Lessons I've Learned Since Leaving Facebook

It's been almost exactly half a year since I did some serious social media housecleaning. It was a decision that didn't come lightly, but something had to give if I was to have enough time to concentrate more fully on the things I love most: formulating, researching, experimenting in the lab, and creating content for my e-books, blogs, and courses.

As part of the big clean-up, I dumped:

• Twitter

• Pinterest

• LinkedIn

• Facebook

Almost everything went smoothly, except, as you have probably guessed, leaving Facebook.

Today, I'm going to share a bit about my experience of terminating all of my Facebook activities .

These were

• My Personal Facebook Page

• Facebook Messenger

• LisaLise Facebook Business Page

• LisaLise Facebook Shop

• LisaLise Facebook Group

The only social media account I decided to hang on to was Instagram (which is owned by the Facebook folks). That tidbit of information is going to be relevant in a moment.

Instead of shutting down the group, it was passed to my lovely colleague, Vivienne Campbell of the Herbal Hub where it continues to thrive, now under the name Natural Cosmetics Forum with Vivienne & Friends).

Lesson 1: Leaving Facebook Doesn't Mean Missing Out

A lot of people have asked if leaving Facebook has made me feel like I am missing out. I admit there was a fabulous community spirit in the group (that I am informed continues under Vivienne's caring guidance).

And who doesn't love a warm and welcoming community spirit?

However, during my time on Facebook, I seriously neglected the community forum at Formulators Kitchen (which made me feel all kinds of guilty as I am the founder). With no Facebook to distract, there has been time to use more energy in 'the Kitchen'. As a result, we have experienced an influx of wonderful new members.

So, leaving Facebook (even the lovely group) has had a positive outcome for me. It feels more rewarding to be spending my community-online-time on the Kitchen.

If you're interested in becoming a Kitchen member (it's free), please visit this page.

We'd be happy to welcome you.

Lesson Two: Don't Believe Everything (or anything?) Facebook Tells You

Hold on to your hat, because this is something I’m still trying to work out.

Even though Facebook clearly warns 'this will permanently delete your content and messages' when you click on 'delete my account', Facebook doesn't seem to do anything of the kind. Instead, it simply stashes EVERYTHING you have ever input on their platform 'somewhere' and makes it completely unaccessible.

I experienced this on Instagram. (This is where that tidbit of information comes in)

Here's how.

Anyone with both a Facebook shop and Instagram account (which I had), can connect (tag) Facebook shop items directly in an Instagram post. Instagram viewers will see a little shop icon that they can click on which brings them directly to the item ... in the Facebook shop.

The funny thing is, Instagram does this even when the Facebook shop no longer exists.

Confused yet?

I still am.

Almost 6 months after deleting my Facebook shop, all of the products are still visible (and active) on my Instagram account. I know they are active because I can still tag products and still view the whole shop.

Interesting, eh?

When I go into my Instagram settings, I can (still) find an active link called 'manage shop'. Clicking on it results in a page where products can be added, managed, promoted, etc.

Since the shop is visible on Instagram, one might imagine it should be editable, so I have tried clicking on ‘add products’, but this brings me to a page that says 'something went wrong - try again later' .

I have 'tried again later'. Numerous times. The same message pops up every time.

Since the shop was (is?) ‘deleted’ from Facebook, it stands to reason one would need to contact Facebook about this, but in order to contact Facebook, one must have a Facebook account.

And that is where I draw the line.

Opening a new Facebook account to ask them why they didn’t ‘permanently delete’ the accounts and activities I ALREADY DELETED seems completely counterproductive.

Leaving Facebook apparently involves much more than clicking delete, but they don’t tell you what it is (unless it’s stated somewhere in the 600 page ‘terms and conditions’ you have to agree to in order to use their platform).

This all reminds me of the line from the song Hotel California:

"You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave"

I think my biggest regret at this point is that I didn't take the time to delete every single post and item individually before deleting each account. But come to think of it, who knows if that would have made any difference at all.

Welcome to the Hotel California. (here’s a link to the original song by the Eagles)

Do Tell

If you have had any experiences like this, I'd love to hear about them in a comment below. And if you want to read more about why I decided to leave Facebook in the first place, I wrote a post about it right here.

PS: If you want to follow me on Instagram, click any of the pictures below to visit my Instagram page.

LisaLise Newsletter

Sign up for the LisaLise Newsletter to stay in the loop about ingredients and processes. You’ll also get formulating tips & tricks, free formulas and how-to’s and loads of natural cosmetic inspiration.

