Cleaner pick · Safest cleansing we have rated
Africology Skincare & Spa
Bio Therapy Conditioner+47 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 6967 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 →
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 →
Also screened, nothing found: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · California Proposition 65 · IARC Monographs · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors
US EPA Safer Choice (SCIL) recognizes 53% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
Environmental
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
Labor
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Timotei 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.
Ingredients, decoded
Data availability
Robust26 of 26 characterized
Our sources have reference data on all 26 listed ingredients.
Worth a look (10)
Strong contact sensitizerflagged by 3 of 9 lists →
Strong contact sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists →
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists →
EU-regulated fragrance allergenflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
Health Canada Hotlist — restrictedflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
Mild sensitizer for someflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
EU-regulated fragrance allergenflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (16)