Carslan Soft Focus Make-Up Powder

You'll typically find this ingredient in amounts between 0.1-20%.

This ingredient is often coated with metal oxides like titanium dioxide. Trace amounts of heavy metals may be found in mica, but these metals are not harmful in our personal products.

Mica has been used since prehistoric times throughout the world. Ancient Egyptian, Indian, Greek, Roman, Aztec, and Chinese civilizations have used mica.

This is due to how structurally similar it is to what your skin already produces.

Though it is mostly an emollient that helps soften and hydrate skin, it also has some humectant and occlusive action. Humectants help the skin retain moisture while occlusives seal it in, making squalane a triple-threat moisturizer.

Research shows it has antioxidant capabilities that help protect against stressors like UV exposure, specifically UVA induced oxidative stress. This study also found that it supports collagen biosynthesis in human dermal fibroblasts.

No clinical study has reported significant adverse effects and irritation reactions are very rare from this ingredient (even at 100% concentration).

Overall, it's a fantastic ingredient for hydration and is suitable for all skin types.

This depends on the source. Squalane can be derived from both plants and animals. Most squalane used in skincare comes from plants.

Please note: the source of squalane is only known if disclosed by the brand. We recommend reaching out to the brand if you have any questions about their squalane.

Read more about squalene with an "e".

Though squalane is often called an oil, it’s technically not one. It is a hydrocarbon, meaning it is only made of carbon and hydrogen. True oils are triglycerides and made of fatty acids and glycerol.

The term “oil-free” isn’t regulated so companies can define it however they want. Some exclude all oils, while others just avoid mineral oil or comedogenic oils.

Squalane has a comedogenic rating of 1 from the original 1972 study that tested raw ingredients under occlusion on rabbit ears. This system is not standardized or peer-reviewed, and using the raw ingredients is very different from how diluted cosmetic formulations are used on human skin.

A comedogenic rating of 1 means it is "unlikely to clog pores" according to the original rating system.

The overall formula of a product matters more than the individual ingredients on whether or not it will cause clogged pores.

Despite being a "stearate", it has a lightweight, cushiony, and non-greasy slip.

This ingredient has shown no adverse effects in testing and is deemed safe in cosmetics at current use levels.

Typical concentrations range from 0.7-23%.

Because it is made of C-18 fatty acids (like stearic acid), this ingredient may not be fungal acne safe.

On a cellular level, it disrupts the cell membranes of microbes by poking holes that make the cell leak. This shuts down the chemical reactions the microbe needs to make energy so it can no longer survive.

Another perk of this ingredient is that it stays functional across a wide pH range (3-10).

You'll often see it paired with boosters like Ethylhexylglycerin; one study showed that a 1:9 ratio of Ethylhexylglycerin to Phenoxyethanol damages bacterial membranes as effectively as doubling the Phenoxyethanol concentration on its own.

Typical use concentrations range from 0.3-1% depending on the formula, and this ingredient is capped at 1% int the EU.

Safety-wise, the fear mongering does not hold up to the evidence. The EU's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety and FDA consider it safe as a preservative at up to 1%, including for children of all ages.

Adverse systemic effects only showed up in animal studies at exposures roughly 200x higher than what people get from cosmetics. And despite its very widespread use, this ingredient is a rare sensitizer and allergic reactions are uncommon.

This ingredient is typically used at low levels (up to 2.5% in eyeshadow and 1% in lipstick).

Here's a myth worth busting: mineral filters are usually described as working by "reflecting" or "bouncing" UV off your skin.

That's mostly not true: when researchers actually measured it, ZO and Titanium Dioxide reflect only about 4-5% of UV (less than SPF 2 worth of protection).

The vast majority of the work (~95%) is done by absorption, similar to chemical UV filters. ZO is a semiconductor that absorbs UV photos through its energy band gap.

So the old "physical blocker vs. chemical absorber" framing is really an oversimplification.

Zinc Oxide is one of the most effective broad-spectrum UV filters out there. It protects across UVB, UVA2, and UVA1 with a flat, even absorption curve across the whole UVA-UVB range.

That uniform UVA coverage is its standout feature; titanium dioxide skews more toward UVB as its particle size drops so ZO gives more consistent and extended UVA protection.

It's also very photostable. As an inorganic oxide, ZO doesn't break down in sunlight the way some organic filters can, so it holds up over a day of wear.

