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/L'arbre vert/Nourishing Body Lotion with Coconut Oil & Mango Butter
LV
L'arbre vert

Nourishing Body Lotion with Coconut Oil & Mango Butter

Body Lotion250mlGTIN 3450601036552

Cleaner pick · Safest moisturize we have rated

Africology Skincare & Spa

Bio Therapy Body Lotion

+43 on ingredient safety

250ml · 78 ZAR · 31.20 ZAR/100 ml

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 1695 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

52OUT OF 100Poor

range 44–73

57▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

58-point split

62

Scan

42

Precautionary

100

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

1695 found

See better →

Flagged

2 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 58-point gap between the two loudest voices.

42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
100Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 1695 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

58 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 →

  • 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 →

✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · California Proposition 65 · IARC Monographs · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · ECHA SVHC Candidate List

✓Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 80% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.

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

    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

    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

    Robust·20 of 20 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on all 20 listed ingredients.

    Worth a look (2)

    • PARFUM6/10undeclared fragrance blendperfuming · fragranceraters disagree

      Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • CITRIC ACID4/10fragrance · chelating · bufferingraters disagree

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

    ✓No flags in our sources (18)

    • water
    • CAPRYLIC
    • CAPRIC TRIGLYCERIDE
    • COCOS NUCIFERA OIL
    • GLYCERINhumectant
    • GLYCERYL STEARATE CITRATE
    • ORYZA SATIVA STARCH
    • MANGIFERA INDICA SEED BUTTER
    • CETEARYL ALCOHOL
    • GLYCERYL STEARATE
    • GLYCERYL CAPRYLATE
    • STEARIC ACID
    • XANTHAN GUM
    • PALMITIC ACID
    • BENTONITE
    • vitamin e
    • HELIANTHUS ANNUUS SEED OIL
    • SODIUM BENZOATE
    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.

    • 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.
    • 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".