I know 30 myths to bust seems like an awful lot, but believe me, there could have been
lots more. I struggled on which ones to include that would be the most helpful. What
women are led to believe about skin care and makeup could fill volumes. We are incessantly
bombarded with these myths disguised as truths, and like any brainwashing procedure
it takes effort and facts to get to what is really possible and what is worth your time and
money. So these 30 myths represent a snapshot of the typical erroneous information you
get from cosmetics companies that end up hurting your skin and budget because they are
a poor way to make decisions about the products you buy.
1. Myth: There are skin-care products that really are better than Botox or better
than dermal fillers.
Fact: Over the past few years cosmetics companies have positioned their skin-
care products by claiming that they can compete with or even outdo medical
corrective procedures such as Botox. The ads in fashion magazines for these types of
skin-care products often make claims about how dangerous Botox injections can be.
There is nothing scary about Botox (other than the sound of the botulism toxin mate-
rial used). In fact, the research about Botox’s effectiveness and safety is overwhelmingly
positive for every disorder they treat with it, and there are many, from cerebral palsy
in children to headaches and eye tics. (Sources: Journal of Neural Transmission, April
2008, pages 617–623; Laryngoscope, May 2008, pages 790–796; Journal of Headache
and Pain, October 2007, pages 294–300; Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, June
2007, pages 1059–1072; and Pediatrics, July 2007, pages 49–58.)On the other hand, there is absolutely no research showing that any skin-care
product can even remotely work in any manner like Botox, or like dermal fillers such
as Restylane or Artecol, or like laser resurfacing. Regardless of their ingredients or the
claims these skin-care products make, it just isn’t possible. Even Botox can’t work like
Botox if you apply it topically rather than injecting it into facial muscles. Nor can der-
mal fillers plump up wrinkles when applied topically rather than being injected. When
performed by professionals, Botox and dermal injections make wrinkles in the treated
area disappear almost immediately. Believing that skin-care products can do the same
is a complete waste of money. There has never been a single skin-care product that has
ever put a plastic surgeon or cosmetic dermatologist out of business! It makes sense,
then, even with the increasing number of products claiming to be better than Botox,
that there were more Botox injections and dermal filler injections performed in 2007
than ever before—millions and millions of them.
2. Myth: Dermal fillers such as Radiesse and Restylane are completely safe and
are the best filler options available.
Fact: Absolutely not true! First, there are more than 30 dermal filler materials be-
ing used, and many of them are even more beneficial and definitely longer lasting than
Radiesse and Restylane (Sources: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, November 2007,
pages 33S–40S; and Dermatologic Therapy, May 2006, pages 141–150; and Clinical and
Plastic Surgery, April 2005, pages 151–162). Although dermal fillers do work beautifully
to fill out depressed areas of the face, such as the nasal labial folds that extend from
your nose to your mouth, deep lines between the eyebrows, and marionette lines along
the sides of the mouth, they do pose risks. The advertising for these two products, and
the repeated mention of them in fashion magazines, have led consumers to believe
that these work flawlessly. There are definitely problems (albeit infrequent) associated
with these fillers, and with all of the more than 30 fillers currently being used. These
problems and adverse events are primarily granulomas and nodules, which are lumps
or hard spheres that may occur under the skin. Although these sometimes must be
corrected with surgery, for the temporary fillers the adverse events do fade with time
while the semi-permanent fillers can stay in place for far longer periods of time. The
trade off is duration versus risk, and the decision is yours.
Please don’t take this information to mean you shouldn’t consider using dermal fillers
to successfully treat wrinkles (millions of successful treatments have been performed);
it’s just that you should be fully informed before you make any decision about any
product or procedure you are considering. One more thing: there are absolutely no
skin-care products that can work in any way, shape, or form like a dermal filler. (Sources:
Dermatologic Surgery, June 2008, Supplemental, pages S92–S99, and December 2007,
Supplemental, pages S168–S175; Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, November 2007,
Supplemental, pages S17–S26; Dermatology, April 2006, pages 300–304; Journal of
Cosmetic Laser Therapy, December 2005, pages 171–176; and Aesthetic and Plastic
Surgery, January–February 2005, pages 34–48.)3. Myth: You should choose skin-care products based on your age.