Natural Preservatives That Aren't

Today, we're going to take a look at an article I happened across a while back in a natural beauty e-zine. The description promised to 'reveal which natural ingredients could function as preservatives for homemade beauty products'.

This sounded interesting.

And it was.

I was impressed at how much misinformation could be packed into one article. There wasn't a fact in sight.

Everything was so incorrect, I started looking for information to contact the publisher. But there was no address, email or phone anywhere to be found. Then I noticed the author was listed only by first name: 'Sharon'.

This was enough to raise not just one, but a whole series of red flags.

Let's have a look at each of Sharons 'all natural, easily available preservatives', shall we?

Beeswax is Not a Preservative

Beeswax adds structure to products such as lip balms, and can also be used to thicken creams and lotions. In anhydrous products (where beeswax may be present), there is no need of preservative.

In the food industry, beeswax is sometimes be used to coat cheeses - effectively sealing out the air and thereby providing protection against ageing.

And all of this is great, but it doesn't make beeswax a preservative.

On its own, beeswax has a pretty long shelf life, but having a long shelf life doesn't make it a preservative either.

Sorry Sharon, beeswax does not belong on this list.

Vitamin E Oil is Not a Preservative

The very name of this ingredient is a bit misleading. I think the author meant vitamin E, and not vitamin E oil (which can be a carrier/fatty oil with added vitamin E).

Vitamin E (tocopherol) is an antioxidant, not a preservative.

Antioxidants help retard the rancidity of plant oils and fats.

Antioxidants do not stop bacterial growth or keep pathogens at bay.

Antioxidants are not preservatives.

Sharon my dear, neither Vitamin E nor Vitamin E oil can be classified as preservatives.

Rosemary Oil is Not a Preservative

I am in doubt as to whether the author meant Rosemary Essential Oil, Rosemary Oleoresin, Rosemary Leaf Extract, or Rosemary Antioxidant.

Regardless - none of these are preservatives.

Rosemary contains antioxidants – which is not the same as being a preservative.

Rosemary antioxidant is - as the name reveals - an antioxidant and can be used to help slow down the rancidity of oils (in the same way as vitamin E).

In food, rosemary has a history of use for helping meat stay fresh longer, but that still doesn't make it a preservative for use in DIY cosmetics - regardless of its form.

Sorry Sharon - rosemary 'oil' is not a preservative.

Essential Oils are Not Preservatives

The author listed all of the following essential oils as preservatives:

• Thyme

• Oregano

• Lavender

• Lemon

• Rosemary

• Benzoin

• Eucalyptus

• Clove

• Sage

• Tea tree

While it is correct that essential oils are unpreserved and have a relatively long shelf life (especially when stored optimally), that doesn't make them preservatives. This would be like claiming sunflower oil or clay can be used as preservatives.

Although some essential oils have antimicrobial properties, no essential oil can be used as an effective preservative without exceeding a safe level of use by up to several thousand percent. In short, trying to preserve a product using essential oils would make the product unsafe to use.

Oh dear Sharon, this claim is not only dead wrong, but also potentially dangerous.

Grapefruit Seed Extract is Not a Preservative

I can kind of forgive the author for this one as there are some suppliers selling grapefruit seed extract as a preservative. The problem is, they aren't being up front about what's actually in their product.

Grapefruit seed extract doesn't have any antimicrobial function on its own. It needs the addition of preservatives in order to function as a preservative.

Read that again: you have to add preservatives to grapefruit seed extract in order for it to preserve anything.

"The efficacy of grapefruit seed extract as a preservative has been shown to be due to the addition of preservatives such as benzalkonium chloride, triclosan and/or methylparaben." (REF)

Analysis of some commercially sold grapefruit seed extracts show that they are adulterated with the addition of preservatives (REF)

This product should be on a buyer beware list as it is necessary to thoroughly research what you are buying and whether or not you can legally claim your product is 'all natural' if you want to use grapefruit seed extract in your cosmetics.

The Time I Tried it as a Stand-alone Preservative

Years ago, one of my suppliers offered an 'all new natural preservative' (they had given it another name, but the label revealed it was grapefruit seed extract). I ordered some to test it out.

Within a month, my supplier issued a warning to all of their customers. It appeared that the new preservative was non-functional.

The week before, I had made a small test batch of cream that had been placed on my observation shelf. Directly after reading the warning, I opened and checked one of the jars. There was a thick green growth covering a third of the surface.

