Luna Bronze Eclipse Tanning Mousse Versus Loving Tan 2 HR Express Deluxe Bronzing Mousse

The FDA requires batch-to-batch certification for this ingredient that is held to a pretty rigorous standard. That means the CI 17200 in your cosmetics has been tested and approved before it ever reaches you.

Contact allergy to cosmetic-grade dyes used at low concentrations are uncommon but has been documented before.

This ingredient also goes by the name D&C RED NO. 33.

CI 17200 has a comedogenic rating of 1 and an irritancy rating of 2 on a scale of 0-5. This is based on peer-reviewed research from the man who invented the comedogenic scale.

A 1 on the comedogenic scale is about as low as it gets without being a flat zero, and makes sense for CI 17200.

It's a water-soluble dye used at very small concentrations (typically 0.001-0.1%), so it dissolves into the water phase of a formula rather than sitting on your skin the way an oil or wax would.

The irritancy rating of 2 reflects that, like most synthetic dyes, there's a small possibility of mild irritation ( particularly for people with existing dye sensitivities).

For the vast majority of people, it's a non-issue at typical use levels.

It's also worth keeping in mind that comedogenic and irritancy ratings are tested on individual ingredients, not finished formulas. The final product's formulation, concentration, and other ingredients all play a role in how something actually behaves on your skin.

Just so you know, the FDA ban on Red Dye No. 3 refers to CI 45430, not this ingredient. CI 45430 and CI 17200 are different chemical compounds with distinct safety and regulatory histories.

It's also worth noting that Red No. 3 (CI 45430) was already banned from cosmetics back in 1990, so the 2025 action just extended the ban to food and oral drugs. CI 17200 was never part of any of this.

Some people may experience allergies from this dye, especially asthmatics and those with an aspirin intolerance.

Because it has a neutral charge, it is compatible with a wide range of ingredients and stays stable across a broad pH range/water hardiness conditions.

Patch testing has shown it to have the lowest irritation potential among common cleansing surfactants (like SLS).

Typical use levels range from 5-20% in rinse-off cleansers.

One thing worth knowing: The American Contact Dermatitis Society named the parent family, alkyl glucosides, "Allergen of the Year" in 2017. The prevalence of allergy is pretty low but be sure to patch test if you've reacted to "gentle" or sulfate-free cleansers before.

This ingredient is fungal acne safe because the fatty alcohol portion of this ingredient is not within the C11-24 chain length that Malassezia can metabolize.

DHA does not penetrate living skin cells, does not interact with melanocytes, and does not affect actualy melanin production.

There's a "safety controversy" that largely stems from misinterpreted studies:

Once concern is that DHA can generate unstable molecules that can damage cells (free radicals) when exposed to sunlight. This only happens in the outermost layer of dead skin cells and wearing SPF on top takes care of it.

The DNA damage claim comes from lab studies that doused living skin cells in much higher concentrations of DHA than you'd ever find in a self-tanner. That's not really a meaningful comparison to putting self-tanning lotion on your skin.

Regulatory bodies around the world, including the EU's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) and the U.S. FDA consider it safe for use in cosmetics when applied topically (maximum 10%, and most self-tanners contain between 3-5%).

You'll also recognize water as that liquid we all need to stay alive. If you see this, drink a glass of water. Remember to stay hydrated!