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/Shanghai Shengda/Shower Steamer, Enlightening Eucalyptus
SS
Shanghai Shengda

Shower Steamer, Enlightening Eucalyptus

Bath Oil Salts Soak
Vagus Nerve Bath Oil

Cleaner pick · Safest bath we have rated

OSEA Malibu

Vagus Nerve Bath Oil

+44 on ingredient safety

$48

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 1203 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

51OUT OF 100Poor

range 44–66

56▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

40-point split

58

Scan

42

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

1203 found

See better →

Flagged

5 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 43-point gap between the two loudest voices.

42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
85Health Canada Ingredient HotlistGovernment
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 1203 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

43 pts apart
  • 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 →

  • A government authority. 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 →

✓Also screened, nothing found: US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · California Proposition 65 · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI)

✓Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 73% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.

Environmental

    ✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

    Packaging

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

    Coverage & match quality

    7 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.

    Laborno rating

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

    1.0×
    0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.

    What we know about the packaging

    Unidentified·0 of 1 identified

    Nobody recorded what this pack is actually made of beyond “plastic”, so the packaging score is a stand-in for the middle of that range — 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

    Robust·11 of 11 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on all 11 listed ingredients.

    Worth a look (5)

    • TITANIUM DIOXIDE8/10uv filter · uv absorber · colorantraters disagree

      ANSES CMR-listed · flagged by 5 of 9 lists →

    • FRAGRANCE6/10undeclared fragrance blendperfumingraters disagree

      Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • CITRIC ACID4/10fragrance · chelating · bufferingraters disagree

      Health Canada Hotlist — restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

    • BLUE 14/10cosmetic colorantraters 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 →

    ✓No flags in our sources (6)

    • SODIUM BICARBONATE
    • SODIUM SULFATE
    • PEG-8
    • SYNTHETIC FLUORPHLOGOPITE
    • PVP
    • CARMINE
    What these ingredient tags mean (1)

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

    • undeclared fragrance blendFRAGRANCE

      • FRAGRANCE: A blend the label does not itemize, so what is in it cannot be read from the ingredient list. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009 permits the collective term "parfum"; the SCCS Opinion on Fragrance Allergens (SCCS/1459/11) reviews the contact-allergy evidence for the substances it can contain.