That was my first (and maybe last) experience with grapefruit seed extract as a 'preservative'.

Sorry, Sharon, but you totally struck out. Nothing you wrote was correct. I can only hope nobody read your article.

I debated with myself whether or not to add a link, but decided there was no reason to contribute to the spread of misinformation.

Have a safe day.

LisaLise Newsletter

Sign up for the LisaLise Newsletter to stay in the loop about ingredients and processes. You’ll also get formulating tips & tricks, free formulas and how-to’s and loads of natural cosmetic inspiration.

PS: If you want to create your own self preserving cosmetics, this bundle offer might be just the thing.

Self Preserving BUNDLE

Tip-ins and Fairy Dust

We're going to talk about ingredients and fractions today. I am in my cynical corner, but I'll try to be nice. (Come to think of it, no, I probably won’t).

Some ingredients are added to commercially manufactured products solely for one purpose, and that is to make the marketing and legal departments happy.

The marketing and legal departments are happy when they can advertise Cosmetic Product X now contains ingredient Y without the risk of being sued for false advertising:

• 'Now With Real Essential Oils'

• 'Contains Argan Oil'

• ‘With Soothing Aloe Vera’

This practice is nothing new.

The ingredients in question are often referred to amongst folks in the industry as tip-ins or fairy dust.

Tip-ins are present in such minuscule amounts that they would never in a million years be able to 'make hair softer' or 'skin smoother' or do anything else useful to the consumer.

In order to meet legal requirements, tip-ins are added at a minimum of 0.05% of the total formula.

Yes, you read that correctly: 0.05%

Shall we spell that out for clarity? Five hundredths of one percent.

That’s about the same as adding a grain of sugar to a pot of tea and pawning it off as ‘sugar sweetened’.

Is five hundredths of a percent of argan oil in a conditioner going to have any effect at all?

Nope.

If your hair does feel silkier after trying the 'now with genuine argan oil' conditioner, what you are in all likelihood experiencing is the (much cheaper and 100% synthetic) silicone listed on the ingredients label waaaay before you see argan oil listed.

Ingredients used as tip-ins are (as you may imagine) often on the pricier end of the scale, so the manufacturer is also happy about being able to generate sales with legal claims while keeping production costs at an absolute minimum.

In short, tip-ins and fairy dust are only win win win for the manufacturer. The consumer is duped and shortchanged every time.

Can you tell I find the practice distasteful, dishonest, and unethical?

To me, using tip-ins and fairy dust has nothing to do with producing quality products and everything to do with misleading consumers for the sole purpose of profit.

If this was a once in a while occurrence, I might not be writing about it (again) but tip-ins are unfortunately (still) common practice in the industry.

Do Indie Companies?

In stark contrast, most artisan companies will bend over backwards and do everything they can to avoid cutting back on the most expensive ingredients ‘just’ to lower production costs.

How do I know?

Because many of my clients struggle with this exact issue and ask me for guidance. I have yet to meet one who isn't in personal agony over not being able to include more of 'the good stuff' if they need to adjust their formula to lower production costs.

If you didn’t think indie beauty companies were that passionate about their products and their work, I can assure you they are.

Perhaps that's part of the reason the green beauty movement continues to grow. Consumers seem to prefer quality products to mass-manufactured fairy tales.

I can only hope the continued growth of green beauty companies and increasing number of label-reading-savvy consumers will eventually cause mainstream manufacturers to stop their practice of tip-ins and fairy dust altogether.

I think after all these years, it’s about time.

Do Tell

Have you had to adjust your formulation to meet a lower production cost? Please share in a comment below.

PS: The book below was written for artisan cosmetic makers and helps you get set up, sanitised and organised.

Good Manufacturing Practice for the Artisan Lab

LisaLise Newsletter

Sign up for the LisaLise Newsletter to stay in the loop about ingredients and processes. You’ll also get formulating tips & tricks, free formulas and how-to’s and loads of natural cosmetic inspiration.

Plastic Shaming

Today, I'm ranting about something I call plastic shaming. There seems to be an ever increasing amount of it going on in the green beauty world. If it isn’t a blogpost, it’s a podcast or article with a headline like:

• 'Has your (indie beauty) company ditched plastic yet?'

• 'If you care about the planet, don’t even consider plastic packaging'

• 'Check your company's (and your own) carbon footprint - how much plastic can you dump?’

