Final Paper

Chemistry

What Does ‘Natural' Beauty Mean and Who Gets to Define it?

The endless debate between chemists and natural beauty gurus

Few words have been contested as much as “natural” in the ever-evolving cosmetics industry. Trends wax and wane season after season, but the intrigue surrounding naturally derived makeup and skincare continues to occupy the beauty world’s imagination. Last year, Forbes tapped former L’Oréal employee and current beauty brand consultant Jennifer Hessel to give her take on the industry. Hessel boldly stated “Skincare From the Earth” – aka “natural, clean, and even food-standard products” – may be the biggest trend in beauty. Little, if anything at all, has changed since she shared her comments with Forbes. In fact, industry insiders are doubling down. Kisaco Research, the annual hosts of the Beauty & Money Summit in Los Angeles, California, held an international search for what the most successful, new beauty brands are focusing on and it’s not surprise that their number one finding was “clean” beauty.

But even with all the industry, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has yet to develop an official, government-mandated standard for what “natural,” “organic,” and “clean” mean. Without a set guideline, cosmetic brands can slap an all-natural label on just about any product regardless of its ingredients. Natural beauty gurus, cosmetic chemists, and clean beauty consumers all have their own requisites for what makes a product natural or “clean” and more often than not those guidelines do not overlap. Who has the final say, then?

Some believe scientists hold the power to defining what is or is not natural, but others question a system that privileges expensive degrees and financially incentivized chemists who benefit from a loos definition of natural beauty. On that same note, there are those who feel clean beauty enthusiasts wield the power to shape the defining characteristics of natural cosmetics while their counterparts see gurus and laymen consumers as uninformed hobbyists.

Chemistry professionals don’t doubt the necessity of better, more natural products. They do, however, question to what end consumers must be concerned with potentially dangerous ingredients. In their eyes, journals publish so much research each day and new chemical properties are discovered constantly that we could eventually approach a time where all ingredients could be classified as toxic. Additionally, synthetic organic chemistry, which refers to the field of chemistry concerned with synthesizing carbon-based molecules (this often serves as a point of confusion between scientists and laypeople. Oftentimes beauty product formulations come about from natural product synthetic organic chemistry research and despite the terms natural, synthetic, and organic appearing within the research category’s name, there is no immediate connection between the natural product synthetic organic chemistry field and natural versus synthetic cosmetics), typically works to imitate the molecules naturally occurring in the environment. In fact, many research labs work to synthesize safer versions of toxic chemicals naturally occurring in the earth. With that in mind, synthetic no longer automatically means toxic and natural may not mean safe by default.

But some natural cosmetic experts are familiar with the complexity chemists point out when contesting organic cosmetics. Dr. Cary Gannon, a board certified podiatric surgeon and founder of natural beauty brand AILA Cosmetics, falls into this category and believes natural cannot be defined by a specific set of rules. Instead she says “[natural means] plant-based and free from as many harmful chemicals as possible.” Dr. Gannon developed her AILA to service her patients who needed a healthy alternative to regular, store-bought nail polish. Despite her mission to provide natural nail polish to her customers, she continues to face the seemingly insurmountable challenge many clean beauty brands face – the arbitrary qualifications for natural cosmetics shifts so rapidly that adjusting to trends while maintaining a brand’s integrity feels almost impossible. In fact, AILA’s website features an entire section titled “How Free Are We?” referencing the nail care industry’s nomenclature for natural products.

Years ago 3-free nail polish, lacquer free of the three most harmful ingredients in nail polish (formaldehyde, toluene, and dibutyl phthalate), was developed and sold as the first clean nail products. Soon after 5-free nail polish hit shelves also eliminating formaldehyde resin and camphor. Just as when the first 3-free and 5-free products became available, there are still no scholarly articles published on the negative effects of any nail polish ingredients. However, in that same period, researchers have conducted countless studies showing all five ingredients’ carcinogenic properties. The need for natural beauty, according to clean beauty enthusiasts, doesn’t come from a mountain of peer reviewed researching proving the toxicity of synthetic beauty products. Rather, gurus and self-proclaimed natural beauty experts meticulously read the literature and develop informed conclusions based on the data they’ve gathered.

Natural cosmetics are not just a trend that will be here today and gone tomorrow. Clean beauty consumers’ robust library of knowledge on chemical formulations, active ingredient properties, and product efficacy shows the depth of natural beauty proving the subcategory’s longevity. As researchers publish new and noteworthy data on common chemical ingredients, organic cosmetic brands will evaluate risk factors and integrate the information they’ve gathered into natural product development process. By design, clean beauty is an agile industry constantly evolving to fit the ever-changing science landscape. What’s considered safe today may be deemed toxic tomorrow. According to natural beauty consumers, that’s exactly what makes clean beauty great.