Fact: Many products on the market claim to be designed for a specific age group,
especially for “mature” women; mature usually refers to women over 50. Before
you buy into any arbitrary age division when choosing skin-care products, ask yourself
why the over-50 group is always lumped together. According to this logic, someone
who is 40 or 45 shouldn’t be using the same products as someone who is 50 (only 5 or
10 years older), yet someone who is 80 should be using the same products as someone
who is 50. If you think that doesn’t make sense, you’re right.
To clear up the confusion, what you need to know is that skin has different needs
that are based on skin type, not on age. Not everyone in the same age group has the
same skin type. Your skin-care routine depends on how dry, sun-damaged, oily, sensi-
tive, thin, blemished, or normal your skin is, all of which have nothing to do with age.
Then there are the issues of rosacea, psoriasis, allergies, and other skin disorders, which
again have nothing to do with age. What everyone needs to do is protect the outer bar-
rier of their skin in exactly the same way—avoid unnecessary direct sun exposure (sun
protection), don’t smoke, don’t irritate your skin, and do use state-of-the-art skin-care
products loaded with antioxidants and skin-identical ingredients (Sources: International
Journal of Cosmetic Science, October 2007, pages 409–410; and Cutaneous and Ocular
Toxicology, April 2007, pages 343–357). Plenty of young women have dry skin, and
plenty of older women have oily skin and breakouts (particularly women who are
experiencing perimenopausal or menopausal hormone fluctuations).
Some skin disorders, diseases, and functionality problems are associated with older
skin, but whether they appear or not depends on the woman and her particular skin.
They are not universally true of older skin because even these specific maladies can
occur in younger people as well (such as ulcerated skin, wounds that don’t heal, itchy
skin, and thinning skin). In addition, none of these problems have anything to do with
“normal,” daily skin-care needs; whatever your age, a healthy skin-care routine for your
skin type can do wonders (Sources: British Journal of Community Nursing, May 2007,
pages 203–204; Journal of Investigative Dermatology, December 2005, pages 364–368;
and Journal of Vascular Surgery, October 1999, pages 734–743).
Turning 50 does not mean a woman should assume that her skin is drying up and
that she must therefore begin using “mature” skin-care products. After all, those are
almost always just products that are designed for dry skin, and are in no way differ-
ent from any of the other skin-care products for dry skin on the market. Besides, for
many women over 50 (including me), it definitely does not mean that the battle with
blemishes is over. Let me just reiterate this: There are no products designed for older
women that address any special needs other than dry skin!
4. Myth: Products labeled as “hypoallergenic” are better for sensitive skin.
Fact: “Hypoallergenic” is little more than a nonsense word. In the world of cos-
metics, this term is nothing more than an advertising contrivance meant to imply that
a product is unlikely or less likely to cause allergic reactions and therefore is better forsensitive or problem skin. To “imply” is never the same as to state a “fact,” and in this
situation it is patently untrue that products labeled “hypoallergenic” are any better for
sensitive skin! There are absolutely no accepted testing methods, ingredient restrictions,
regulations, guidelines, rules, or procedures of any kind, anywhere in the world, for
determining whether or not a product qualifies as being hypoallergenic. A company
can label their product “hypoallergenic” because there is no regulation that says they
can’t, no matter what proof they may point to—and what proof can they provide given
there is no standard to measure against? Given that there are no regulations governing
this supposed category that was made up by the cosmetics industry, there are plenty
of products labeled “hypoallergenic” that contain problematic ingredients and that
could indeed trigger allergic reactions, even for those with no previous history of skin
sensitivity. The word “hypoallergenic” gives you no reliable understanding of what
you are or aren’t putting on your skin (Sources: www.fda.gov; and Ostomy and Wound
Management, March 2003, pages 20–21).
5. Myth: “Dermatologist tested” on a cosmetics label is a good indication that the
product is reliable and can live up to the claims.
Fact: You absolutely should not rely on the “dermatologist tested” claim any
more than you should rely on the appearance of a doctor’s name on a product’s
label to indicate you are getting a superior formulation. There are many misleading
and deceptive aspects to the term “dermatologist-tested” as it’s used on a label, but at
the top of the list is that this claim does not tell you what dermatologist did the testing,
what he or she tested, how he or she performed the testing, or what the results were.
