MD Moms
Baby Silk Daily Skin Protection Moisturizing Balm
Baby
hover a pillar to set the scene →
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 58-point gap between the two loudest voices.
42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs100Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredientCleaner options
See 1129 cleaner alternatives
Same category, all safer. We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
Every rater, every axis
Ingredient safety
58 pts apartIndependent — 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 →
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: Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · California Proposition 65 · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · US NTP Report on Carcinogens
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. about this rater →
Coverage & match quality
5 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
Partly identified1 of 2 identified
1 of 2 packaging components is a named material; Plastic (unspecified) is recorded only in general terms, so that part of the score is a stand-in.
- 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
Nobody published the material for this product, so it was read from the product photo — the container looks like this, rather than the maker saying so. Treat the packaging score as weaker here than on a product with a declared material.
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
Robust23 of 26 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 23 of 26 listed ingredients; 3 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (2)
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists
IARC possible carcinogen (Group 2B)flagged by 1 of 9 lists
No flags in our sources (21)
- Water
- Dimethicone
- Butylene Glycol
- Cetyl Alcohol
- Glyceryl Stearate SE
- Glycerin
- Butyrospermum Parkii
- Vitis Vinifera Seed Oil
- Persea Gratissima Sterols
- Squalane
- Sodium PCA
- Hydrolyzed Silk
- Hydrolyzed Collagen
- Hydrolyzed Elastin
- Tocopheryl Acetate
- Dipotassium Glycyrrhizate
- Sodium Hyaluronate
- Panthenol
- Acrylates/C10 30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer
- Aminomethyl Propanol
- Caprylyl Glycol
No data in our sources (3)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.