Given the price and size, this ends up being $520 an ounce, yet the core ingredients in this moisturizer are so basic and so boring that the price defies all logic beyond the fact that the cosmetics industry has skillfully convinced many consumers that expensive means better and that hyper-expensive must mean the product works brilliantly.
There are outstanding and disappointing products in all price ranges, and this one falls into the disappointing category. The light-diffusing claims are tied to the high amount of titanium dioxide and mica in this eye cream, which brighten and add shine to the eye area, although the shine isn’t the best if your eye area is wrinkled because it will only make those lines more noticeable. However, the shine and whiteness effect is cosmetic and readily available from countless products costing significantly less than this.
Beyond the light-diffusing trickery, all of the intriguing ingredients in this eye cream are listed after the preservative. The fact that it’s packaged in a jar won’t help many of the beneficial ingredients, present only in minute amounts, remain stable during use, which is a huge letdown at any price.
What about the gold? Well, as it turns out, gold in any amount isn’t a precious ingredient for your skin. It is a relatively common allergen that can induce dermatitis about the face and eyelids (Sources: Inflammation and Allergy Drug Targets, September 2008, pages 145–162; Dermatologic Therapy, volume 17, 2004, pages 321–327; and Cutis, May 2000, pages 323–326). And if it is really nano-sized as claimed that would be even more problematic for your body because gold compounds are associated with many side effects. Gold compounds used to treat arthritis have been shown to cause birth defects, they also pass into breast milk, they can interact with other drugs, and they can cause sun sensitivity, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, fainting, and increased sweating.
There is zero research proving topical application of gold has any anti-wrinkle or rejuvenating effect on skin. This cream also contains fragrant plant waxes that shouldn’t be used near the eyes.
This extraordinary anti-aging formula starts with the healing powers of pure gold, nourishing the skin at a cellular level and forming an invisible, elastic film that instantly restores tone, diffuses light, and rejuvenates the eye area. Paraben-free.
Rosa Damascena Flower Water, Water, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, C12-20 Acid PEG-8 Ester, Glycerin, Butylene Glycol, Cetyl Alcohol, Silica, Saccharide Isomerate, Titanium Dioxide, Vp/Va Copolymer, Phenoxyethanol, Potassium Cetyl Phosphate, Shea Butter, Carbomer, Mica, Sweet Almond Oil, Bisabolol, Ethylhexylglycerin, Panax Ginseng Root Extract, Pullulan, Caffeine, Hydrolyzed Fibroin, Sodium Hydroxide, Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil, Disodium EDTA, Tocopheryl Acetate, Maltodextrin, Carrageenan, Gynostemma Pentaphyllum Extract, Acacia Dealbata Flower Wax, Algae Extract, Ascorbyl Tetraisopalmitate, Jasmine Flower Wax, Narcissus Poeticus Flower Wax, Steareth-20, Sodium Hyaluronate, PEG-8, Citric Acid, Iron Oxides, N-Hydroxysuccinimide, Hesperidin Methyl Chalcone, Sambucus Nigra Flower Extract, Malus Domestica Fruit Extract, Tocopherol, Camellia Sinensis Leaf Extract, Scutellaria Alpina Extract, Chlorhexidine Digluconate, Benzoic Acid, Potassium Sorbate, Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7, Chrysin, Palmitoyl Oligopeptide, Ascorbic Acid, Dipeptide-2, Gold, Lecithin [Citronellol, Geraniol]
Strengths: The makeup far surpasses the skin care, but is not without its problems; one good serum; a skin lightening product with arbutin; excellent range of foundation, concealer, and powder shades for light to medium skin tones; beautiful powder blush and eyeshadows; some impressive eye and lip pencils (if you don't mind routine sharpening).
Weaknesses: Unjustifiably expensive; several products contain problematic plants or fragrant waxes and oils; no sunscreens; no effective anti-acne products; no AHA or BHA exfoliants; none of the products advertising an SPF rating contain active ingredients or any other ingredients capable of shielding skin from sun damage; the Luminous Eye Liner; boring mascara.
