Almay Roll-On Antiperspirant & Deodorant Fragrance Free

It's typically used at levels below 5% but can go up to 8.5% in hand cleansers.

Human irritation data for this ingredient looks good: a 2024 study found that Laureth-23 had the lowest irritation score of all the fatty alcohol ethoxylates tested.

Sensitization risk is also low for allergies, the CIR found:

The only notable finding was slight irritation of the clear membrane in the eyes of rabbits so that's worth knowing for eye-area products.

There is one caveat for this whole ingredient family: ethoxylated surfactants slowly oxidize when exposed to air, and it's the oxidation products, not the fresh material, that act as sensitizers.

A study that patch tested 528 dermatitis patients found stronger reactions to the oxidized surfactants; this is mostly a formulation and shelf life issue.

This ingredient does have a comedogenic rating of 3, but this doesn't mean a formula with this ingredient will clog pores. Human testing has proved that any finished product with this ingredient won't automatically make you break out; it really comes down to concentration, formula, and your skin.

The chemistry for this ingredient is reassuring; Malassezia uses long chain fatty acids from its surroundings (C11-24) to grow, and Laureth-23 has no fatty acid for it to grab onto.

Supporting this, closely related alkyl PEG ethers like Ceteth-20 get used in Malassezia lab work as neutral carriers to disperse a separately added fatty acid (not as the food source itself).

This ingredient is typically used in concentrations between 1-10%. Studies have found it to be non-sensitizing, non-phototoxic, and non-photoallergenic.

A close cousin of this ingredient is Glyceryl Stearate SE ("self-emulsifying"). This just has a small amount of sodium or potassium stearate added so it can emulsify without a co-emulsifier.

Since this ingredient is an ester of a C18 fatty acid, it may not be fungal acne safe. The Malassezia yeast can potentially metabolize within the C11-C24 range.

Fun fact: The human body also creates Glyceryl Stearate naturally.

Like other types of silica, this ingredient can be used to thicken a product. As an absorbent, it may be used to absorb extra water or help prevent clumping.

Although “aluminum” in an ingredient name can raise red flags for some consumers, the form and usage context matter significantly. For typical topical applications, there is no substantial evidence of health risks - such as cancer, neurotoxicity, or systemic “aluminum overload.”

A 2012 assessment found this ingredient is used in leave-on products at up to 21%, which is at the very high end for the category; most cosmetic use is far lower and typically in the single digits.

A true allergy to Laureth-4 is rare; similar alcohol ethoxylates tested negative for skin sensitization in undiluted guinea pig studies, and related compounds were non-sensitizing in Magnusson-Kligman maximization tests.

There is one caveat for this whole ingredient family: ethoxylated surfactants slowly oxidize when exposed to air, and it's the oxidation products, not the fresh material, that act as sensitizers. This is mostly a formulation and shelf life issue.

Dr. James Fulton's rabbit ear test from the 1980's scored this ingredient as a 5 on the comedogenic scale. Fulton himself described the rabbit ear as not an ideal model and the tests used undiluted ingredients on rabbit ears, which are more reactive than human facial skin.

Dr. Draelos later used a human assay on finished cosmetic products and found that products built with so-called comedogenic ingredients are not necessarily comedogenic themselves.

This ingredient can be potentially pore clogging if it appears high in the ingredient list of a leave-on product.

The fungal acne picture is actually reassuring: Malassezia uses fatty acids from its surroundings (C11-24). This ingredient has nothing for the Malassezia yeast to use since it is an alcohol and not an acid.

Supporting this, closely related ethoxylated alcohol detergents like Ceteth-20 get used in Malassezia lab work as neutral carriers to disperse a separately added fatty acid (not as the food source itself).

The common safety discussion around this ingredient involves a manufacturing byproduct called 1,4-dioxane.

Trace amounts can form during production but the EU's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety has concluded that levels at/below 10 ppm in finished products are safe (commercial products consistently fall within acceptable margins).

True allergic reactions are uncommon and the CIR Expert Panel has confirmed this ingredient to be safe as used in cosmetics.

Because it is derived from lauric acid, it may not be fungal acne safe.

Lab studies have found that lauric acid is surprisingly good at killing acne-causing bacteria. However, these tests were done on bacteria in a petri dish and not on real skin, so we can't say for certain it works the same in a formulation on a real face.

The comedogenic rating of 4 comes from the 1972 rabbit ear model using undiluted ingredients. Comedogenicity is highly individual and one comedogenic ingredient cannot predict how a formula will behave on skin.

This ingredient is not fungal acne safe and research has confirmed Malassezia can use it as a food source. Even though "fungal acne" has the word "acne" in it, they are completely different. Regular acne is driven by a bacteria called Cutibacterium acnes, clogged pores, and excess oil. Fungal acne isn't really acne; it's caused by an overgrowth of a yeast called Malassezia that already lives on everyone's skin. Because one is bacterial and the other is fungal, they respond to different ingredients.

It plays several roles in a formula:

Typical use levels for this ingredient sit around 1-10% and the Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel has affirmed safety at concentrations up to 25% in leave-on products.

Multiple assessments have found it to be non-irritating and non-sensitizing to most people.

However, there have been some cases of allergic contact dermatitis in patients with chronically compromised skin barriers.

Cetearyl alcohol has a comedogenic rating of 2 and irritancy rating of 1. Both of these numbers come from the 1989 study that used rabbit ears; a "2" means mildly comedogenic and a "1" means low irritancy.

Here's the catch: rabbit skin is more sensitive than human skin and throws a lot of false positives. A 1996 reappraisal found that ingredients rated 1-2 in the rabbit ear tests are generally safe for humans.

Remember comedogenic ratings are unable to assess the entire formula of a product or how it will react on your skin. Just be sure to patch test if you are unsure about certain ingredients.

This ingredient is not fungal acne safe. Cetearyl alcohol is a fatty alcohol with chain lengths that fall within the range that Malassezia can metabolize.

A 2019 study has also observed Malassezia growth in the presence of this ingredient, confirming it to be not-fungal acne safe.

Concentration-wise, safety review reports the wider trimonium family shows up between 0.0005% to 10% in rinse-off products and 0.001% to 4% in leave-on products.

This ingredient is commonly used at ~1–5% when acting as the emulsifier.

Allergies to this ingredient are rare; the CIR panel noted the literature lacks clinical reports of irritation or sensitization and patch tests on finished products containing it came back clean.

EDTA locks them up so it's a neat little background helper ingredient.

Typical use is under 2% but numbers as high as 10-25% have been reported in hair color products.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review panel looked at the whole family and concluded they're safe as used. At cosmetic concentrations, they have not been found to be skin irritants or sensitizers.

Clinical testing has found no absorption through skin so the scary-sounding oral toxicity numbers from animal studies aren't relevant to a face cream.

One real formulation note: this ingredient is a penetration enhancer so it can slightly increase how much of the other ingredients get through (though this is more of a thing for formulators to work around).

Allergy is genuinely rare; there are a handful of case reports so be sure to avoid if you're patch test positive to EDTA.