Cleaner pick · Safest cleansing we have rated
Africology Skincare & Spa
Bio Therapy Conditioner+45 on ingredient safety, gives up 14 on packaging
250ml · 47.50 ZAR · 19 ZAR/100 ml
Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Ranked by safety only. Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Payout never affects a rating, a ranking, or the cleaner pick.
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 46-point gap between the two loudest voices.
42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs88Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredientAll 5239 cleaner options, safest first We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
Every rater, every axis
Ingredient safety
46 pts apartA 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 →
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 →
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 →
A government authority. 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 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens
Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 63% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
Environmental
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
Labor
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Fructis 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
9 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
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.
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
Robust22 of 24 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 22 of 24 listed ingredients; 2 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (9)
EU harmonised CMR (cat. 2)flagged by 4 of 9 lists →
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Transparency concernflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
IARC possible carcinogen (Group 2B)flagged by 1 of 9 lists →
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Health Canada Hotlist — restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (13)
No data in our sources (2)
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.
common irritantSODIUM LAURYL SULFATE, COCO-BETAINE
- SODIUM LAURYL SULFATE: A strong cleansing agent used as the reference irritant in skin-irritation testing. OECD Test Guideline 439 (in vitro skin irritation, reconstructed human epidermis), paragraph 24: "The suggested PC is 5% aqueous SDS", sodium dodecyl sulphate, the same substance as sodium lauryl sulfate, CAS 151-21-3.
- COCO-BETAINE: A mild cleansing agent, but a recurring patch-test finding, usually traced to leftovers from how it is made. American Contact Dermatitis Society, Allergen of the Year 2004 (Fowler JF Jr, Dermatitis 2004;15(1):3-4).
fragrance materialLINALOOL, GERANIOL, CITRONELLOL
- LINALOOL: A floral fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 84: 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.
- 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.
- CITRONELLOL: A rose-and-citrus fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 86: 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.
undeclared fragrance blendPARFUM / FRAGRANCE
- PARFUM / FRAGRANCE: 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.
exfoliating acidSALICYLIC ACID
- SALICYLIC ACID: A beta hydroxy acid that clears the inside of pores; the EU restricts its level and keeps it off children under three. SCCS Opinion on Salicylic Acid, Submission I (SCCS/1601/18, corrigendum of 20 to 21 June 2019); EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009 Annex III entry 98, as amended by Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/850, which for purposes other than preservation caps it at 3,0% in rinse-off hair products, 2,0% in other products, and 0,5% in body lotion, eye shadow, mascara, eyeliner, lipstick and roll-on deodorant, and states "Not to be used in preparations for children under 3 years of age." Its separate PRESERVATIVE use sits at Annex V entry 3, capped at 0,5% (acid), where the salts carry the carve-out "except for shampoos".
Where this came from
Cruelty-free status recorded from crueltyfreeinternational.org ↗
Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.