Giving up jar packaging is something many cosmetic companies refuse to do. They prefer selling formulas in attractive containers that have no ability to keep the ingredients they contain stable. It is well known amongst researchers and scientists that jar packaging is not only unsanitary but almost all beneficial ingredients break down in the presence of air. What a waste!
Aside from the jar packaging this fragrance-free eye cream comes in this eye cream is just plain not necessary if you're already using a well-formulated moisturizer. We know that sounds shocking but check out our More Info section to see why you can save money giving up this erroneous belief.
The formula is an emollient moisturizer for dry skin containing an impressive blend of skin-repairing ingredients though it lacks an array of antioxidants that would really aid in building new collagen. It claims to replenish skin with sea minerals but the small amount of fucus serratus it contains (sea algae) isn't all that helpful for skin and there isn't any research showing what it provides, either.
One other point: The only radiance this product provides is from the mica it contains. Mica is a shiny mineral used in thousands of products claiming to brighten skin. Other than the cosmetic benefit you may see after applying this product, shine particles don't have anything to do with skin care.
The fact that it's packaged in a jar means the beneficial ingredients won't remain stable once it is opened. All plant extracts, vitamins, antioxidants, and other state-of-the-art ingredients break down in the presence of air, so once a jar is opened and lets the air in these important ingredients begin to deteriorate. Jars also are unsanitary because you're dipping your fingers into them with each use, adding bacteria which further deteriorate the beneficial ingredients (Sources: Free Radical Biology and Medicine, September 2007, pages 818-829; Ageing Research Reviews, December 2007, pages 271-288; Dermatologic Therapy, September-October 2007, pages 314-321; International Journal of Pharmaceutics, June 12, 2005, pages 197-203; Pharmaceutical Development and Technology, January 2002, pages 1-32; International Society for Horticultural Science, www.actahort.org/members/showpdf?booknrarnr=778_5; Beautypackaging.com, and www.beautypackaging.com/articles/2007/03/airless-packaging.php).
Why You May Not Need an Eye Cream
Most eye creams aren't necessary. That's either because they are poorly formulated, contain nothing special for the eye area, or come in packaging that won't keep key ingredients stable. Just because the product is labeled as an eye cream doesn't mean it's good for your eye area; in fact, many can actually make matters worse.
There is much you can do to improve signs of aging around your eyes. Any product loaded with antioxidants, skin-repairing ingredients, skin-lightening ingredients, anti-inflammatory ingredients, and effective emollients will work wonders and those ingredients don't have to come from a product labeled as an eye cream.
You would be shocked how many eye creams lack even the most basic ingredients to help skin. For example, most eye creams don't contain sunscreen. During the day that is a serious problem because it leaves the skin around your eyes vulnerable to sun damage and this absolutely will make dark circles, puffiness, and wrinkles worse!
Whatever product you put around your eye area, regardless of what it is labeled, must be well formulated and appropriate for the skin type around your eyes! That may mean you need an eye cream, but you may also do just as well applying your regular facial moisturizer around your eyes.
Ceramide Premiere uses skin-replenishing ceramides, nutrient-rich sea minerals, and high-performance retinols to help support your skin's own natural collagen. And it's clinically proven to hydrate your skin as it comforts, diminishes the appearance of fine lines and evens skin tone, to reveal the radiance that makes you beautiful.
Water, Cetyl Ricinoleate, Cetearyl Alcohol, Cetearyl Glucoside, Isononyl Isononanoate, Butylene Glycol, Butyrospermum Parkii (Shea Butter), Glycerin, Hydrogenated Polyisobutene, Stearyl Heptanoate, Caprylic/Capric Triglyceride, Dimethicone, Ethylene/Acrylic Acid Copolymer, PPG-2 Isoceteth-20 Acetate, Pentylene Glycol, Myristyl Myristate, Polymethylsilsesquioxane, Behenyl Alcohol, Ceteth-20 Ceramide 1, Ceramide 3, Ceramide 6 II, Fucus Serratus Extract, Yeast Extract, Retinyl Palmitate, Tocopheryl Acetate, Cetearyl Dimethicone Crosspolymer, Soy Amino Acids, 3-Aminopropane Sulfonic Acid, Calcium Hydroxymethionine, Hydrolyzed Soy Protein, Phytyosphingosine, Punica Granatum Sterols, Acetyl Tetrapeptide-5, Sodium Lauroyl Lactylate, Hydroxyethyl Acrylate/Sodium Acryloyldimethyl Taurate Copolymer, Myristyl Laurate, Polysorbate 20, Polysorbate 60, Sorbitan Isostearate, Carbomer Hydroxyethylcellulose, Xanthan Gum EDTA, BHT, Disodium EDTA, Mica, Tin Oxide, Butylparaben, Ethylparaben, Isobutylparaben, Methylparaben, Phenoxyethanol, Potassium Sorbate, Propylparaben, Sodium Benzoate, Titanium Dioxide
Elizabeth Arden At-A-Glance
Strengths: Some excellent serums and a few noteworthy moisturizers; praiseworthy concealers; a handful of well-formulated makeup products including foundation, blush, eyeshadow, and lipstick.
