?

So is Drunk Elephant Protini worth it?

FAQ

What does “30% Hyaluronic Acid Complex” actually mean?

Where does the hyaluronic acid actually sit?

What is the silicone at position 2 doing?

What about the “72-hour hydration” claim?

So is it a good buy at $55?

Frequently asked questions

What does the ingredient order actually tell you?

Where is the “Peptide-Lipid Complex” on the label?

Does a low position mean the peptides do nothing?

What holds up here, and what to weigh?

One note for sensitive skin

Frequently asked questions

Where does the ceramide actually sit on the label?

What does position #21 tell you about how much ceramide is in there?

Why do we know the oatmeal is 0.5% but not the ceramide?

Is the shea butter the real workhorse here?

So what should a shopper actually take from this?

FAQ

Where do the nine signal peptides actually sit?

Do the peptides do what the name promises?

What is that long run of ingredients after the peptides?

Is the copper peptide in here the one with the research behind it?

What about the clinical study on the box, and the last ingredient?

So is it worth it?

FAQ

What does the Cetaphil Moisturizing Cream label actually say?

Where does the niacinamide actually sit?

So what is actually moisturizing your skin?

Is there anything a “sensitive skin” buyer should note?

What should you actually take from the label?

Frequently asked questions

What does the label actually say?

Where does the retinol actually sit?

How much retinol does a position like that imply?

Is fragrance before retinol a problem?

What would a formula that leads with its active look like?

Frequently asked questions

Where does each marketed active actually land on the label?

Does niacinamide earn its place at number four?

Why is the “Amino-Peptide” all the way down at eleven?

What about the hyaluronic acid at thirteen?

Is the fragrance at position twenty-seven worth noting?

How do you read any ingredient list this way yourself?

FAQ