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/Blistex/Lip Medex
Lip Medex
Blistex

Lip Medex

Lip BalmGTIN 0041388160016
Grapefruit & Currant Thinkdaily Lip Balm

Cleaner pick · Safest lip care we have rated

Thinkbaby

Grapefruit & Currant Thinkdaily Lip Balm

+10 on ingredient safety

$3.49

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 638 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

55OUT OF 100Fair
90
Safety
—
Eco
30
Labor
46
Pkg
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

638 found

See better →

Flagged

1 ingredient

What's flagged →

All 638 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

  • A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

✓Also screened, nothing found: Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · California Proposition 65 · IARC Monographs · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors

Environmental

    ✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

    Labor

    • 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 →

    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

    3 ratings · 3 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.

    1.0×
    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

    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

    Not enough to score·9 of 16 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on 9 of 16 listed ingredients; 7 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill. That is not enough of the label for a safety score to be honest, so we do not publish one.

    Worth a look (1)

    • benzyl alcohol6/10fragrance materialpreservative · perfuming · solventraters disagree

      EU harmonised skin sensitizer · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

    ✓No flags in our sources (8)

    • flavouring
    • lanolincommon irritantrich occlusive
    • menthoxypropanediol
    • microcrystalline wax
    • myristyl myristatecomedogenic in testing
    • ricinus communis oil
    • saccharin
    • theobroma cacao

    No data in our sources (7)

    • swax
    • diisopropyl bate
    • fragrances
    • ultra medtm formula to pruvi quick cooling lip relief you can feel working
    • sore lips
    • itching sensations that accompany sore lips
    • serious dryness

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

    What these ingredient tags mean (4)

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

    • comedogenic in testingmyristyl myristate

      • myristyl myristate: A waxy emollient named among the pore-clogging materials in the rabbit-ear assay. Fulton JE Jr, Pay SR, Fulton JE 3rd, "Comedogenicity of current therapeutic products, cosmetics, and ingredients in the rabbit ear", J Am Acad Dermatol 1984;10(1):96-105, PMID 6229554. The openly readable abstract names this ingredient among its "ingredient offenders", in prose and without a numeric rating: "Ingredient offenders include isopropyl myristate and its analogs, such as isopropyl palmitate, isopropyl isostearate, butyl stearate, isostearyl neopentanoate, myristyl myristate..." The rabbit-ear assay rates raw ingredients and does not predict how a finished formula behaves on human skin.
    • common irritantlanolin

      • lanolin: 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 materialbenzyl alcohol

      • benzyl alcohol: Used both as a fragrance component and as a preservative; the EU names it either way. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 45: 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 (38), which is footnote (37) plus a condition: stock that does not comply may still be made available until 31 July 2028 only "provided that they comply with the restrictions applicable on 15 August 2023", and only if it was lawfully placed on the Union market before the 31 July 2026 cut-off. Entry 45 covers its non-preservative use; it is separately an allowed preservative at Annex V entry 34.
    • rich occlusivelanolin

      • lanolin: 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%.

    Where this came from

    Product identity (name, brand, category) verified against ebay.com ↗

    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.