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/Joy/Honey and Almonds Body Lotion
Honey and Almonds Body Lotion
Joy

Honey and Almonds Body Lotion

Body Lotion750mlGTIN 8904035422092

Cleaner pick · Safest moisturize we have rated

Africology Skincare & Spa

Bio Therapy Body Lotion

+36 on ingredient safety

250ml · 78 ZAR · 31.20 ZAR/100 ml

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 1458 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

55OUT OF 100Fair

range 51–70

64▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

39-point split

78

Scan

55

Precautionary

94

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

1458 found

See better →

Flagged

4 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 39-point gap between the two loudest voices.

55Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
94Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 1458 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

39 pts apart
  • 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: California Proposition 65 · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · 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 50% 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

    6 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.

    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

    Robust·21 of 24 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on 21 of 24 listed ingredients; 3 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

    Worth a look (4)

    • Octyl Methoxycinnamate7/10raters disagree

      Endocrine-active · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • Methyl Paraben7/10preservative · fragranceraters disagree

      Endocrine-active · flagged by 3 of 9 lists →

    • Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Extract4/10humectant · emollient · oral careraters disagree

      IARC possible carcinogen (Group 2B) · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

    • CI 191404/10colorant · hair dyeingraters disagree

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

    ✓No flags in our sources (17)

    • Water
    • Mineral Oilrich occlusive
    • Glycerinehumectant
    • Glyceryl Monostearate
    • Cetyl Alcohol
    • Isopropyl Palmitatecomedogenic in testing
    • Stearic Acid
    • Dimethiconerich occlusive
    • Triticum Vulgare Germ Oil
    • Propylene Glycolcommon irritant
    • Honey Extract
    • Prunus Amygdalus Dulcis Oil
    • Butyrospermum Parki Butter
    • Acrylates/C10-30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer
    • Disodium EDTA
    • CI 15985
    • Perfume

    No data in our sources (3)

    • Lanolin Anhydrous
    • Thethanolamine
    • Propyl Paran Butylated Hydroxytoluene

    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.

    • comedogenic in testingIsopropyl Palmitate

      • Isopropyl Palmitate: A light emollient named among the pore-clogging materials in the rabbit-ear assay. Fulton JE Jr, Pay SR, Fulton JE 3rd, "Comedogenicity of current therapeutic products, cosmetics, and ingredients in the rabbit ear", J Am Acad Dermatol 1984;10(1):96-105, PMID 6229554. The openly readable abstract names this ingredient among its "ingredient offenders", in prose and without a numeric rating: "Ingredient offenders include isopropyl myristate and its analogs, such as isopropyl palmitate, isopropyl isostearate, butyl stearate, isostearyl neopentanoate, myristyl myristate..." The rabbit-ear assay rates raw ingredients and does not predict how a finished formula behaves on human skin.
    • common irritantPropylene Glycol

      • Propylene Glycol: A solvent that shows up in patch-test clinics, more often as irritation than as allergy. American Contact Dermatitis Society, Allergen of the Year 2018 (Jacob SE, Scheman A, McGowan MA, Dermatitis 2018;29(1):3-5).
    • rich occlusiveMineral Oil, Dimethicone

      • Mineral Oil: 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)."
      • 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%.
    • humectantGlycerine

      • Glycerine: 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".