Undone Beauty Water Blush

Though this ingredient works well with most skin types, some people with sensitive skin may experience a reaction such as allergic rashes, closed comedones, or itchiness.

Due to its large molecule size, it doesn't penetrate beyond the skin's surface.

This ingredient has a solid regulatory track record; the CIR Expert Panel first concluded it was safe for use in cosmetics at concentrations up to 100% in 1997. A 2012 reassessment reaffirmed that finding. Safety studies have also found no irritation or evidence of toxicity.

A 2019 study did find this ingredient to grow Malassezia, so this ingredient may not be fungal acne safe.

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

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

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.

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.

It is considered non-irritating on the skin.

Titanium dioxide provides broad-spectrum protection mostly in the UVB and UVAII range, with some protection in the UVAI range.

While its UVA protection isn’t as strong as zinc oxide’s, the difference is minor.

A common myth is that mineral UV filters reflect UV light. However, modern research shows titanium dioxide absorbs UV radiation like chemical filters (~95% absorption & 5% reflection).

Thanks to its non-irritating nature, titanium dioxide is suitable for sensitive, acne-prone, or redness-prone skin. It is unlikely to cause "eye sting" like other sunscreen ingredients.

A major drawback of this ingredient is its white cast and thick texture. This is why mineral sunscreens often leave a white cast and are less cosmetically elegant than chemical/hybrid sunscreens.

To improve white cast and spreadability, micronized or nano-sized titanium dioxide is often used.

There are ongoing concerns surrounding nano-titanium oxide's impact on marine ecosystems.

There is no conclusive evidence that any form of titanium oxide (or any other sunscreen ingredients) will cause harm to marine ecosystems or coral reefs. The science is still developing but many consumers are keeping a close eye on this issue.

Please note, many destinations have reef-safety sunscreen rules. For instance, the U.S. Virgin Islands advises all visitors to use non-nano mineral sunscreens.

Nano mineral sunscreens once raised safety concerns about absorption into skin.

Extensive research has shown that they do not penetrate healthy or damaged skin; they remain safely on the surface and the top layer of dead skin (stratum corneum).

You'll likely find titanium dioxide bundled with alumina, silica, or dimethicone. These ingredients help make titanium dioxide highly photostable; this prevents it from interacting with other formula components under UV light.

A 2021 paper looked at skincare formulations containing iron oxides and found that they reduced transmission of blue light when measured optically. In simple terms, the pigment particles helped block or scatter part of the visible light spectrum in lab testing and the authors suggest this could translate into better protection against blue-light-related skin effects.

There is also clinical and experimental research showing that tinted products containing iron oxides can reduce visible light-induced pigmentation:

Please note, whether a product reduces visible or blue light depends on things like:

In the EU's CosIng database, iron oxides are only listed as a colorant. CosIng groups ingredients by their main cosmetic role, such as colorant, preservative, or UV filter.

Though studies say iron oxides can "attenuate blue light", they're describing an optical property and not an officially recognized cosmetic function.

So CosIng isn’t contradicting the research. It’s just classifying iron oxides by what they officially are: pigments that add color.

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

This dye is commonly found in makeup because it imparts a vivid color. Some types of this dye change color based on pH level and interaction with moisture:

Your skin has a natural pH of around 4.5 - 5.5.

According to the FDA, CI 45410 is not permitted for use in eye products.

Red 27 is a flourescein dye and commonly used as a fluorescent tracer in medicine.

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.