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/Cosmo Naturel/Nourishing Body Milk Shea Sweet Almond
Nourishing Body Milk Shea Sweet Almond
Cosmo Naturel

Nourishing Body Milk Shea Sweet Almond

Body LotionGTIN 3489940249705

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 1886 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

58OUT OF 100Fair

range 53–72

57▲▼ split
Safety
70
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

1886 found

See better →

Flagged

5 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 1886 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

58 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 →

  • 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 · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · IARC Monographs

Environmental

  • Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

✓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 · 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×
1.0×
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

Fair·15 of 24 characterized

Our sources have reference data on 15 of 24 listed ingredients; 9 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

Worth a look (5)

  • Sodium stearoyl glutam Parfum6/10raters disagree

    Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

  • Geraniol6/10fragrance materialperfuming · tonicraters disagree

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

  • essential oil6/10raters disagree

    Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

  • Lactic acid4/10exfoliating acidhumectant · buffering · skin conditioningraters disagree

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

  • Citric acid4/10fragrance · chelating · bufferingraters disagree

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

✓No flags in our sources (10)

  • Glyceryl stearate
  • Glycerinhumectant
  • Prunus amygdalus dulcis oil
  • Calendula officinalis flower extract
  • Lavandula angustifolia
  • Helianthus annuus seed oil
  • Sodium dehydroacetate
  • water
  • Sweet almond
  • sunflower

No data in our sources (9)

  • MORÉDIENTS
  • Butyrospermum parki
  • She butter
  • oat
  • Ker extract
  • lavend water
  • Coco-glucosi Potassium sorbate
  • Cita Citronello
  • Linaloo

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

What these ingredient tags mean (3)

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

  • fragrance materialGeraniol

    • Geraniol: A rose-scented fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 78: 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.
  • exfoliating acidLactic acid

    • Lactic acid: An alpha hydroxy acid that loosens surface skin cells; it also makes skin more sun-sensitive while you use it. FDA, "Guidance for Industry: Labeling for Topically Applied Cosmetic Products Containing Alpha Hydroxy Acids as Ingredients" (announced at 70 FR 1721, 10 January 2005; FDA web pages title it "Labeling for Cosmetics Containing Alpha Hydroxy Acids"), which names this acid and recommends the statement "Sunburn Alert: This product contains an alpha hydroxy acid (AHA) that may increase your skin's sensitivity to the sun and particularly the possibility of sunburn."
  • 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".

Where this came from

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

Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.