Here's how I read every one of these:

'You should feel guilty, inadequate, and ashamed of yourself for not doing enough to be environmentally friendly and save the planet - regardless of how hard you may already be trying.'

Plastic shaming.

I realise headlines such as the examples above are designed to create action (and function as click bait), but I am convinced this kind of guilt inducing phrasing is detrimental to indie beauty companies (as well as everyone else).

Let's put a few things into perspective here.

Comparing Global Sales in 2020

The natural beauty industry has boomed over the past decade and (happily) continues to rise. In 2020, global sales of natural and organic cosmetics reached $18.5 billion (REF)

You may be asking how many of the bigger cosmetic companies are included in these numbers. I did, but couldn’t find a specific enough answer, so I am assuming it’s all the smaller indie companies and any company who label themselves (or their products) as green/organic/natural.

Now, $18.5 billion is definitely not peanuts, but let’s compare it with something else that sells globally.

I went looking for something with similar packaging considerations to compare with the natural beauty industry. Similar packing considerations = functional, safe, non-toxic, approved for food/cosmetics, shipping-friendly, etc.

I ended up with a single company that I'm pretty sure needs no introduction: Coca Cola.

Their revenue / global sales in 2020 was $33.01 billion (REF)

That's almost twice ($14.5 billion more than) the entire natural beauty industry, but since we're (mainly) focusing on packaging and plastic, let's look a few details.

Coca Cola sells 1.9 billion servings of coke per day. (REF) (REF)

Every. Single. Day.

Packaging Choices and Pollution

A good portion* of the 1.9 billion servings Coca Cola sells daily are packaged in plastic.

*(I couldn’t find exact numbers of cans vs bottles - feel free to pop information in a comment below if you have it)

When the company started in the 1950's, their bottles were made of glass (and there was a return deposit of 2 cents for each bottle).

But today, they only use plastic bottles. (REF)

They don't use recycled plastic (yet) either . (REF)

Interestingly, they don’t seem the least bit willing to ditch the plastic bottles because, as Bea Perez of Cocoa Cola stated in Davos in 2020:

'Consumers still want them'.

She went on to explain

'Business wont be in business if we don't accommodate consumers' (REF)

I’d be curious to see how their consumer tests were designed in order to be able to arrive at this conclusion. Despite years of massive global campaigns on reducing plastic waste, Coca Cola's customers all apparently 'still want plastic'.

Maybe indie beauty customers (who can be vehement about their choices) don’t drink coke?

1.9 billion servings every day is equal to one daily serving for approximately every 5th person on the planet.

Even accounting for the fact that some of these servings are in cans, that's a lot of plastic. And much of it has ended up in the environment.

Coca Cola ranked among the top plastic polluters in the world for 3 years running (REF)

Perspective: The Big Guys vs Indie Beauty Companies

While there (still) don’t seem to be any genuine plastic-reducing considerations going on at Coca Cola, indie beauty companies are being bombarded relentlessly with plastic shaming headlines and demands to ‘show kindness to our planet’.

Does that seem even remotely fair?

I find it so ridiculously off kilter, I had to write about it.

Am I saying indie companies shouldn’t worry about plastic packaging because one big company is plastic-polluting the world more on a daily basis than the entire green beauty industry?

No, because that wouldn’t be very productive at all. We all have to do our part to show respect for our planet and conserve our environment.

So, instead of plastic shaming indie beauty companies for not doing enough, I am hereby giving you all a well deserved shout out for being the hardest working, most dedicated, ethical, and caring folks this planet could wish for.

I happen to know exactly how much you agonize over every raw material choice and every single packaging decision because you have told me in person time and time again during our many consultations and in online groups and discussion forums.

You most certainly don't deserve to be plastic shamed – you are already making the world a better place.

And having seen how one of 'the big guys' does it, you can now go pat yourselves on the back for actually walking the walk about your company's packaging choices.

Keep doing exactly what you are doing!

There's a Better Way

We can all make a positive difference in reducing plastic waste and improving the environment, but I believe shaming the very people who are already doing their darndest to make a difference in this area just isn't the way forward.

Thanks for reading.

Do Tell

Do you feel plastic-shamed? Please share your thoughts in a comment below.

More Plastic Stuff

This article from 2019 reveals how much plastic a few of the largest companies use per year. Coca Cola uses 3 million tons per year (REF)

The entire soft drink industry produces 470 billion plastic bottles every year. Cocoa Cola is responsible for almost a quarter of this amount. (REF)

BBC: Coca Cola Reveals How Much Plastic it Uses (LINK)

More stats on the beauty industry (LINK)

LisaLise Newsletter

Sign up for the LisaLise Newsletter to stay in the loop about ingredients and processes. You’ll also get formulating tips & tricks, free formulas and how-to’s and loads of natural cosmetic inspiration.