That is, they don’t tell you what they found with their supposed testing; they just tell
you that they tested it. Without all of the testing information and results, there is no
way to determine what it means. More often than not it just means that a cosmetics
company paid a doctor to say that it’s a good product (and there are lots of doctors on
the payroll of lots of cosmetics companies). Or they could actually have performed a
test, but only on six people, or used testing methods that guaranteed a positive outcome,
which happens more often that you’d think. But that hardly provides results you can rely
on. Dermatologist-tested is nothing more than a marketing gimmick because people
like to believe that doctors have the consumer’s best interest at heart. In the world of
cosmetics, however, that is not always the case.
6. Myth: Cosmeceutical companies make better products than cosmetics companies.
Fact: The term “cosmeceutical” is, sad to say, a false advertising gimmick cre-
ated by dermatologists to suggest that their “cosmeceutical” products are somehow
better than other products in the cosmetics industry. What pathetic chicanery and
deceit! At the very least what you should expect from the medical world is scientific
fact, not these fictitious, sales-oriented machinations. When you hear the word “cos-
meceutical,” you’re supposed to think a product is a blend of cosmetic ingredients and
pharmaceutical-grade ingredients and, therefore, it must be better for your skin—right?
The fact is, “cosmeceutical” is just a trumped-up word that has no legal or recognizedmeaning; it definitely has nothing to do with what the product may contain versus the
content of any “non-cosmeceutical” cosmetic. A quick comparison of ingredient lists
reveals that there is nothing any more unique or pharmaceutical about cosmeceuticals
than any other cosmetics in the cosmetics industry. Plus, the FDA does not consider
the term “cosmeceutical” to be a valid product class, so the term isn’t regulated. So you
should view it merely as a marketing term, and nothing more. Anyone can use that
term to represent their brand’s identity (Source: www.fda.gov).
Organizations like the American Academy of Dermatology have muddied the issue
even further by stating “Dermatologists know how to use cosmeceutical ingredients
and can advise their patients about the best ways to achieve healthy looking skin”
(Source: AAD, www.aad.org). I read dermatology journals every month, and I’ve been
to enough dermatology conferences to know that is absolutely not true. They haven’t
a clue. But even more to the point, dermatologists don’t agree on what makes one
product a cosmeceutical and the other not. Depending on who you talk to, products
containing retinol (or other retinoids, which are part of the vitamin A molecule), or
hydroquinone, or certain botanicals such as green tea, soy, pomegranate, curcumin,
or grape, are the gold standard. But all these ingredients are available for use by all
cosmetics companies—and indeed they show up in all kinds of products and often not
in the ones labeled cosmeceutical.
Another description tossed around maintains that a cosmeceutical contains an in-
gredient that performs some kind of special action on the skin. However, all of those
ingredients can be used by any cosmetics company, regardless of their designation or
where they’re applied.
According to the AAD, “the answer to whether or not cosmeceuticals really work
lies in the ingredients and how they interact with the biological mechanisms that occur
in aging skin.” But again, that’s true for any cosmetic. Even doctors can be seduced
by their own hype so they can sell skin-care products and market them as something
different by using a coined, misleading term.
7. Myth: Age spots are best treated with specialty skin lighteners, whiteners, or
products claiming to get rid of brown skin discolorations.
Fact: First, the term “age spot” is really a misnomer. Brown, freckle-like skin
discolorations are not a result of age; they are the result of years of unprotected sun
exposure. You can demonstrate this for yourself: just compare the skin on the parts of
your body that haven’t seen the sun (like your backside or the inner part of your arm)
with skin on the parts of your body that see the sun on a regular basis. The parts of
your body that don’t the see sun will have minimal to no skin discolorations. And keep
in mind that the bad rays of the sun also come through windows! (Sources: Journal of
Cosmetic Dermatology, September 2007, pages 195–202; Dermatology Nursing, October
2004, pages 401–413; and Age and Ageing, March 2006, pages 110–115.)
Second, a number of skin-care products that claim they can make skin whiter or
lighter more often than not contain no ingredients that can have any significant, oreven minor, impact on melanin production (melanin is the brown pigment in skin).
In addition, even when the product does contain an ingredient that can have an effect,
it usually contains such a small amount that it won’t help at all. Basically, there is no
comparison between the effects (or non-effects) of using one of these products and
using a sunscreen plus a product containing hydroquinone.