This ingredient is gentle and soothing, making it go-to for sunscreens aimed at sensitive skin, rosacea, or ecezma-prone skin, babies, and children.

It's also unlikely to cause the "eye sting" that some sunscreen ingredients are known for, and regulatory agencies broadly consider it non-toxic and safe for topical use.

Beyond sun protection, ZO is also a recognized OTC skin protectant. It forms a breathable barrier that shields skin from moisture and irritation while supporting healing. This is why you'll see it as a classic active in diaper rash creams.

The only downside to ZO is that it can leave a visible white cast, especially on deeper skin tones. This is the main reason mineral sunscreens have historically felt less cosmetically elegant than chemical or hybrid formulas.

Zinc Oxide comes in both non-nano and nano forms. The dividing line is 100nm and anything under is classified as a nanomaterial by the EU.

The nano version scatters less visible light which cuts down white case and gives a lighter, more wearable texture.

Another thing worth understanding about formulation:

Uncoated ZO has some inherent photocatalytic activity. This just means it can generate reactive oxygen species under UV. It's exactly why cosmetic-grade ZO is almost always surface-coated; this coating suppresses that reactivity and improves how the powder disperses and feels.

A well-formulated coated ZO largely sidesteps this issue.

Zinc Oxide is commonly used anywhere from 10% up to the regulatory maximum in sunscreens (25%).

Mineral-only broad-spectrum products often land in the 15-25% range to hit higher SPF and UVA values. Keep in mind SPF performance depends heavily on particle size, dispersion, and the rest of the formula, and not just the percentage.

As an OTC skin protectant like diaper creams, ZO typically runs higher at roughly 10-40%.

This ingredient is generally easy to work with and doesn't photodegrade.

The only thing to know is that uncoated ZO can be a bit reactive in a formula.

Under UV, it can break down sensitive ingredients like other actives or UV filters. This is another reason coated versions are standard. ZO can also react with very acidic ingredients or throw off stability of some creams. A good formula will get around this with the right coatings and dispersion.

The EU's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety has concluded that ZO nanoparticles "can be considered to not pose any risk of adverse effects in humans after application on healthy, intact or sunburnt skin".

You might hear that ZO is "toxic"; this is because an in-vitro (test tube) study suggested micronized ZO had potential phototoxicity. In vivo (human) investigations have disputed this and the results have come back reassuring.

So does ZO penetrate skin? The short answer is no, not in any way that matters.

The most relevant evidence comes from real-world human studies: in one, volunteers applied ZO nanoparticle sunscreen hourly for six hours and daily for five days. The advanced imaging showed the particles stayed on the surface and never reached the living epidermis, and no cellular toxicity was found.

Other in-vivo and ex-vivo work agree; ZO nanoparticles don't cross the stratum corneum, even on flexed, massaged, or barrier-impaired skin.

A small amount of solubilized zinc ions can dissolve off the particles and enter the upper skin. But the quantities are tiny compared to the zinc already naturally present in your body, and studies haven't found this to cause local toxicity.

The sunscreen bans you've heard of (like Hawaii's) are aimed at two chemical filters, Oxybenzone and Octinoxate. ZO itself it not banned and is often recommended instead.

So far, there's no solid evidence that any form of ZO harms reefs. It is an ongoing and active area of study, and worth keeping an eye on.

If you're traveling somewhere with these rules, a non-nano mineral sunscreen is the safe bet.

Isododecane's role as a solvent makes it a great texture enhancer. It spreads smoothly on skin and does not leave a sticky feeling behind. Isododecane also helps prevent color transfer in makeup products.

Isododecane is not absorbed into skin.

The chemical name for this ingredient is 2,2,4,6,6-PENTAMETHYLHEPTANE.

Isohexadecane is often used in products designed to help oily skin. It is lightweight and non-greasy while helping to moisturize. When mixed with silicones, it gives a product a silky feel.

A double-blind study confirmed that extra virgin coconut oil is as effective as mineral oil for treating very dry skin. Another study found it outperformed mineral oil for mild to moderate atopic dermatitis in children.

Another study from 2018 found that virgin coconut oil can soothe inflammation and boost key skin barrier proteins. Just know this evidence is still only from lab settings and not human trials.

It has also been shown to reduce Staphylococcus aureus, a bacteria that commonly overgrows in people with eczema.

Clinical testing shows very minimal skin irritation and no evidence of sensitization or phototoxicity.

