Neutrogena Pure Mild Facial Cleanser

Research shows:

A 1998 study did find that applying oleic acid at higher concentrations may cause irritation and disrupt the skin barrier. Modern formulations typically use low levels that is well-tolerated.

The culprit behind fungal acne, the Malassezia yeast, feeds on fatty acids with carbon chain lengths between C11-C24. Oleic Acid, at C18, falls right into that sweet spot.

In vitro studies have shown that Oleic Acid is one of the fatty acids that induce rapid Malassezia growth in lab settings.

The dominant fatty acid is lauric acid (44-54%) and then myristic acid (13-19%). There are also small amounts of caprylic, capric, palmitic, oleic, and linoleic acids.

Human testing from CIR has shown no indication this ingredient to be a primary irritant, sensitizer, or phototoxic compound. It's COSMOS-approved for natural and organic products.

Due to the fatty acid content, this ingredient may not be fungal acne safe. Research has confirmed Malassezia can use lauric acid as a food source.

Your skin has a natural pH and acid mantle. This acid mantle helps prevent harmful bacteria from breaking through. The acid mantle also helps keep your skin hydrated.

"Alkaline" refers to a high pH level. A low pH level would be considered acidic.

PH adjusters are common in cosmetic products. The pH of a product can affect the effectiveness of other ingredients. A product with a high pH may also irritate the skin.

If you are looking for the tea leaf ingredient, click here.

Being created from coconut oil means Cocamidopropyl Betaine is hydrating for the skin.

While Cocamidopropyl Betaine was believed to be an allergen, a study from 2012 disproved this. It found two compounds in unpure Cocamidopropyl Betaine to be the irritants: aminoamide and 3-dimethylaminopropylamine. High-grade and pure Cocamidopropyl Betaine did not induce allergic reactions during this study.

You might see people debate whether Sodium Chloride is comedogenic, but there actually haven't been any comedogenic tests done on it. Either way, the overall formulation of a product matters a lot more than any single ingredient.

You might see this ingredient used in scrubs as a primary exfoliating ingredient.

However, this exfoliating effect only happens at high concentrations (20%) which can be hard to find in cosmetic products.

Due to this, citric acid is usually included in small amounts as a pH adjuster. This helps keep products slightly more acidic and compatible with skin's natural pH.

In skincare formulas, citric acid can:

While it can provide some skin benefits, research shows lactic acid and glycolic acid are generally more effective and less irritating exfoliants.

Most citric acid used in skincare today is made by fermenting sugars (usually from molasses). This synthetic version is identical to the natural citrus form but easier to stabilize and use in formulations.

Read more about some other popular AHA's here:

Because it is not a free-fatty acid, this ingredient is fungal acne safe (there's nothing for Malassezia to feed on).

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.

As a humectant, it pulls water into the skin. But it's a pretty minor moisturizing ingredient compared to other humectants, like glycerin.

Interestingly, it can act as a mild penetration enhancer. One in vitro study on human skin found a 12% concentration upped the absorption of mometasone furoate (a medicinal ingredient used to treat inflammatory skin conditions) up to 7%.

This ingredient is typically used at levels of 0.1-10% depending on the role it's playing.

A patch test study on eczema patients didn't find a significant increase in irritation versus the control group, but the potential for irritation rises at higher concentrations.

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

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.