Greenlens

Navigate

  • Browse
  • In your home
  • Ask Sonion
  • Methodology
  • Criteria
  • Extension
  • How scoring works
  • Account
Cosmetics only · lead with safetyProduct data from public sources incl. Open Beauty Facts & EWG Skin Deep · their ratings never scraped or shown
As an Amazon Associate, Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Affiliate income never changes a rating or ranking.PrivacyTerms
Catalog/More Than Magic/Body Glitter, Sparkling Skies (2019 formulation)
MT
More Than Magic

Body Glitter, Sparkling Skies (2019 formulation)

Glitter
Grave Dust Glitter, Ethereal

Cleaner pick · Safest glitter we have rated

Holograve Cosmetics

Grave Dust Glitter, Ethereal

+31 on ingredient safety

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 71 cleaner options →

Ranked by safety only. Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Payout never affects a rating, a ranking, or the cleaner pick.

Your composite

68OUT OF 100Fair

range 64–77

68▲▼ split
Safety
68
Eco
—
Labor
—
Pkg

Why this score

22-point split

70

Scan

60

Precautionary

82

Tolerance

See why →
Find on Amazon↗

Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Payout never affects a rating, a ranking, or the cleaner pick.

In your home

Sort this into a room

Cleaner options

71 found

See better →

Flagged

7 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 25-point gap between the two loudest voices.

60Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
85Health Canada Ingredient HotlistGovernment
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 71 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

25 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: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · IARC Monographs · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens

✓Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 67% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.

Environmental

  • A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

Coverage & match quality

6 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×
1.0×
Laborno rating

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

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

Robust·12 of 12 characterized

Our sources have reference data on all 12 listed ingredients.

Worth a look (7)

  • METHYLISOTHIAZOLINONE7/10common irritantpreservativeraters disagree

    Strong contact sensitizer · flagged by 3 of 9 lists →

  • IODOPROPYNYL BUTYLCARBAMATE6/10preservativeraters disagree

    EU harmonised skin sensitizer · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

  • POLYETHYLENE TEREPHTHALATE4/10film formingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

  • CARBOMER4/10emulsion stabilising · gel forming · viscosity controllingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

  • SODIUM HYDROXIDE4/10buffering · denaturantraters disagree

    EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

  • YELLOW 54/10cosmetic colorantraters disagree

    EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

  • BLUE 14/10cosmetic colorantraters disagree

    EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

✓No flags in our sources (5)

  • WATER
  • SORBITOL
  • POLYVINYL ALCOHOL
  • GLYCERINhumectant
  • CARMINE
What these ingredient tags mean (2)

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

  • common irritantMETHYLISOTHIAZOLINONE

    • METHYLISOTHIAZOLINONE: A preservative that patch-test clinics see reactions to often enough that the EU banned it from leave-on products. American Contact Dermatitis Society, Allergen of the Year 2013 (Castanedo-Tardana MP, Zug KA, Dermatitis 2013;24(1):2-6); SCCS Opinion on Methylisothiazolinone (P94), Submission II, SENSITISATION ONLY (SCCS/1521/13, revision of 27 March 2014); banned in leave-on cosmetics by Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/1198, which recites the need to address "the increased incidence of allergies induced by methylisothiazolinone".
  • 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".