Yves Rocher
Coconut Body Milk
Body LotionGTIN 3660005563626
Cleaner pick · Safest moisturize we have rated
Africology Skincare & Spa
Bio Therapy Body Lotion+45 on ingredient safety
250ml · 78 ZAR · 31.20 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 52-point gap between the two loudest voices.
42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs94Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredientAll 2579 cleaner options, safest first We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
Every rater, every axis
Ingredient safety
52 pts apartIndependent — 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 →
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 · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist
Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 57% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
Environmental
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Labor
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Yves Rocher 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
8 ratings · 4 of 4 axes
- Some ratings rest on an automatic match that has not been human-reviewed.
Weighted by what you care about
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+
1.0×
1.0×
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
Robust20 of 21 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 20 of 21 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (6)
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
IARC possible carcinogen (Group 2B)flagged by 1 of 9 lists →
EU microplastics-restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (14)
No data in our sources (1)
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.
fragrance materialCOUMARIN, HEXYL CINNAMAL
- COUMARIN: A sweet hay-scented fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 77: 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.
- HEXYL CINNAMAL: A jasmine-like fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 87: 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.
rich occlusiveDIMETHICONE
- DIMETHICONE: A silicone that forms a film on the surface of the skin without an oily feel. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(g), lists dimethicone as a skin protectant at 1 to 30%.
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 ebay.com ↗
Cruelty-free status recorded from crueltyfree.peta.org ↗
Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.