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/Health Basics/Sensitive Skin Relief Body Wash
Sensitive Skin Relief Body Wash
Health Basics

Sensitive Skin Relief Body Wash

Body Wash1lGTIN 9400571745163

Cleaner pick · Safest wash & scrub we have rated

Africology Skincare & Spa

Bio Therapy Body Wash

+27 on ingredient safety

250ml · 60 ZAR · 24 ZAR/100 ml

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 1546 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

53OUT OF 100Poor

range 46–66

73▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
—
Labor
32
Pkg

Why this score

40-point split

100

Scan

60

Precautionary

100

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

1546 found

See better →

Flags

No ingredient flags.

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 40-point gap between the two loudest voices.

60Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
100Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 1546 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

40 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 →

  • 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 →

✓Also screened, nothing found: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist

✓US EPA Safer Choice (SCIL) recognizes 56% 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

    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

    Partly identified·1 of 2 identified

    1 of 2 packaging components is a named material; Plastic (unspecified) is recorded only in general terms, so that part of the score is a stand-in.

    • 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·16 of 16 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on all 16 listed ingredients.

    Worth a look (3)

    • Cocamidopropyl Betaine6/10antistatic · cleansing · hair conditioningraters disagree

      Strong contact sensitizer · flagged by 1 of 9 lists

    • Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Extract4/10humectant · emollient · oral careraters 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 (13)

    • Water
    • Glycerine
    • Sodium Cocoyl Isethionate
    • Sodium Lauroyl Sarcosinate
    • Disodium Cocoamphodiacetate
    • Hydrolyzed Jojoba Esters
    • Lauryl Glucoside
    • Stearyl Citrate
    • Panthenol
    • Saccharide Isomerate
    • Phormium Tenax (Harakeke) Leaf Extract
    • Acrylates/C10-30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer
    • Caprylyl Glycol