Greenlens

Every public rating on one cosmetic, the places they disagree kept visible, and a single score whose weighting you control.

Navigate

  • Browse
  • In your home
  • Ask Sonion
  • Methodology
  • Criteria
  • Extension
  • How scoring works
  • Account

The one rule

We never blend a score that hides who disagrees. Funding model travels with every rating. Weights are computed at read time and never stored.

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/I provenzali/Saponetta vegetale extrafina profumata Tiglio
Saponetta vegetale extrafina profumata Tiglio
I provenzali

Saponetta vegetale extrafina profumata Tiglio

uncategorized100gGTIN 8025796000210

Your composite

35OUT OF 100Horrible

range 23–66

23▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

32-point split

0

Scan

32

Precautionary

25

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

Alternatives

No fair cohort on file, so no comparison.

Flagged

9 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 85-point gap between the two loudest voices.

0Greenlens Ingredient ScanIndependent
vs
85Health Canada Ingredient HotlistGovernment
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

85 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 →

  • 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 · IARC Monographs · US NTP Report on Carcinogens

✓Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 54% 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

    7 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

    +
    1.0×
    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.

    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.

    Ingredients, decoded

    Data availability

    Robust·23 of 24 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on 23 of 24 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

    Worth a look (10)

    • Butylphenyl Methylpropional10/10fragrance materialperfuming · fragranceraters disagree

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

    • Parfum6/10undeclared fragrance blendperfuming · fragranceraters disagree

      Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • Geraniol6/10fragrance materialperfuming · tonicraters disagree

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

    • Fragrance6/10undeclared fragrance blendperfumingraters disagree

      Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • Citric Acid4/10fragrance · chelating · bufferingraters disagree

      Health Canada Hotlist — restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

    • Tetrasodium Etidronate4/10chelating · emulsion stabilising · viscosity controllingraters disagree

      EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • Amyl Cinnamal4/10fragrance materialperfumingraters disagree

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

    • Hydroxycitronellal4/10fragrance materialperfumingraters disagree

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

    • CI 420904/10colorant · hair dyeingraters disagree

      EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • Blue 1 Lake4/10cosmetic colorant · hair dyeingraters disagree

      EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 2 of 9 lists

    ✓No flags in our sources (13)

    • Sodium Palmate
    • Sodium Palm Kernelate
    • Aqua
    • Glycerinhumectant
    • Olea Europaea Fruit Oil
    • Prunus Amygdalus Dulcis Oil
    • Lecithin
    • Sodium Chloride
    • CI 47005
    • Water
    • Yellow 10 Lake
    • Olive
    • Sweet Almond

    No data in our sources (1)

    • Materie derivate da Olio di Palma Sostenibile certificato RSPO

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

    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 materialAmyl Cinnamal, Butylphenyl Methylpropional, Geraniol, Hydroxycitronellal

      • Amyl Cinnamal: A jasmine-like fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 67: 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.
      • 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.
      • Hydroxycitronellal: A lily-like fragrance component named separately on the label. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 72: 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.
    • 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 melonistore.com ↗

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