Deep Cleansing Pore Strips (2020 formulation) safety rating

Deep Cleansing Pore Strips (2020 formulation) safety rating | Greenlens

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 30-point gap between the two loudest voices.

65ANSES Endocrine DisruptorsGovernment

vs

95Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent

050100

See why, ingredient by ingredient

All 953 cleaner options, safest first We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

30 pts apart

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 →
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 · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist

Environmental

Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

Labor

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

Coverage & match quality

6 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

Robust11 of 12 characterized

Our sources have reference data on 11 of 12 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

Worth a look (1)

TITANIUM DIOXIDEuv filter · uv absorber · colorantraters disagree
ANSES CMR-listedflagged by 5 of 9 lists →

No flags in our sources (10)

No data in our sources (1)

LEAF EXTRACT

Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.

What these ingredient tags mean (1)

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

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".

Where this came from

Cruelty-free status recorded from us.biore.com ↗

Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.