Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 32-point gap between the two loudest voices.
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 →
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 →
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Blistex as a company and applies to everything they make, not this product alone. 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 →
Coverage & match quality
6 ratings · 4 of 4 axes
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+What we know about the packaging
Unidentified0 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.
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.
Data availability
Good16 of 23 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 16 of 23 listed ingredients; 7 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (2)
EU microplastics-restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
Persistent / bioaccumulativeflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (14)
No data in our sources (7)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.
These describe what an ingredient is, not whether it is a problem. The stance marks above are the ratings; these are not.
common irritantlanolin alcohol
rich occlusivedimethicone, lanolin alcohol, petrolatum
humectantsodium hyaluronate
Where this came from
Cruelty-free status recorded from ethicalelephant.com ↗
Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.