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/Oshea Herbals/Papaya Clean Anti Blemish Facewash
Papaya Clean Anti Blemish Facewash
Oshea Herbals

Papaya Clean Anti Blemish Facewash

Face Wash / Facial Cleanser50gGTIN 8906036217684
CLAY CLEANSER WITH LAVENDER Travel Size

Cleaner pick · Safest cleansers & exfoliants we have rated

Sodashi

CLAY CLEANSER WITH LAVENDER Travel Size

+55 on ingredient safety

16 AUD

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 4676 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

46OUT OF 100Poor

range 36–70

45▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

69-point split

62

Scan

25

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

4676 found

See better →

Flagged

5 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 69-point gap between the two loudest voices.

25Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
94Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 4676 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

69 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 →

  • 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: Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · California Proposition 65 · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors

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

    5 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

    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

    Fair·14 of 23 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on 14 of 23 listed ingredients; 9 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

    Worth a look (5)

    • Imidazolidinyl Urea8/10common irritantpreservativeraters disagree

      Carcinogen-linked · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

    • Ethylene Glycol Monostearale Fragrance6/10raters disagree

      Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • Potassium Hydroxide4/10bufferingraters disagree

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

    • Aloe Vera Extract4/10raters disagree

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

    • Phenoxyethanol4/10preservative · antimicrobialraters disagree

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

    ✓No flags in our sources (9)

    • Purified Water
    • Glycerinehumectant
    • Stearic Acid
    • Myristic Acid
    • Palmitic Acid
    • Coconut acid
    • Sodium Methyl Cocoyl Taurate
    • Cetyl Alcohol
    • Xylitylglucoside

    No data in our sources (9)

    • Cocamidopropy Betaine
    • Papaya Extract
    • Liquorice
    • Glycyrrhiza Glabra Extract
    • Mulberry Extract
    • Anhydroxylit Xylitol
    • Colour
    • Carica papaya
    • Morus alba

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

    What these ingredient tags mean (2)

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

    • common irritantImidazolidinyl Urea

      • Imidazolidinyl Urea: A preservative the FDA lists as a formaldehyde releaser, so formaldehyde-reactive skin can notice it. How much reaches the skin depends on the whole formula, not on this name alone. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex V entry 27, permits imidazolidinyl urea as a preservative up to 0,6%. The FDA names it among the "formaldehyde and formaldehyde releasing ingredients" on its Allergens in Cosmetics page (content current 25 February 2022). Annex V preamble point 2, as amended by Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/1181, requires the warning "releases formaldehyde" on any product whose total released formaldehyde exceeds 0,001% (10 ppm). That Regulation states the sensitisation ground itself, so the chain is drawn by the regulator and not by us: recital (2) names the class, "Certain of those preservatives are gradually releasing formaldehyde in order to fulfil a preserving function in the final cosmetic product (so called formaldehyde releasers)", and recital (3) gives the purpose of the warning, "In order to inform consumers sensitised to formaldehyde about the presence of formaldehyde that may trigger an allergic reaction". Recital (1) records that formaldehyde is classified a skin sensitizer (Category 1) in Part 3 of Annex VI to Regulation (EC) 1272/2008.
    • 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".