Because unprotected sun exposure is the primary trigger for most brown, freckle-like
skin discolorations, the primary way to reduce, prevent, and possibly even eliminate
skin discolorations is diligent, daily application of a well-formulated sunscreen. Be sure
not to forget the back of your hands and your chest (and be sure to reapply every time
you wash your hands, because sunscreen does wash off).
No other aspect of controlling or reducing brown skin discolorations is as important
as being careful about not getting a tan, and never exposing your skin to the sun without
using a sunscreen rated SPF 15 or more—and more is usually better. And make sure
that the sunscreen includes the UVA-protecting ingredients of titanium dioxide, zinc
oxide, avobenzone (which can also be on the label as butyl methoxydibenzoylmethane),
Tinosorb, or Mexoryl SX (which can also be on the label as ecamsule), because they
prevent the UVA damage that triggers brown spots (Source: Journal of the American
Academy of Dermatology, December 2006, pages 1048–1065).
Though I rarely express my own personal, anecdotal experience (I always rely on
scientific studies rather than guess why a positive or negative result is taking place), in
this case I will share what I do. I have found that using a sunscreen with only titanium
dioxide and zinc oxide as the active ingredients has the most impressive results. The dif-
ference in my face, arms, and hands has been significant ever since I made that change
several years ago. There is some research that supports this personal experience, but I
wish there were more science to back it up. I suspect the reason why the results may be
superior is the coverage zinc oxide or titanium dioxide provides (more like a blanket
over skin), “blocking” the sun rather than chemically converting the rays as synthetic
sunscreen agents do. Keeping the sun from penetrating into skin is the best protection
possible for skin (Sources: The Lancet, August 2007, pages 528–537; Skin Pharmacology
and Physiology, June 2005, pages 253–262; www.aad.org/public/publications/pamphlets/
common_melasma.html; and www.emedicine.com/DERM/topic260.htm).
Beyond the use of sunscreen, hydroquinone has the highest efficacy for lightening
skin, with a long history of safe use behind it, more so than any other skin-lightening
ingredient. There are other alternatives that show promise for lightening skin, but they
have been the subject of far less research and their effectiveness often pales in comparison
to that of hydroquinone. It is interesting to note that when applied to the skin some of
these alternative ingredients actually break down into small amounts of hydroquinone,
which explains why they have an effect. These alternative ingredients include Mitracar-
pus scaber extract, Uva ursi (bearberry) extract, Morus bombycis (mulberry), Morus alba
(white mulberry), and Broussonetia papyrifera (paper mulberry), all of which contain
arbutin, which can inhibit melanin production. Technically, these extracts contain
hydroquinone-beta-D-glucoside. Pure forms of arbutin, such as alpha-arbutin, beta-arbutin, and deoxy-arbutin, are considered more potent for skin lightening, but again
the research is at best limited. Other ingredients that have some amount of research on
their potential skin-lightening abilities are licorice extract (specifically glabridin), azelaic
acid, and stabilized vitamin C (L-ascorbic acid, ascorbic acid, and magnesium ascorbyl
phosphate), aloesin, gentisic acid, flavonoids, hesperidin, niacinamide, and polyphenols.
However, no one knows how much is needed in a cosmetic lotion or cream to have an
effect, and most of the research has been done in vitro, not on human skin.
To sum it up, there is a very specific game plan you can follow to get the most
impressive results; it starts with avoiding sun exposure, daily use of a well-formulated
sunscreen (365 days per year), and using a skin-care product that contains hydroqui-
none. In addition, an exfoliant (such as AHAs and BHA) can be helpful; certain laser,
intense-pulsed light, and radio wave treatments from a dermatologist or plastic surgeon
can also be extremely helpful. But, and this is an important but: If you don’t also use a
sunscreen daily you will be wasting your time and money! (Sources: Journal of Cutaneous
Medicine and Surgery, May–June 2008, pages 107–113; Journal of Investigative Derma-
tology Symposium Proceedings, April 2008, pages 20–24; Bioscience, Biotechnology, and
Biochemistry, December 2005, pages 2368–2373; Experimental Dermatology, August
2005, pages 601–608; Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering, March 2005, pages
272–276; International Journal of Dermatology, August 2004, pages 604–607; Journal of
Drugs in Dermatology, July–August 2004, pages 377–381; Dermatologic Surgery, March
2004, pages 385–388; and Facial and Plastic Surgery, February 2004, pages 3–9.)
8. Myth: Women outgrow acne; you’re not supposed to break out once you reach
your 20s and beyond!