Coconut oil gets flagged as a "fragrance" because it has a natural mild scent (not because it's a synthetic perfume). The European Cosmetic ingredient database also lists "perfuming" as a function of this ingredient.

Just so you know, the term "fragrance" is completely unregulated. Some brands still use botanical extracts or essential oils in their "fragrance-free" formulas, but regulatory databases technically classify these under "fragrance".

Coconut oil has a tiny and useless bit of natural SPF. Early lab studies clocked it around SPF 7-8 but a more recent study found the real number closer to SPF 1.2. It also offers no meaningful UVA protection (SPF only overs UVB rays).

The comedogenic rating of 4/5 means it has a high potential to clog pores; but it's worth noting that comedogenicity is highly individual and ratings cannot predict how an overall formula will behave on skin.

Since lauric acid is the dominant fatty acid, this ingredient may not be fungal acne safe. The Malassezia yeast feeds on fatty acids with carbon chain lengths between 11-24, and lauric acid falls within these lengths (C12).

Industry-reported use ranges from 8% in rinse-off products and 2% in leave-on formulations.

As an antioxidant, it helps fight free-radical molecules. Free-radical molecules are capable of damaging our cells and other genetic material. Thus, antioxidants may reduce the signs of aging.

This ingredient is oil-soluble.

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!

Hydrogenated Polyisobutene is often used as a mineral oil replacement.

Silica is often used for absorption and can help reduce shine when products are applied.

In a formula, it acts as a humectant and barrier-supporting soother and the research backs this up as well.

A 2025 systematic review of human clinical trials found that snail-derived ingredients improved signs of aging, increased skin hydration, decreased transepidermal water loss, and improved healing after radiation therapy/fractional laser treatment.

Lab studies have also shown the secretion promotes the proliferation, migration, and survival of the cells that rebuild skin (keratinocytes and dermal fibroblasts).

There's also a placebo-controlled study where a serum containing it helped with mask-related acne.

Overall, this is a gentle, water-based multitasker that works great for hydrating and supporting the skin barrier. However, please see the section below if you have dust mite or shellfish allergies.

You'll see snail filtrate listed at very different percentages depending on the product. Some Korean serums list it near the top of the ingredients at 90% or more while other products use just a few percent.

This doesn't mean the high-percentage ones are far stronger. Raw snail filtrate is mostly water to begin with so using a lot of it isn't the same thing as using a lot of the active ingredients.

Other products use a concentrated version so a small amount goes a long way. Either approach can work well. Just know the percentage on the label isn't a reliable way to judge how effective a snail product will be.

Being cruelty-free means a brand does not experiment on animals. If you're worried about the well-being of the snails, we recommend looking more into the company of the product. Many brands claim to have developed humane methods to collect snail mucin.

There is much debate on this subject. On one hand, this ingredient comes from an animal. On the other hand, many will argue the ingredient is naturally secreted (like a natural by-product) and therefore vegan. If you have reservations, you can look into Galactomyces Ferment Filtrate or Centella Asiatica Extract as alternatives.

This ingredient is fungal acne safe. Its core composition lacks the fatty acid/ester triggers that Malassezia depends on.

True allergy to Snail Secretion Filtrate is uncommon and most documented cases are linked to a dust mite allergy.

Snail proteins (including Tropomyosin) are similar enough to dust mite proteins that the immune system can confuse them.

In most documented cases, the dust mite was the original trigger and tropomyosin turned out to be only a minor player in some studies (so this has not been fully confirmed).

Another thing to know is that nearly all the evidence comes from eating snails or inhaling the protein and not from cosmetics.

However, the allergenic proteins can survive filtration into a finished product; a topical reaction is biologically plausible but there's little published evidence of it actually happening.

People who are allergic to dust mites (or sometimes shellfish) are the most likely to react.

Ci 77891 is commonly found in sunscreens due to its ability to block UV rays.

Synthetically created Ci 77491 is considered safer than those naturally found. This is because the synthetically created version may contain less impurities. Iron oxides are generally non-toxic and non-allergenic.

Synthetically created CI 77492 is considered safer than those naturally found. This is because the synthetically created version may contain less impurities. Iron oxides are generally non-toxic and non-allergenic.

This ingredient is common in foundations, lipsticks, and blushes. This color is described as brown/orangey red.

It has many secondary names such as Red 6 and Red 7. According to a manufacturer, Red 6 usually contains aluminum.