Weaknesses: No products for those battling blemishes; several products whose sunscreen lacks sufficient UVA protection; most of the foundations with sunscreen fail to provide sufficient UVA protection; lackluster eye and brow pencils; some problematic lip color products; jar packaging weakens some otherwise great formulas.
Former nurse Elizabeth Arden was a pioneer in the beauty industry. At the turn of the 20th century, Arden began her legacy when she opened her first salon, with the now-familiar red door. Over the next several years she introduced new products and services to women unaccustomed to such choices, and almost single-handedly made it acceptable for modern women to wear makeup. And while Arden understood and met these beauty needs, she was also adept at self-promotion and packaging, helping to solidify the idea that what holds the product should be as beautiful as the woman who uses it. She was the front-runner in the cosmetics industry for quite some time, until another young go-getter by the name of Estee Lauder began her own empire—one that would eventually lead to the Elizabeth Arden line being almost an afterthought in the mind of many consumers.
Not only has Arden's image been diminished over the years due to odd distribution patterns (consumers were getting mixed messages as this prestige line began showing up in drug and discount chain stores), but also through their own formulary mistakes and seeming unwillingness to pay attention to current research. Given the history of this line and several outstanding products they've produced in the past, it's very frustrating that what's offered today is such a mishmash of good and bad, with a hefty dose of average. Arden still has several sunscreens that fall short by leaving out sufficient UVA protection. In contrast, Estee Lauder and the Lauder-owned lines have their sunscreen acts together and consistently impress by including other state-of-the-art goodies to amplify the environmental protection of their moisturizers.
Many of Arden's products also contain potentially problematic ingredients or are packaged in a way that puts the light- and air-sensitive ingredients at risk of breaking down shortly after the product is opened. Given Elizabeth Arden's (the woman) pioneering, innovative spirit, we can't imagine her being completely pleased with the state of her namesake skin-care line (Arden passed away in 1966). Having the gorgeous Catherine Zeta-Jones as a spokesmodel for most of the early 2000s may have raised more interest in this brand than in years past, but a pretty face and eye-catching ads don't always translate to good skin care, as evidenced by the reviews on this site. There are some very impressive products in this line, but it's definitely one that demands careful attention to what you're buying lest you put your skin at risk.
For more information about Elizabeth Arden, call (800) 326-7337 or visit www.elizabetharden.com.
Elizabeth Arden Makeup
Cosmetics trailblazer Elizabeth Arden may have been single-handedly responsible for bringing modern makeup to American women (she opened the famous Red Door Salon in 1910 and formulated the first blush and tinted powders in 1912), but today's lineup of Arden makeup has far more disappointments than its pioneering namesake would have liked. Most of the Arden foundations with sunscreen either leave out the five prime UVA-screening active ingredients or because their SPF numbers are unnecessarily low. Either way, only one of the foundations with sunscreens can be relied on as your sole source of facial sun protection.
In contrast to the mostly disappointing foundations, you'll be pleased with what Arden offers for concealer, eyeshadow, lipstick, and mascara. Each of these categories has some brilliant products to consider, and they serve to prove, at least to a modest extent, that Elizabeth Arden makeup is not to be counted out just yet. The remaining products have little to extol, either because they are truly ineffective or because the competition has Arden beat by a mile. A continual bright spot for Arden is that their tester units are typically well organized and the colors are grouped so it's easy to zero in on what you like.
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!