Retinosine Deep Intense Cream safety rating

Retinosine Deep Intense Cream safety rating | Greenlens

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 35-point gap between the two loudest voices.

65California Proposition 65Government

100Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent

050100

See why, ingredient by ingredient

All 906 cleaner options, safest first We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

35 pts apart

A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

Also screened, nothing found: ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · IARC Monographs

Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 71% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.

Environmental

Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

Labor

Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Rovectin as a company and applies to everything they make, not this product alone. Checked this week. about this rater →

Packaging

Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. We started showing this score on Sep 11, 2026. about this rater →

Coverage & match quality

7 ratings · 3 of 4 axes

Some ratings rest on an automatic match that has not been human-reviewed.
Fewer raters reach smaller-brand products, so a missing rating is not a clean bill of health, only a gap.

Weighted by what you care about

Tune your weights

composite recomputes live

Ingredient safety1.0×

Environmentalno rating

No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.

Labor1.0×

Packaging1.0×

0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.

What we know about the packaging

Unidentified0 of 2 identified

None of the 2 packaging components is identified beyond its broad material, so the packaging score is a stand-in — not a reading of this container.

Recorded only as “plastic” — no resin code. It could be PET (#1) (widely recyclable) or PVC (#3) (hard to recycle); nothing on record says which, so it counts as 46 out of 100, the middle of that range.

This says how precisely the packaging is described, not how good it is — a fully identified material can still be a bad one.

How we know the packaging

Read from the product photo, not declared by the maker — treat this score as weaker.

The container looks like this, rather than the maker saying so. A photo also cannot show the resin code moulded into the base, so every plastic container reads as “plastic, unspecified” — the cautious end of the plastics range, not a finding about this particular pack.

Ingredients, decoded

Data availability

Good41 of 52 characterized

Our sources have reference data on 41 of 52 listed ingredients; 11 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

Where this came from

Cruelty-free status recorded from crueltyfree.peta.org ↗

Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.

Worth a look (1)

Retinolretinoidskin conditioningraters disagree
Prop 65-listedflagged by 4 of 9 lists →

No flags in our sources (40)

No data in our sources (11)

What these ingredient tags mean (4)

These describe what an ingredient is, not whether it is a problem. The stance marks above are the ratings; these are not.

retinoidRetinol
- Retinol: A vitamin A derivative that speeds skin turnover; dryness and flaking while skin adjusts are its usual accompaniment. SCCS Opinion on Vitamin A (Retinol, Retinyl Acetate, Retinyl Palmitate), SCCS/1576/16, final version of 6 October 2016; Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/996 added the group to EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009 Annex III entry 376, capping it at 0,05% retinol equivalent in body lotion and 0,3% in other leave-on and rinse-off products, with the label statement "Contains Vitamin A. Consider your daily intake before use."
humectantGlycerin
- Glycerin: A humectant, and one of the two ingredients a comparison of moisturiser components found made a significant difference to skin hydration. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(h), lists glycerin as a skin protectant at 20 to 45%. On the humectant half: Jeong CB, Han JY, Cho JC, Suh KD, Nam GW, "Analysis of electrical property changes of skin by oil-in-water emulsion components", Int J Cosmet Sci 2013;35(4):402-410, DOI 10.1111/ics.12059, PMID 23621673, found that "glycerine and urea showed significant skin hydration effects compared with other humectants".
barrier lipidCholesterol, Ceramide NP
- Cholesterol: One of the three lipid classes that make up the skin barrier, alongside ceramides and fatty acids. Feingold KR and Elias PM, J Lipid Res 2024, open access: the barrier lipid matrix "by weight is approximately 50% ceramides, 25% cholesterol, and 15% free fatty acids". Corroborated by Wertz PW, "Roles of Lipids in the Permeability Barriers of Skin and Oral Mucosa", Int J Mol Sci 2021;22(10):5229, DOI 10.3390/ijms22105229, PMID 34063352.
- Ceramide NP: One of the lipid families the skin barrier is actually built from.