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/Needs/Creme Hidratante de Ureia 10%
Creme Hidratante de Ureia 10%
Needs

Creme Hidratante de Ureia 10%

Body LotionGTIN 7896048606938

Cleaner pick · Safest moisturize we have rated

Africology Skincare & Spa

Bio Therapy Body Lotion

+88 on ingredient safety

250ml · 78 ZAR · 31.20 ZAR/100 ml

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 5324 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

49OUT OF 100Poor

range 45–72

12▲▼ split
Safety
90
Eco
—
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

lenses agree

0

Scan

0

Precautionary

0

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

5324 found

See better →

Flagged

14 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 80-point gap between the two loudest voices.

0Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
vs
80ECHA SVHC Candidate ListGovernment
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 5324 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

80 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 →

  • 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: US NTP Report on Carcinogens · California Proposition 65 · IARC Monographs

Environmental

  • A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. 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×
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

Good·27 of 33 characterized

Our sources have reference data on 27 of 33 listed ingredients; 6 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

Worth a look (14)

  • cyclomethicone10/10emollient · hair conditioning · solventraters disagree

    EU-prohibited · flagged by 5 of 9 lists →

  • butylphenyl methylpropional10/10fragrance materialperfuming · fragranceraters disagree

    Reproductive-toxicant concern · flagged by 5 of 9 lists →

  • hydroxyisohexyl 3 cyclohexene carboxaldehyde10/10fragrance materialperfuming · fragranceraters disagree

    EU-prohibited · flagged by 4 of 9 lists →

  • triclosan7/10preservative · antimicrobial · deodorantraters disagree

    Endocrine-active · flagged by 5 of 9 lists →

  • bht7/10fragrance · antioxidantraters disagree

    Endocrine-active · flagged by 3 of 9 lists →

  • methylisothiazolinone7/10common irritantpreservativeraters disagree

    Strong contact sensitizer · flagged by 3 of 9 lists →

  • parfum6/10undeclared fragrance blendperfuming · fragranceraters disagree

    Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

  • citronellol6/10fragrance materialperfumingraters disagree

    ANSES endocrine candidate · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

  • hexyl cinnamal6/10fragrance materialperfumingraters disagree

    ANSES endocrine candidate · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

  • d limonene6/10fragrance materialraters disagree

    ANSES endocrine candidate · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

  • linalool6/10fragrance materialperfuming · deodorantraters disagree

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

  • carbomer4/10emulsion stabilising · gel forming · viscosity controllingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

  • phenoxyethanol4/10preservative · antimicrobialraters disagree

    Mild sensitizer for some · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

  • alpha isomethyl ionone4/10fragrance materialperfuming · skin conditioningraters disagree

    EU-regulated fragrance allergen · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

✓No flags in our sources (13)

  • ureahumectant
  • ammonium lactate
  • water
  • caprylic
  • capric triglyceride
  • ceteareth 20
  • cetearyl alcohol
  • disodium edta
  • ethylhexyl stearate
  • Glycereth 26
  • glycerinhumectant
  • glyceryl stearate
  • paraffinum liquidumrich occlusive

No data in our sources (6)

  • dimeth cone
  • bis lauryl Cocammopropylamine
  • hdi
  • peg 100 copolymer butylene gycol
  • propanodiol
  • benzy salicylate

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

What these ingredient tags mean (5)

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

  • common irritantmethylisothiazolinone

    • methylisothiazolinone: A preservative that patch-test clinics see reactions to often enough that the EU banned it from leave-on products. American Contact Dermatitis Society, Allergen of the Year 2013 (Castanedo-Tardana MP, Zug KA, Dermatitis 2013;24(1):2-6); SCCS Opinion on Methylisothiazolinone (P94), Submission II, SENSITISATION ONLY (SCCS/1521/13, revision of 27 March 2014); banned in leave-on cosmetics by Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/1198, which recites the need to address "the increased incidence of allergies induced by methylisothiazolinone".
  • fragrance materialalpha isomethyl ionone, butylphenyl methylpropional, citronellol, hexyl cinnamal, hydroxyisohexyl 3 cyclohexene carboxaldehyde, d limonene, linalool

    • alpha isomethyl ionone: A powdery violet fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 90: 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.
    • butylphenyl methylpropional: A lily-of-the-valley fragrance component the EU no longer permits in cosmetics. It was a declarable fragrance allergen at Annex III entry 83 of EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009. Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/1902 deleted that entry and moved it to Annex II entry 1666 (2-(4-tert-butylbenzyl) propionaldehyde, CAS 80-54-6), prohibiting it in cosmetic products from 1 March 2022.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • hydroxyisohexyl 3 cyclohexene carboxaldehyde: A floral fragrance component the EU no longer permits in cosmetics. It was a declarable fragrance allergen at Annex III entry 79 of EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009. Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/1410 deleted that entry and inserted it at Annex II entry 1380 (HICC, CAS 51414-25-6 and 31906-04-4), prohibiting it in cosmetic products.
    • d limonene: A citrus-smelling fragrance component named separately on the label; the one name covers three related isomers. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 88: 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. That entry carries transition footnote (37): stock that does not comply, lawfully placed on the Union market before the 31 July 2026 cut-off, may still be made available until 31 July 2028. It is marked on the racemic dl-limonene/Dipentene line and the (S)-(l-limonene) line, but NOT the (R)-p-mentha-1,8-diene (d-limonene) line, CAS 5989-27-5, whose duty was already running as entry 88 before Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/1545 and so needed no transition. All three isomers are declared under the single glossary name "Limonene", so that name on a label does not identify which of them is present.
    • 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.
  • 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.
  • rich occlusiveparaffinum liquidum

    • paraffinum liquidum: A refined oil that sits on the surface of the skin; it has a heavy finish. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(l): "Mineral oil, 50 to 100 percent; 30 to 35 percent in combination with colloidal oatmeal in accordance with 347.20(a)(4)."
  • humectanturea, glycerin

    • urea: A humectant the skin already makes; at higher levels it also softens thickened skin. StatPearls, "Moisturizers", NCBI Bookshelf NBK545171, updated 12 February 2024: "Urea is a component of NMF. The addition of urea to moisturizers helps with the absorption of water into the stratum corneum." The FDA label for prescription-strength urea calls it keratolytic and states that its mechanism of action is not yet known.
    • 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 mercadolivre.com.br ↗

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