Calm + Restore Age Renewal Anti-Wrinkle Under Eye Gel safety rating

Calm + Restore Age Renewal Anti-Wrinkle Under Eye Gel safety rating | Greenlens

All 312 cleaner options, safest first We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

raters agree

Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

Also screened, nothing found: California Proposition 65 · IARC Monographs · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens

Environmental

Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

Labor

Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Aveeno as a company and applies to everything they make, not this product alone. Checked this week. about this rater →

Coverage & match quality

5 ratings · 2 of 4 axes

Some ratings rest on an automatic match that has not been human-reviewed.
Fewer raters reach smaller-brand products, so a missing rating is not a clean bill of health, only a gap.

Weighted by what you care about

Tune your weights

composite recomputes live

Ingredient safety1.0×

Environmentalno rating

No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.

Labor1.0×

Packagingno rating

No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.

0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.

Ingredients, decoded

Data availability

Robust17 of 17 characterized

Our sources have reference data on all 17 listed ingredients.

Worth a look (2)

Polyacrylamidefilm forming · antistatic · bindingraters disagree
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Citric Acid

No flags in our sources (15)

What these ingredient tags mean (3)

These describe what an ingredient is, not whether it is a problem. The stance marks above are the ratings; these are not.

rich occlusiveDimethicone
- Dimethicone: A silicone that forms a film on the surface of the skin without an oily feel. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(g), lists dimethicone as a skin protectant at 1 to 30%.
humectantGlycerin
- Glycerin: A humectant, and one of the two ingredients a comparison of moisturiser components found made a significant difference to skin hydration. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(h), lists glycerin as a skin protectant at 20 to 45%. On the humectant half: Jeong CB, Han JY, Cho JC, Suh KD, Nam GW, "Analysis of electrical property changes of skin by oil-in-water emulsion components", Int J Cosmet Sci 2013;35(4):402-410, DOI 10.1111/ics.12059, PMID 23621673, found that "glycerine and urea showed significant skin hydration effects compared with other humectants".
soothingNiacinamide, Avena Sativa Kernel Flour
- Niacinamide: A vitamin B3 form that supports the skin barrier and has anti-inflammatory activity; it turns up in products aimed at acne, rosacea and eczema. Camillo L, Zavattaro E, Savoia P, "Nicotinamide: A Multifaceted Molecule in Skin Health and Beyond", Medicina (Kaunas) 2025;61(2):254, DOI 10.3390/medicina61020254, PMID 40005371, open access: it "is extensively used in ... the treatment of dermatological conditions such as blistering diseases, atopic dermatitis, rosacea, and acne vulgaris", and contributes to reducing inflammation. On the acne evidence specifically: Liu H, Yu H, Xia J, Liu L, Liu GJ, Sang H, Peinemann F, "Topical azelaic acid, salicylic acid, nicotinamide, sulphur, zinc and fruit acid (alpha-hydroxy acid) for acne", Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020;5:CD011368, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD011368.pub2, PMID 32356369, records "low-quality evidence" for every nicotinamide comparison it could pool, and none of its four nicotinamide studies measured the physician global assessment at all.