Which Consumer Labels Can We Trust?

Sometimes, researching presents me with information I am not the least bit happy to discover, like some of the information in todays post.

Let's examine a term that's been around so long, it's a part of our everyday life. It's found on labels everywhere – household products, products for pets, and for children.

The term: Non-Toxic.

Most of us understand 'Non-toxic' as a stamp of approval and assurance of safety. When we see a product labelled NON TOXIC, we feel confident that the contents is safe and can't cause the slightest bit of discomfort to either adults or children, nor will it harm the environment in any way.

Non-toxic means all that, right?

Unfortunately, no.

It's Not as Simple as That

A non-toxic label on a product doesn't mean a blessed thing. There is no industry standard, no government regulatory department, or even a consumer group that takes responsibilty for approving this term/stamp/label for any consumer product in the USA.

A definition:

"A non-toxic substance is one that is not expected to cause symptoms or be dangerous." (LINK)

The American website, Finch writes:

"To be honest, ‘non-toxic’ doesn’t actually mean much of anything." (LINK)

What science does to determine safety levels is to measure adverse effects. If a substance is determined to be 'non-toxic', it is labelled NOAEL (No Observed Adverse Effect Level).

Finch explains further:

"The NOAEL is the highest amount of a chemical an organism can be exposed to before it begins showing some sort of toxic response, like getting sick or developing a rash. (LINK)

In short – a label that reads non-toxic is completely misleading.

American Solutions

In the US, the Art and Creative Materials Institute (ACMI) are concentrating on a different kind of label – their own. ACMI seals include an AP (Approved Product) seal, which

"identifies art materials that are safe and that are certified in a toxicological evaluation by a medical expert to contain no materials in sufficient quantities to be toxic or injurious to humans, including children, or to cause acute or chronic health problems."

From what I have been able to find, these folks seem very serious about safety. Visit their site here

In Effect in Denmark

In my little country of Denmark, there are many labelling standards for consumer products – and many of them overlap. We have Denmark-specific safety-labels, Scandinavian-specific labels, and then there are the numerous pan-European labels.

For example, the labels commonly seen on childrens products inform of a variety of safety-related issues. Behind most of these labels is an organisation or group.

As reassuring as that may sound, Denmark (and Europe) are still far from perfect.

Info tidbit: The Danish Ministry of Environment places responsibility for correct labelling of any product in the hands of the company that markets the product and not – as one might expect – in the hands of the manufacturer of the product. (visit them here)

Read that again and consider how many bits of information and documentation can 'go missing' between the manufacture and delivery of, say, a product for babies or toddlers.

I'm not very happy about admitting this, but many of the labels I see on products in Denmark (and Europe) don't give me any sense of security at all.

There are additional reasons why.

Whatever You Need - Just Let us Know!

This little incident from a few years ago may help explain my skepticism.

I was looking into buying some cosmetics containers from a foreign manufacturer 'across the planet' (I'm not going to mention the country) and needed to be able to apply a specific label to the packaging. When I asked for information and documentation that the containers were phtalate-free, the manufacturer (proudly!) replied they only needed to see a copy of any original document from anywhere and would within a short period of time be able offer me 'any kind of documentation I desired'.

I asked the same question differently a few times to be sure I wasn’t misunderstanding.

I wasn’t.

Their representative in Denmark didn’t seem very pleased to learn what he had just learned either.

So much for my confidence in that manufacturer. (and I still have no clue as to whether their containers were phtalate free or not).

One has to wonder how many companies have bought containers from this manufacturer and affixed any number of labels to their 'safe and non-toxic' products?

Checking a Label is Easier said than Done

When someone suggests you 'read the label' for information, it may be necessary to do a bit more digging to get a full understanding of what any of it means - regardless of where on the planet you live.

Meantime, the NON TOXIC label remains on my ‘labels not to trust’ list.

Do Tell

Do you trust the labels you read? How do you research the ones you are unsure of? Please share in a comment below.

LisaLise Newsletter

Sign up for the LisaLise Newsletter to stay in the loop about ingredients and processes. You’ll also get formulating tips & tricks, free formulas and how-to’s and loads of natural cosmetic inspiration.