
Cleaner pick · Safest hands & feet we have rated
Round Lab
Birch Moisturizing Hand Cream+74 on ingredient safety
$8.50
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 90-point gap between the two loudest voices.
All 2262 cleaner options, safest first We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
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 →
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: California Proposition 65 · IARC Monographs · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
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 · 2 of 4 axes
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
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.
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.
Data availability
Good32 of 41 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 32 of 41 listed ingredients; 9 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (11)
ANSES CMR-listedflagged by 3 of 9 lists →
Endocrine-activeflagged by 3 of 9 lists →
Endocrine-activeflagged by 3 of 9 lists →
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
ANSES endocrine candidateflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Persistent / bioaccumulativeflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists →
EU-regulated fragrance allergenflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (21)
No data in our sources (9)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.