Greenlens

Every public rating on one cosmetic, the places they disagree kept visible, and a single score whose weighting you control.

Navigate

  • Browse
  • In your home
  • Ask Sonion
  • Methodology
  • Criteria
  • Extension
  • How scoring works
  • Account

The one rule

We never blend a score that hides who disagrees. Funding model travels with every rating. Weights are computed at read time and never stored.

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/Aunt Jackie's/Fix My Hair Intensive Repair Conditioning Masque
Fix My Hair Intensive Repair Conditioning Masque
Aunt Jackie's

Fix My Hair Intensive Repair Conditioning Masque

masque soins cheveux436mlGTIN 0034285675158
Bio Therapy Conditioner

Cleaner pick · Safest treatment we have rated

Africology Skincare & Spa

Bio Therapy Conditioner

+74 on ingredient safety, gives up 14 on packaging

250ml · 47.50 ZAR · 19 ZAR/100 ml

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 3326 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

36OUT OF 100Horrible

range 31–53

26▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

17-point split

15

Scan

32

Precautionary

25

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

3326 found

See better →

Flagged

5 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 45-point gap between the two loudest voices.

15Greenlens Ingredient ScanIndependent
vs
60ANSES Endocrine DisruptorsGovernment
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 3326 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

45 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 →

  • 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: California Proposition 65 · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · IARC Monographs

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

    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×
    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.

    Ingredients, decoded

    Data availability

    Fair·16 of 28 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on 16 of 28 listed ingredients; 12 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

    Worth a look (5)

    • Butylphenyl Methylpropional10/10fragrance materialperfuming · fragranceraters disagree

      Reproductive-toxicant concern · flagged by 5 of 9 lists →

    • Hexyl Cinnamal6/10fragrance materialperfumingraters disagree

      ANSES endocrine candidate · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • Linalool6/10fragrance materialperfuming · deodorantraters disagree

      EU harmonised skin sensitizer · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • Alpha-Isomethyl lonone4/10perfuming · skin conditioningraters disagree

      EU-regulated fragrance allergen · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

    • Hydroxycitronellal4/10fragrance materialperfumingraters disagree

      EU-regulated fragrance allergen · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

    ✓No flags in our sources (11)

    • water
    • Butyrospermum Parkii Butter
    • Cetearyl Alcohol
    • Mangifera Indica Seed Butter
    • Dimethiconerich occlusive
    • Behentrimonium Methosulfate
    • Propylene Glycol Dicaprylate
    • PPG-1 Trideceth-6
    • Radish Root Ferment Filtrate
    • Potassium Sorbate
    • Tetrasodium EDTA

    No data in our sources (12)

    • Cetyl Alcohol Glycenin
    • Linum Ustat Gratissima Oil
    • Cyclopentasilaxane
    • Olea Europaea Fruit 0 Palyquaternium-37
    • Dicaprate
    • Phenoyeth Spinosa Kernel Oil
    • Acrylamidopropyltrimonium Chlonide
    • Acrylamide Cepolymer
    • Ethy Vegetable Protein PG-Propyl Silanetriol
    • Leuconostoc
    • utronellol
    • Coumann Geraniol

    Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.

    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.

    • fragrance materialHexyl Cinnamal, Linalool, Butylphenyl Methylpropional, Hydroxycitronellal

      • Hexyl Cinnamal: A jasmine-like fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 87: a fragrance substance whose presence must be indicated in the list of ingredients above 0,001% in leave-on and 0,01% in rinse-off products, because of established contact-allergy risk.
      • Linalool: A floral fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 84: a fragrance substance whose presence must be indicated in the list of ingredients above 0,001% in leave-on and 0,01% in rinse-off products, because of established contact-allergy risk.
      • Butylphenyl Methylpropional: A lily-of-the-valley fragrance component the EU no longer permits in cosmetics. It was a declarable fragrance allergen at Annex III entry 83 of EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009. Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/1902 deleted that entry and moved it to Annex II entry 1666 (2-(4-tert-butylbenzyl) propionaldehyde, CAS 80-54-6), prohibiting it in cosmetic products from 1 March 2022.
      • Hydroxycitronellal: A lily-like fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 72: a fragrance substance whose presence must be indicated in the list of ingredients above 0,001% in leave-on and 0,01% in rinse-off products, because of established contact-allergy risk.
    • rich occlusiveDimethicone

      • Dimethicone: A silicone that forms a film on the surface of the skin without an oily feel. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(g), lists dimethicone as a skin protectant at 1 to 30%.