Reporters all over the world constantly ask me why cosmetics companies mislead and often out and out lie to women, and how they manage to get away with it. The simple answer is that women like to be lied to. We want to believe that the products we buy can get us what we want. We prefer the promise of eternal youth (or some approximation) and clear, flawless skin to reality. No matter how many thousands of products there are, often dozens of them from the same companies, and all guaranteeing some degree of a miracle, it still happens—we just don’t seem to have a learning curve. We want the next one we buy to be the answer. Using either scientific mumbo jumbo or concoctions said to come straight from the earth, or a mix of both, they tell us exactly what we want to hear. Most cosmetics companies need to lie just to gain a consumer’s attention because the truth is never as enticing as the deception.
While women want to find hope in a jar, regulatory agencies do what they can to protect us. However the official limitations provide no real protection from truly misleading information or lies. One of the most beguiling aspects of the cosmetics industry in the U. S. and Canada is that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Health Canada (HC), and most regulatory boards around the world—with the exception of the European Union (EU) member countries—don’t require cosmetics companies to prove their claims. “Neither
cosmetic products nor cosmetic ingredients are reviewed or approved by FDA before they are sold to the public.” (Sources: Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, www. cfsan. fda. gov/~dms/cos-206.html, March 3, 2005; and FDA Authority Over Cosmetics and Health Canada, www. hc-sc. gc. ca/hl-vs/iyh-vsv/prod/cosmet-eng. php). That means cosmetics companies, whether they call their products cosmeceutical or otherwise, get to say just about anything they want about their products without any substantiation or proof whatsoever.
Pharmaceutical and over-the-counter drug regulations are infinitely stricter than those dealing with cosmetics. If a drug company makes a claim about what an antihistamine can do to prevent sneezing, the product must contain particular ingredients in specified amounts to win approval from the FDA. The same is true for aspirin and other analgesics, antacids, decongestants, anti-inflammatories, and all drugs across the board in the world of pharmaceuticals. The same is not true for cosmetics.
The only fundamental FDA restriction on cosmetics companies’ claims is the legal prohibition of phrases that directly state or promise a permanent change in the skin or hair. Of course, there are a million ways to make something sound like a permanent change to consumers without sounding permanent to the FDA.
What about federal regulations concerning truth in advertising? That issue generally falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), but it doesn’t take much to get around these guys either. For example, I can describe at great length how miraculously my product works as long as I throw in phrases such as “appears to,” “seems to,” “feels as if,” “looks like,” “you may experience,” and lots more variations on these themes. All of these phrases invalidate any promise about a product’s performance. A company is not considered to be lying to the consumer when these kinds of terms are used because the purported results are subjective, not actual. It may “seem” like your cellulite has disappeared, or you may “appear” to look younger, or you can “experience” a clear complexion, but nothing has happened except that you may be convinced something has taken place.
Better Than Botox? That question mark poses a question, not a statement, so the FDA is happy, and meanwhile what the consumer hears is that the product is better than Botox. It doesn’t take fancy terminology to keep within regulatory guidelines while still misleading the consumer because reading caveats doesn’t get our attention. That’s how most cosmetics advertising gets around truth-in-advertising restrictions every time.
Another game in the industry happens when companies step way over the line in their advertising campaigns, either on televison or in fashion magazines, and mislead or lie to consumers. They do this because they know that by the time the FDA or HC can take action the advertisement has run its course and made an impression on consumers. Mission accomplished; the company is on to its next product launch. Also, many cosmetics companies know that the FDC and HC are just so overloaded with work and underfunded that their deceptive ads can easily slip under the radar of these agencies and continue on, safe and sound, without any fear of repercussions.
And beyond the lack of regulation, the language and images are manipulated to create a veneer of scientific authority in advertisements that promise everything from younger skin to smoother thighs. The problem here has to do with the studies the cosmetics companies claim are backed by actual research that proves their assertions to be true. This is the wide – open world of claim substantiation, a whole industry of its own that has given the word deception an entirely new meaning.