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/Aunt Jackie's/Curl La La Defining Curl Custard
Curl La La Defining Curl Custard
Aunt Jackie's

Curl La La Defining Curl Custard

Verzorging426gGTIN 0034285696153
Curl Freeze Lash Styling Gel

Cleaner pick · Safest styling we have rated

Catrice Cosmetics

Curl Freeze Lash Styling Gel

+49 on ingredient safety

$7

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 3125 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

49OUT OF 100Poor

range 43–66

51▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

37-point split

39

Scan

42

Precautionary

76

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

3125 found

See better →

Flagged

10 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 46-point gap between the two loudest voices.

39Greenlens Ingredient ScanIndependent
vs
85Health Canada Ingredient HotlistGovernment
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 3125 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

46 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 →

  • 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: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · California Proposition 65 · 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

    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·26 of 26 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on all 26 listed ingredients.

    Worth a look (10)

    • Limonene7/10fragrance materialperfuming · deodorant · solventraters disagree

      ANSES endocrine candidate · flagged by 3 of 9 lists →

    • Parfum6/10undeclared fragrance blendperfuming · fragranceraters disagree

      Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 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 →

    • Cetrimonium Chloride4/10preservative · antimicrobial · antistaticraters disagree

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

    • Acrylamidopropyltrimonium Chloride/Acrylamide Copolymer4/10film forming · antistatic · hair fixingraters disagree

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

    • Citric Acid4/10fragrance · chelating · bufferingraters disagree

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

    • Phenoxyethanol4/10preservative · antimicrobialraters disagree

      Mild sensitizer for some · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

    • Red 334/10cosmetic 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 (16)

    • Water
    • Propylene Glycolcommon irritant
    • Polyquaternium-37
    • Propylene Glycol Dicaprylate/Dicaprate
    • Glycerinhumectant
    • Butyrospermum Parkii Butter
    • Glycine Soja Oil
    • Olea Europaea Fruit Oil
    • Cetyl Alcohol
    • Cetearyl Alcohol
    • Behentrimonium Methosulfate
    • Lanolin Oilcommon irritantrich occlusive
    • Hydrolyzed Quinoa
    • Butylene Glycol
    • Potassium Sorbate
    • Ethylhexylglycerin
    What these ingredient tags mean (5)

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

    • common irritantPropylene Glycol, Lanolin Oil

      • Propylene Glycol: A solvent that shows up in patch-test clinics, more often as irritation than as allergy. American Contact Dermatitis Society, Allergen of the Year 2018 (Jacob SE, Scheman A, McGowan MA, Dermatitis 2018;29(1):3-5).
      • Lanolin Oil: A rich wool-derived emollient that is also a long-standing patch-test allergen. American Contact Dermatitis Society, Allergen of the Year 2023: "Lanolin: The 2023 American Contact Dermatitis Society Allergen of the Year", Cutis 2023;112(2):78-81, DOI 10.12788/cutis.0825, PMID 37820332; FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(k), lists lanolin as a skin protectant at 12,5 to 50%.
    • fragrance materialHexyl Cinnamal, Limonene, Linalool

      • 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.
      • Limonene: A citrus-smelling fragrance component named separately on the label; the one name covers three related isomers. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 88: 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. That entry carries transition footnote (37): stock that does not comply, lawfully placed on the Union market before the 31 July 2026 cut-off, may still be made available until 31 July 2028. It is marked on the racemic dl-limonene/Dipentene line and the (S)-(l-limonene) line, but NOT the (R)-p-mentha-1,8-diene (d-limonene) line, CAS 5989-27-5, whose duty was already running as entry 88 before Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/1545 and so needed no transition. All three isomers are declared under the single glossary name "Limonene", so that name on a label does not identify which of them is present.
      • 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.
    • undeclared fragrance blendParfum

      • Parfum: 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.
    • rich occlusiveLanolin Oil

      • Lanolin Oil: A rich wool-derived emollient that is also a long-standing patch-test allergen. American Contact Dermatitis Society, Allergen of the Year 2023: "Lanolin: The 2023 American Contact Dermatitis Society Allergen of the Year", Cutis 2023;112(2):78-81, DOI 10.12788/cutis.0825, PMID 37820332; FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(k), lists lanolin as a skin protectant at 12,5 to 50%.
    • 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".