Lip Smacker
Lip Balm Raccoon, Boysenberry Bandit (2018 formulation)
Lip Balm
hover a pillar to set the scene →
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 48-point gap between the two loudest voices.
42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs90EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI)Government
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredientCleaner options
See 1027 cleaner alternatives
Same category, all safer. We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
Every rater, every axis
Ingredient safety
48 pts apartA government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. about this rater →
Also screened, nothing found: California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ECHA SVHC Candidate List
US EPA Safer Choice (SCIL) recognizes 50% 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. about this rater →
Coverage & match quality
8 ratings · 2 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
+
1.0×
Environmentalno rating
No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
1.0×
Packagingno rating
No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.
Ingredients, decoded
Data availability
Robust24 of 26 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 24 of 26 listed ingredients; 2 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (6)
ANSES CMR-listedflagged by 5 of 9 lists
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 1 of 9 lists
Health Canada Hotlist — restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists
No flags in our sources (18)
- RICINUS COMMUNIS SEED OIL
- CETYL ACETATE
- EUPHORBIA CERIFERA WAX/CIRE DE CANDELILLA
- POLYBUTENE
- PARAFFIN
- SESAMUM INDICUM SEED OIL
- COPERNICIA CERIFERA WAX/CIRE DE CARNAUBA
- HYDROGENATED SOYBEAN OIL
- MINERAL OIL/HUILE MINERALE
- ACETYLATED LANOLIN ALCOHOL
- MICROCRYSTALLINE WAX/CIRE MICROCRISTALLINE
- TRITICUM VULGARE GERM OIL
- STEARIC ACID
- STEVIA REBAUDIANA LEAF/STEM EXTRACT
- SUCRALOSE
- PROPYLENE GLYCOL
- OCTADECYL DI-T-BUTYL-4-HYDROXYHYDROCINNAMATE
- TOCOPHEROL
No data in our sources (2)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.
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.