All about solid cosmetics

franceinfo: Why did you decide to deal with this dossier on solid cosmetics? Is this a booming market?

Adelaide Robert-Geraudel: Yes, the offer is increasing, you can find them everywhere, in organic stores like supermarkets. They meet the current expectations of consumers: namely more natural products, often organic, with less packaging and therefore more environmentally friendly. They are part of the sustainable consumption movement.

Ecological because, in particular, there is no more packaging. But what about the composition of these products? Are they healthier than conventional products?

This is what we wanted to verify at 60 Million consumers, because a solid cosmetic requires really different formulations. It’s not just a formulation that has had most of its water content removed, and we were concerned that there was a bit of greenwashing and false promises, and the good news is, in the together we do indeed have formulations that are lighter than in conventional cosmetics, with fewer ingredients, and formulations that are more respectful of the environment (even if this is a little less true for shampoos).

We still have some irritating or allergenic substances. And care must be taken not to consider these cosmetics as natural and therefore harmless: there are many products with essential oils that are at risk in young children and pregnant women, but the results remain positive.

So less packaging, compositions that you find satisfactory. A change of habits. But are they effective, these solid cosmetics? Because you point out some limits, especially for shampoos, toothpastes?

The little weak point of solid cosmetics, for the moment, in any case, it can actually be efficiency. The question, for the toothpastes that we raised, is that we saw that we had a lot of them that were fluoride-free. However, fluoride is toxic in high doses, but its interest has nevertheless been demonstrated in small doses on the prevention of dental caries. This can be compensated with better quality brushing. But it’s true that we found it a shame not to see sometimes on the packaging. It wasn’t very clearly indicated that there was no fluoride, whereas that can be a real criterion of choice for people who have a high risk of caries.

Then, we also saw on some, a strong abrasiveness, which can damage the enamel. Then, shampoos or even a little deodorant. They were a little disappointing in the usage tests. The testers judged that, overall, they judge the effectiveness to be correct, but in the end, when asked the question after a month of use, what do you prefer? What you have just tested or your conventional shampoos; they prefer conventional shampoo.

For deodorants too, you say there may be a practical limit. It is not necessarily practical to have a solid deodorant?

It is in any case what emerges from the user test. People who have tested them say the effectiveness is decent. On the other hand, I find that in terms of practicality, this is really what they rated the least well. So, in any case, for those who were users of conventional deodorants, spray or stick, they found that the forms of bars, creams, bombs, it was not at all practical.

So, we saw that it was ecological. But is it economical too? Do these solid cosmetics save us money?

So indeed, there is the absence of packaging, the lower number of ingredients, the production often made in France. All of these are strong assets, after, in terms of costs, solid cosmetics are generally a little more expensive than conventional cosmetics, but not if we compare them to the “natural and organic” ranges.

And then, once again, you just have to be careful because it can be more expensive if you mess around with it, and leave a lot of shampoo running in the corner of your bathtub or that we drop all the little pastilles of a toothpaste. It’s really a new habit to take, these are new products.

All about solid cosmetics, on newsstands this month of February in the magazine 60 Million.