Why Longer Skincare Ingredient Lists Aren’t Always Bad

Hi, friends!

For years, I’ve encouraged you to turn those skincare bottles around, read the ingredient list, and question formulas filled with ingredients you don’t recognize or those super long, science-y names.

And I still totally believe in doing that!

But as my own understanding of formulation science has grown over the last decade, I’ve found myself wanting to work with certain science-backed actives and ingredients that, well... have some pretty long science-y names.

One of the biggest things I’ve learned as I’ve grown as a formulator is that a longer ingredient list doesn’t automatically mean a bad formula. And a long, scientific-looking ingredient name doesn’t automatically mean a harmful ingredient.

In fact... some of the ingredients we’re now incorporating into our updated formulas have names that look far more complicated than the herbs, oils, and butters you’re used to seeing from us.

Think peptides, stabilizing systems, and other more modern skincare technologies.

And there’s a reason for this.

Complicated names aren’t always complicated ingredients

Cosmetic labels use standardized INCI ingredient names. That’s why aloe vera may appear as Aloe barbadensis leaf juice, shea butter as Butyrospermum parkii, and jojoba oil as Simmondsia chinensis.

We talked about this in our ingredient-label guide on the blog, and it’s one reason I don’t believe you should judge an ingredient solely by how “scientific” its name sounds.

As we incorporate ingredients such as peptides and liposomal actives, you may start seeing even more technical names on our labels.

Technical doesn’t automatically mean toxic!

Over the years, I’ve learned that when it comes to holistic and natural skincare, what matters most is what the ingredient actually is, why it’s there, the quality and sourcing of that ingredient, and whether it’s being used appropriately within the formula.

More isn’t always better

This is especially important when we’re talking about active ingredients.

It’s easy to assume that if an exciting active appears near the bottom of an ingredient list, there must not be enough of it to do anything.

Sometimes that can be true, especially when a brand is adding in a trendy ingredient mainly so they can put it on the front of the bottle and make big claims, even though there's barely any of that ingredient in the formula.

But that is not true of every ingredient.

Some actives are specifically designed to work at very low concentrations. Certain peptides, for example, can be used effectively at .5-3%. As a formulator, it's a part of my job to know how much of these ingredients to add into my formula for your skin's best outcome.

Adding dramatically more wouldn’t necessarily make the formula dramatically better. Actually, using too much of an ingredient can interfere with the balance, stability, texture, or overall integrity of a formula.

The goal of good formulation isn’t to cram in the highest possible amount of certain actives. The goal is to use the appropriate amount for the intended effect without causing imbalance to the formula and by way your skin.

The 1% line needs a little context.

Remember our ingredient guide where we talked about the 1% line?

Well, ingredients are generally listed from highest to lowest concentration until you reach roughly the 1% range.

That means the top of an ingredient list is still incredibly helpful for understanding the foundation of a formula.

But once you get into those lower-percentage ingredients, position of those ingredients alone tells you much less about whether an ingredient is meaningful.

A peptide used at a fraction of a percent cannot be evaluated the same way you would evaluate an oil that makes up a large portion of the formula.

They have completely different jobs. Starting to see the bigger picture?

So, has our philosophy changed?

No. But my knowledge as a holistic skincare formulator and herbalist has grown, and so my approach has become more nuanced as I’ve dug deeper into the science behind certain non-toxic active ingredients.

This is actually one of the reasons I’ve worked on so many reformulations.

As my understanding of my craft grows, I want the products I create to grow with me!

Many of my formulas reflect my love for beautifully simple skincare, and that have pretty much stayed the same since their OG formulations years ago. And I still believe simple formulas can be incredibly effective, with or without modern actives.

Ingredient sourcing, transparency, thoughtful formulation, and avoiding unnecessary additives remain VERY important to me.

But... it’s also important to remember that simple isn’t automatically mean it will be a superior product.

Sometimes a more sophisticated formula requires a few additional ingredients to deliver an active, improve stability, maintain freshness, or allow us to incorporate newer science-backed ingredients like peptides.

My philosophy has always been to prioritize the highest-quality ingredients I can source and create skincare formulas whose ingredients work synergistically together.

So if you notice new ingredients appearing in one of your SBA staples, know that little old me just updated the formula to make it even better. There is intention, research, testing, and a reason behind these changes.

And sometimes improving a formula means taking ingredients out. You’ve already seen us do exactly that with products like our Blemish Balm and lip balms.

In short, these are the questions I ask about every ingredient that goes into a formula:

Does it have a purpose?
Is it being used appropriately?
Does it improve the formula?
Does it meet our non-toxic formulation standards?
And are we proud to tell you why it’s there?

If the answer isn’t yes, it doesn’t belong in our bottles!

Do you have any questions? Email us and let me know. Happy to chat!

Chelsea H.
Founder, CEO & Master Herbalist Formulator
Skin Balm Apothecary