White Tea & Yuzu Hand Cream safety rating

White Tea & Yuzu Hand Cream safety rating | Greenlens

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 58-point gap between the two loudest voices.

42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent

100Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent

050100

See why, ingredient by ingredient

All 870 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 →
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 · California Proposition 65 · IARC Monographs · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist

Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 53% 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

6 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

Ingredient safety1.0×

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.

Packaging1.0×

0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.

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.

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

Robust15 of 17 characterized

Our sources have reference data on 15 of 17 listed ingredients; 2 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

Worth a look (2)

Citralfragrance material

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 materialCitral
- Citral: A lemon-scented fragrance component named separately on the label; the one name covers three related substances. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 70: 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. As replaced by Commission Regulation (EU) 2026/909 of 27 April 2026, the entry is a GROUPED one covering citral, geranial and neral, declared collectively as "Citral", with per-product-type caps from 0,032% in deodorant to 1,2% in rinse-off and leave-on hair products. Its three substances carry two different sell-through dates: products not complying may not be placed on the Union market from 1 January 2027 in every case, and may not be made available from 1 July 2028 for citral, footnote (**), or from 1 August 2028 for geranial and neral, footnote (***). In the consolidated text those two footnotes are renumbered (46) and (47); both are worded "these substances", where the footnotes that attach to a single named substance say "that substance".
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".