Fact: If only that were true, my skin-care struggles in life would have been very
different. In fact, women in their 20s, 30s, 40s, and even 50s can have acne just like
teenagers, and the treatment principles remain the same. Not everyone who has acne
as a teenager will grow out of it, and even if you had clear skin as a teenager, there’s
no guarantee that you won’t get acne later in life, perhaps during menopause. You can
blame this often-maddening inconsistency on hormones! What is true is that men can
outgrow acne, because after puberty men’s hormone levels level out, while women’s
hormone levels fluctuate throughout their lifetime, which is why many women experi-
ence breakouts around their menstrual cycle (Sources: International Journal of Derma-
tology, November 2007, pages 1188–1191; American Journal of Clinical Dermatology,
May 2006, pages 281–290; and International Journal of Cosmetic Science, June 2004,
pages 129–138). There are actually lots of myths about acne; see the following for a
few corollaries to Myth #8.
9. Myth: Acne is caused by eating the wrong foods.
Fact: This is both true and false. The traditional foods thought to cause acne, such
as chocolate and greasy foods, have no effect on acne, and there is no research indicat-
ing otherwise. However, there is the potential that individual dietary allergic reactions
can trigger acne, such as eating foods that contain iodine, like shellfish, although thereis an ongoing controversy about that. A bit more conclusive is new research showing
that milk, especially skim milk, can increase the risk of acne. The same may be true
for a diet high in carbohydrates; a high glycemic load can increase breakouts, while
a low glycemic load can reduce their occurrence. (Glycemic load is a ranking system
for the amount of carbohydrates in a food portion; too many carbs in your diet could
trigger breakouts.) Experimenting for a few months to see which of these food groups
either hurt or help your skin is worth the effort (Sources: Molecular Nutrition and Food
Research, June 2008, pages 718–726; Dermatologic Therapy, March–April 2008, pages
86–95; Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, May 2008, pages 787–793;
and Dermatology Online Journal, May 30, 2006).
10. Myth: If you clean your face better you can clear up your acne.
Fact: Over-cleaning your face can actually make matters worse. Acne is caused
primarily by hormonal fluctuations that affect the oil gland, creating an environment
where acne-causing bacteria (Propionibacterium acnes) can flourish. Don’t confuse scrub-
bing or “deep cleaning” with helping acne, because it absolutely doesn’t. Over-cleansing
your face triggers inflammation that can actually make acne worse. What really helps
breakouts is using a gentle cleanser so you don’t damage your skin’s outer barrier or create
inflammation, both of which hinder your skin’s ability to heal and fight bacteria, along
with using gentle exfoliation. An effective exfoliating product that contains salicylic acid
or glycolic acid can make all the difference in reducing acne when used with a topical
disinfectant containing benzoyl peroxide. None of these products should contain any
irritating ingredients whatsoever, and particularly not alcohol, menthol, peppermint, or
eucalyptus. (Sources: Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology Venereology, May
2008, pages 629–631; Expert Opinion in Pharmacotherapy, April 2008, pages 955–971;
International Journal of Dermatology, March 2008, pages 301–302; Journal of Cosmetic
Dermatology, March 2007, pages 59–65; Cutis, July 2006, Supplemental, pages 34–40;
and Skin Pharmacology and Physiology, June 2006, pages 296–302.)
11. Myth: Makeup causes acne.
Fact: Probably not. There is no research indicating that makeup or skin-care prod-
ucts cause acne, and there is no consensus on which ingredients are problematic. In the
late 1970s there was some research performed on rabbit skin using 100% concentra-
tions of ingredients to determine whether or not they caused acne. Subsequently, it
was determined that this study had nothing to do with the way women wear makeup
or use skin-care products, and it was never repeated or considered useful in any way.
Still, women do experience breakouts after using some skin-care or makeup products
(or a random combination of both—I know I do). Such breakouts can be the result of
an irritant or an inflammatory response, a random skin reaction, or a result of prob-
lematic ingredients unique to a person’s skin type. That means you have to experiment
to see what might be causing your breakouts. There is no information from medical
research or the cosmetics industry to help or point you in the right direction. And just
so you know, “noncomedogenic” is a meaningless word the cosmetics industry uses toindicate that a product is less likely to cause breakouts; the problem is no standards or
regulations have been set up to describe this category.