Created by Sylvie Chantecaille, this line of makeup and skin-care products, sold at Neiman Marcus and some salons and spas, draws on Chantecaille's 20 years of experience as an employee of Estee Lauder Corporation. The fact that she worked for Lauder and helped to create and launch the Prescriptives line is impressive. Experience means a lot in the crowded, complicated cosmetics industry and it's as good a reason as any to start your own product line.
Not surprisingly, she claims her products are known for their "uniquely high concentration of natural botanicals" and their organic origins, though it takes only a cursory look at the ingredient list to see that isn't true—did she really think no one would notice propylene glycol, polyvinylpyrrolidone, methylparaben, butylparaben, phenoxyethanol, triethanolamine, and PEG-8, which are about as natural as polyester? What is true, however, is that most of the plants in these products are present in very small amounts, often listed after the preservative.
What almost every cosmetic company knows (we can't think of one that doesn't) is that you can't brag about the synthetic ingredients your products contain, even if they are the backbone of every product you make. Selling skin-care products is far easier when you use terms such as "pure," "holistic," or "wellness." Chantecaille takes this faux information one step further by saying (and we're not kidding about this) that her products are "endowed with a potent life force." Oooh-la-la! But … once you pull off the rose-colored glasses and probe beneath the hyperbole, all you are left with is a bouquet of fantasy that won't help your skin.
Even more bewildering than the natural claims is that Chantecaille asserts that their emphasis on anti-aging focuses primarily on addressing the causes of inflammation. Without question, inflammation plays a role in how the skin and the body age, and recent research is showing that it probably plays a greater role than previously suspected. Any cosmetic company that is trying to make products that reduce inflammation and its effects is a good thing—but for all their talk, Chantecaille's formulas don't inhibit inflammation; instead, many of them increase inflammation thanks to the numerous fragrant plant oils and waxes they contain. While these ingredients create lovely aromas, scent isn't skin care. Most of these fragrant plant ingredients contain volatile chemicals that create the scent; it is these chemicals (e.g., eugenol, limonene, citronellol, and linalool) that cause skin irritation that leads to, you guessed it, inflammation (Sources: Rapid Communications in Mass Spectronomy, November 2008 pages 3593–3598; Chemical Research in Toxicology, May 2007, pages 807–814; and The British Journal of Dermatology, May 2006, pages 885–888).
In contrast, there is little more than anecdotal research indicating that the problematic plant ingredients Chantecaille uses are actually healing, as the company claims.
The chief reason to explore Chantecaille is their makeup. Although there isn't a single item that doesn't have an equally good counterpart in other lines for far less money, if you're curious about Chantecaille, color is where it's at. Their foundation shade range has improved and is beautifully neutral. The textures and finishes for foundation, powder, blush, eyeshadow, and lip glosses are outstanding, as are the finishes. In short, Chantecaille has made it very easy to assemble a makeup wardrobe that makes skin look smooth, polished, and radiant, although their foundations and powders are geared toward those with normal to dry skin.
One more comment: Chantecaille has a penchant for attributing sun-protection claims and SPF ratings to various products. They do so in violation of FDA regulations on sunscreens because the company does not list active ingredients on their label. If a cosmetic company can't even get that right, then much of what they do is called into question, aside from just looking askance at their claims. Considering the price of their products, this omission is nearly unforgivable; please don't rely on the claim for sun protection, because it assuredly puts your skin at risk for sun damage. By the way, none of the natural ingredients in these products provide sun protection on their own, either. Ingredients such as vitamins C and E can, to some extent, help skin defend itself against sun damage and boost the longevity of sunscreen actives, but by themselves they're not capable of providing sun protection on a par with what's required to earn an SPF rating.
For more information about Chantecaille, call 877-673-7080 or visit www.chantecaille.com.
The Beautypedia and Paula’s Choice Research teams have one mission: To help you find the best products for your skin, whether they’re from Paula’s Choice or another brand. By combining efforts, we’re able to share scientific research and remain committed to the highest standards based on our decades of experience objectively reviewing thousands upon thousands of skincare and makeup formularies in all price ranges.
Beautypedia cuts through the hype to bring you product insights and recommendations you won’t find anywhere else!