Chemistry

Women’s Quest to Take Over the [Beauty] World

How the rise of natural beauty gave room for women to infiltrate STEM

For centuries, STEM-related industries excluded women from gaining access to quality education and viable careers. Some feminist culture theorists believe even historically feminized activities like baking and applying skincare are common hobbies for women because they allow those who were pushed away from pursuing science careers to experience science in a small but impactful way. Without the proper steps to attaining a degree in chemistry or a job as a formulation chemist, women have resorted to alternative methods of indulging their analytical minds.

Sexism in science starts early and presents itself inconspicuously. Studies show that before the age of seven, young girls are already exposed to a variety of subtle cues telling them they shouldn’t pursue careers in science. This often takes the form of stifling analytical creativity in favor of creative storytelling for toys marketed towards girls (think: several Barbie dolls with intricate back stories but few sprawling Lego cityscapes) as well as representations of female scientists in children’s media being few and far between. Such ingrained misogyny calls for revolutionary action. And luckily, that’s exactly what happened. Girls and women stopped sitting idly by as the industry that’s profit off of them for centuries continued to rake in the cash. Now female beauty consumers demand their inclusion, no ifs ands or buts about it.

The natural beauty trend, catalyzed by everyday female beauty consumers, quickly turned into a large-scale example of women reclaiming their space in STEM. By shifting an entire chemistry-based industry through peer-to-peer information sharing and in-depth personal research, women have seemingly overthrown the male-dominated field of cosmetic chemistry. Even if beauty consumers weren’t enacting systemic change to fight a society that implicitly discourages little girls from being scientists, they do their part by staking claim to their own piece of the beauty world. Understanding the ingredient lists, product formulations, and long-term effects of the items in their medicine cabinets show undeniable chemical literacy. Additionally, scrutinizing tried-and-true, bestselling products based on criteria extracted from notable research findings highlights women’s science-related critical thinking skills can and will thrive even under the pressure of centuries-deep misogyny. Women saw the backdoor to cosmetics – natural beauty – and shamelessly snuck in to challenge the way things had always been done. They refused to purchase products made with carcinogenic chemicals, toxic ingredients, and untested components. And as any brand in the current consumer climate of Boycott Culture knows, purchasing power makes or breaks a business. Beauty enthusiasts redirected their disposable income to an untapped market – clean beauty.

More exciting still, not only are female consumers choosing to spend their beauty dollars on natural products, they are also starting their own natural beauty brands. Most major producers of synthetic cosmetics (Estee Lauder, L’Oréal, and Revlon) are helmed by men and run by a cohort of male c-suite executives and senior vice presidents. In contrast, organic cosmetic companies enter the marketplace every day with more and more of them boasting female founders and CEOs. On the heels of Third Wave feminism, the fourth wave (often referred to as Post-Feminism) appeared out of thin air. Suddenly everywhere you looked there were #Girlbossesä and #PantsuitNation devotees preaching the empowered women gospel. Major sociopolitical movements of the twenty-first century changed the game for American women across many industries and beauty was no exception. In 2010 came Tata Harper, the luxury skincare brand now selling “100% natural, nontoxic” beauty essentials in over 400 Sephora stores nationwide. Next came Herbivore Botanicals in 2011 with “synthetic free, plant-based” products meant for troubled skin. Then there was Vintner’s Daughter in 2012, the cult-favorite cosmetics company with only one item in its entire product lineup: a natural face oil “infused with 22 of the world’s most nutrient-rich botanicals.” In the following six years came countless other companies created by everyday women who noticed a gap in the beauty market they were being offered.  

Women are actively and relentlessly infiltrating the beauty supply chain. At every stage of the beauty business, the proportion of women continues to increase. More and more women are choosing to be product developers and cosmetic chemists; female business strategists no longer are a rarity; makeup and skincare retailers now look to women to guide their day-to-day sales. Heck, even the ultra-exclusive, notoriously boys club-esque finance industry is seeing an uptick in female venture capitalists funding this new wave of beauty startups. Gone are the days when men conceptualized, developed, sold, and profited from women’s cosmetics while overtly and implicitly excluded women from participating in the process beyond end-product consumption. Regardless of the natural beauty’s controversial perception in society, there’s no argument that the rise of organic makeup and skincare lent itself to becoming the perfect platform for a feminist revolution in STEM.