Manna Kadar Beauty Lash Extending Primer

Besides holding formulas together, it also leaves a silky and lightweight feel on skin without the greasiness. A manufacturer also claims it can help with the controlled release of active ingredients.

The CIR Expert Panel found this ingredient to not be sensitizing in concentrations up to 15% in human maximazation testing and dimethicone-based compounds were not comedogenic.

It has a high molecular weight well above 1,000 g/mol which means it limits meaningful skin penetration.

A 2019 study specifically tested this ingredient and found no observable Malassezia growth in its presence.

This ingredient (alongside other synthetic waxes) have been concluded to be safe in cosmetics under the present practices.

Reported usage goes up to 18% and it is non-sensitizing.

Just one caveat for fungal acne: This ingredient is made up of C16-32 fatty acids and fatty acid esters. Part of this overlaps with the C11-24 range that the Malassezia yeast can feed on, so it's not fungal-acne safe.

The CIR Expert Panel has confirmed this ingredient to be nontoxic and clinical studies show no sensitization at cosmetic use concentrations.

True allergic reactions are quite rare: a 15-year retrospective study of 6,751 patients found only 0.31% had a positive reaction (and less than half were considered clinically relevant).

It seemed that when sensitization does occur, it's most commonly linked to topical medication (like corticosteroids) and not cosmetics. Allergic contact dermatitis also appears largely limited to individuals with underlying skin conditions.

Overall, propylene glycol is a well-studied ingredient that most people can tolerate without issue.

As a preservative, it is used to stabilize products and prevent them from degrading. Specifically, BHT prevents degradation from oxidation.

The concerns related to BHT come from oral studies; this ingredient is currently allowed for use by both the FDA and EU.

However, it was recently restricted for use in the UK as of April 2024.

Some people who are allergic to imidazolidinyl urea also react to diazolidinyl urea. It ranked as the 14th most common allergen in patch tests from 2005–06.

Safety reviews show that at concentrations under 0.5%, the formaldehyde released remains below the accepted safety limit, making it considered safe for cosmetic use.

Ultimately, its safety depends on individual skin sensitivity and personal comfort with formaldehyde-releasing preservatives.

It is typically used at very low levels in cosmetics, with most formulations using 0.0125% or less (well below its approved maximum).

In the EU, IPBC concentration limits are set at 0.02% in rinse-off products and 0.01% in leave-on products.

Though IPBC is a relatively uncommon contact allergen, patch testing studies show positive reaction rates ranging from 0.3%-0.9% of patients tested. This is still quite low compared to preservatives like methylisothiazolinone which sits at around 4-5%.

Researchers note that existing iodine sensitives or rubber allergies may be the cause of this as IPBC shares a structure with both thiuram (used in rubber) and iodine.

Be sure to patch test if you are unsure and speak with a medical professional about using this ingredient.

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