Did I 'Slag Off' the NATIO cosmetics brand?

Did I 'slag off' the NATIO cosmetics brand in a previous article on this blog? One person seems to think so.

Here's the transcript of a conversation carried out online between myself and a NATIO employee who took issue with an article I wrote last year, entitled: "NATIO's Paraben Hypocrisy."

Read the original article here.

Did I go too far? Am I, in my self-given mission of education women about the beauty industry, 'slagging off' cosmetic companies? I won't say any more for now, but will let you in on our conversation, so you can join it. Please comment at the end.  Note: Name of correspondent removed. Text otherwise unedited.

START

21 August at 09:48

Hello

Just a quick email to you re a web site you have written about the australian natio products.

http://abeautifuleducation.blogspot.com/2009/03/natios-paraben-hypocrisy.html

After reading your blog I checked to what you had written and I think you've made a mistake. There are disclaimers stating that 'no parabens' are used in conjuction with... MINERAL MAKEUP.... NOT SKINCARE! Your web site details I believe need ammending.

False accusations can cause problems... its not worth it :)

Just thought I'd mention before the company find your site... your easily traced back to here with your link :)

Lillybeth Melmoth 21 August at 11:12

That's correct [name].

I was stating it is misleading to market one product on the merits of it not containing parabens, when other products they make do contain parabens. By claiming their mineral makeup is paraben-free they are misleading consumers into:

1) believing there is something wrong/unsafe about parabens (of which there is no conclusive evidence, they are playing on a fear largely provoked by media hype perpetuated by the cosmetic industry)

and

2) the consumers may assume that if the company is declaring parabens unsafe or undesirable, their other items would also be paraben free, which they are not.

So it's not a false accusation - it's my opinion that their marketing in this way leads the customer to assume two untruths.

Does that change your response to the article now?

Warmest regards,

Lillybeth

Lillybeth Melmoth 21 August at 11:13

And if you wish you can add comments to the blog or to the posts here on facebook and I'll respond in public. :-)

22 August at 06:36

i dont mind and dont need to publicise my notes to you. you do however need to re jog your working. You show me one piece of information WRITTEN on th products or the natio website styating ALL products are baraben free... your wording is in accurate, i do understand now what you were trying to say.. but its not come across correctly :)

22 August at 06:37

iv looked again and no where on their site state that they say parabens are unsafe.

Lillybeth Melmoth 22 August at 09:12

I never state they explicitly STATE parabens are not safe. I've already explained it is IMPLIED. It's not against any laws to advertise like this, I'm just saying it's a little hypocritical.

However, some people do have a reaction to parabens and would seek out paraben-free products, but to the average consumer the claim of being paraben-free is a subtle scare tactic. A real paraben-free seeker would check the label.

It's my blog. I can write anything I like without false accusing, which I do not do. If you choose to interpret incorrectly that is not my error. I'm confident there's nothing illegal or worthy of prosecution on my blog. Take it to your bosses in Australia. Maybe then they'd changed the wording.

All the best,

Lillybeth.

22 August at 09:19

You are very arrogant, even though you know your wrong howeve not admiting the fact ..i wont be messaging you again, but will be keeping a little eye on you, informing ALL compnaies you' slag off' from now on.

END

Toxic Beauty - Campbell Live, TV3, March 16th

'Synthetic chemicals in our skincare.' 'Harmful toxins in beauty products.'

Saying that parabens have been found in breast tissue is kind of like passing on that hypey, scaremongering email you received as a forward in your inbox.



I've decided not to write a response to Toxic Beauty here: how synthetic ingredients can actually be safer than natural ones, why parabens aren't evil (or at least have little conclusive evidence against them) and the fact that EVERYTHING ON EARTH has chemicals in it, because, why reinvent the wheel?

Paula Begoun has decades of experience and research behind her in the field of cosmetics: the science and the ingredients in them. I'm happy to recommend her website where you can read hundreds of balanced and fascinating articles on this very topic. You could start with this article on 'natural' ingredients.

The Beauty Brains in another fave of mine. They are female cosmetic scientists who apply science to every beauty-related question and product they come across, then dish the dirt to their readers. Posing dilemmas like Why You Should Be Suspicious Of Beauty Authorities, Does Origins Skin Care Open Your Pores?, Can Saliva Cure Acne? and The Top 5 Reasons Skin Care Products Stop Working, they can help you avoid the marketing 'BS' so common in the beauty industry.

Go there now! I promise you'll thank me. :-)

NATIO's Paraben Hypocrisy

Walking past the pharmacy in Tauranga Hospital, I was (rather easily!) enticed off my path and into the store when I noticed the pretty stand of NATIO cosmetics. A relatively new brand, NATIO is a reasonably priced "bridge-brand"; designed to fill the gap between supermarket and department store brands. Natio's tagline is "Natural Australian Beauty", although in the FAQ on their website you can read the following:

Quote:

Q: Are Natio products 100% natural?

A: Natio creates skincare and cosmetics that combine the best of nature and science. We use botanical extracts instead of mineral oils, and pure essential oils to fragrance the products. We also avoid animal testing and ingredients derived from animals. However, we do use the best compounded stabilizers to ensure that our products reaches you without contamination and remains pure until your very last drop.

End quote.

In other words, the answer is 'no.' But that's OK! 'Natural' doesn't equal 'better' or 'safer'. So let's see what stabilisers they are refering to here...

What they refer to here as 'stabilisers' are chemical preservatives they use in their products, predominantly from the group of chemicals called parabens. Parabens have gotten a bad rap in recent years-but most of it without conclusive scientific evidence- so as far as we know, they're not all bad. In fact, if a product isn't preserved somehow, it would last as long as a forgotten banana in the staffroom fridge, become susceptible to bacteria, fungus and mould and make you sick.

( You can read what 'the Cosmetics Cop', Paula Begoun, has to say on parabens. She explains the fears and the reality HERE)

So why then does the display for their mineral loose powder foundation say:


NATIO Mineral Loose Foundation.

PURE

No parabens, No talc...(and something else I can't remember, perhaps no synthetic dyes or something).

See!??! No Parabens!

So I go around the counter to the shelves of skin care, pick up a night time moisturiser, quickly scan the label and find methylparaben and a couple of other parabens listed in the ingredients! The same is found to be true for the eye cream and other products.

WHY, Oh, WHY would they make a 'no paraben' claim a selling point for their foundation, when they add parabens to their skin care products?

Marketing products like this is simply hypocritical.

The way they advertise this product is unethical as it plays on the consumer's prejudice against and misunderstanding of parabens and leads the customer to assume that if NATIO says "paraben-free = pure", then the entire range would be paraben-free, which is not the case.

So, if you come across the NATIO range, have a play with their makeup; enjoy the gorgeous lip colours and shimmery eye shadows, but don't be fooled by their 'natural' greenwashing. It's an attempt to take the moral high-ground which, in this case, is unnecessary AND untrue.

RELATED ARTICLE:  Read the discussion between myself and a NATIO employee who took issue with this article here.