Is anti-sugar makeup out of market?

A few days ago, the China Food and Drug Network published an article called "Can" anti-sugar cosmetics really anti-aging?" Popular science articles. The article obviously points out that "anti-sugar" cosmetics and anti-aging are not exactly the same, and whether the raw materials and cosmetics truly have "anti-glycation" effects on the skin surface needs to be further studied.

01 Official publication: Anti-Sugar = Anti-Aging.

In the past two years, with the development of social media, the saying "anti-aging before anti-sugar" has been widely spread among juvenile consumers.

Moreover, Can "anti-sugar" Cosmetics Actually Fight Aging? This paper points out that glycation is a process in which reducing sugars react slowly with proteins, lipids, or nucleic acids without enzyme catalysis to produce a series of advanced glycation end products (AGEs). These can cause skin pigmentation, leading to darker skin tones and accelerated aging.

In short, AGEs are collagen killers, and "anti-sugar" inhibits the production of AGEs. In order to "anti-sugar", in addition to avoiding sugar from the diet, anti-sugar from the skin has become the preferred way.

According to popular Science, among the raw materials included in the Catalogue of Used Cosmetic raw materials (2021 edition), Thiamine HCL (vitamin B1), nicotinamide (vitamin B3), pyridoxamine (vitamin B6), vitamin C, carnosine, chlorogenic acid, lipoic acid, and active ingredients in natural products such as turmeric, green tea, garlic, onion, cabbage, citrus fruits, tomato, parsley, beans, and grapes, It can inhibit the formation of AGEs, accelerate the catabolism of existing AGEs or AGEs crosslinks, and block the biological effects of AGEs. It has become a common active ingredient in "anti-glycation" cosmetics on the market.

However, the article also emphasizes that most of the studies on the anti-glycation efficacy of the above raw materials and active ingredients reported in the literature are obtained from in vitro cell experiments, and the test results are not equivalent to the results of human use, and their efficacy and safety need to be further verified.

The main reason for people's skin aging is the photoaging effect of ultraviolet rays, in addition to diet, lifestyle and other factors, so "anti-sugar" cosmetics and anti-aging are not exactly the same.

It is worth noting that this is not the first time an official campaign on "anti-sugar" cosmetics has been launched. In April 2021, the China Food and Drug Network published an article on "Can" anti-sugar "truly anti-aging? It has been pointed out that the formation of AGEs is irreversible and that the accumulation of AGEs in the skin increases with age. There is no research to suggest that the use of anti-sugar cosmetics in humans can reverse the formation of aging and achieve anti-aging effects.

02 claims that "anti-sugar" risks breaking the law

In fact, whether cosmetics can claim to be "anti-sugar" is still controversial.

According to the Cosmetic Classification Rules and catalog, which came into effect on May 1, 2021, cosmetic effects are divided into 26 broad categories and new effects, and "anti-sugar" is not among the 26 effects.

"As long as there is sufficient scientific evidence, anti-sugar can be registered as a new effect as a special cosmetic." That is according to a senior industry regulator.

However, classifying "anti-sugar" as a new benefit presents challenges. A brand research and development engineer said, "Companies are highly confused about how to claim 'anti-sugar' to provide evidence for efficacy."

Moreover, pointed out that the popular science article, "cosmetics safety technical standards (2015 edition)" not "mash resistance" of the human body contains cosmetics efficacy testing method, the industry has yet to form a unified "mash resistance" effect evaluation standard, raw materials and cosmetics to skin surface is indeed "the saccharification" efficacy remains to be further research.

This means that, for now, cosmetics can not claim "anti-sugar" benefits.

To this, the brand r&d engineers expressed his confusion, "the extensive and profound Chinese culture, language expression, such as sugar, antioxidant, blue light resistance, resistance to pollution, are in the process of marketing, brand to describe or description products skin feeling, effects, and the use of high frequency words, and 26 efficacy claims correspondence? What are the criteria and dimensions?"

In his view, if the above claims were to be classed as new functions, they would need to be registered and managed under special cosmetics for businesses; for regulators, each new efficacy requires the introduction of the corresponding efficacy evaluation standards and efficacy testing methods, "for both sides, highly time-consuming and labor-intensive".

Industry product manager Guo Xiaofeng has a different view, "anti-sugar is not a new effect, but a mechanism, the final result is to achieve a certain anti-aging characterization." He additionally explained that anti-glycation and anti-oxidation, neurotransmitter inhibitory peptides, and promoting collagen regeneration are only one of the ways to achieve the "anti-wrinkling" effect.
03 "Anti-sugar" track to cool?

Public information shows that the concept of anti-sugar emerged in 2017, and a wave of "anti-sugar culture" has gradually formed from diet to skin care. Since 2019, the deep binding of anti-sugar and "anti-aging" has begun to prevail in the skin care market. According to the "2022 Advanced beauty consumption Demand Insight" released by CBNData, in 2021, the amount of notes on the concept of "anti-sugar" in the Little Red book increased by more than 250%.

In this context, more and more brands have begun to equate "anti-sugar" with "anti-aging", and gradually take "anti-sugar" as the focus of product development and publicity, in an attempt to pass the car at the corners of the anti-aging track by differential positioning.

Cosmetics observation and search of major e-commerce platforms found that cosmetics that claim to be "anti-sugar" are dazzling. Taking Tmall as an example, the search with "anti-sugar" as a keyword shows a total of roughly 10,000 products, including essence, face mask, face cream, etc. Numerous well-known brands at home and abroad, such as Olan oil, Xiulike, HFP have launched products claiming "anti-sugar".

According to Cosmetics Watch, cosmetics that claim to be "anti-sugar" are filed by claiming the efficacy of 26 ranges. To a Chinese brand as an example, its six product propaganda including their resistance "sugar" 2 words, among them, the "red found sugar through muscle highlights the frost resistance" for record efficacy as "moisture", "red found sugar beauty muscle isolation resistance BB cream" record efficacy as the "cream", "red found resistant sugar net through cleanser" effect of the record is "wash, discharge makeup".

Now, with the official clear "anti-sugar" is not directly equivalent to "anti-aging", coupled with the cosmetics registered "anti-sugar" efficacy block, under the double attack, the hot "anti-sugar" market will undoubtedly suffer a huge impact.

"Advertising is best consistent with the efficacy of registration and filing. It is suspected of false propaganda after equating 'anti-sugar' with anti-aging." The senior regulatory figure reminded, "the regulatory tightening, the brand side had better delete 'anti-sugar' efficacy claims as soon as possible, modify the relevant text".

Eric Kwok argues that for the brand, saccharification of claim is a differentiated selling point, is also a kind of consumer education, consumer understanding of science and the actual science has the difference, brands understand the way, "if all scientific language to propaganda, against science, is not conducive to brand spread."