Free Shipping for International Orders Over $250

Free Shipping for all Australian Orders over $100

MY CART ×

Shopping cart is empty!

Subtotal

SHIPPING

DISCOUNT APPLIED

GIFT VOUCHER APPLIED

TOTAL
Shopping cart is empty.

THE SKIN JOURNAL

We want to help you understand your skin, so that you know what’s going on with it, what to put on it, and how to care for it. Sciency stuff that answers so many of your skin questions, written in a clear and simple way. Penned by our founder, Ee Ting Ng.



Does non-comedogenic mean no breakouts?

23 July, 2018

Does non-comedogenic mean no breakouts?

Ever broken out from a non-comedogenic product before?

By their very definition, they are technically not supposed to clog pores. So why and how did the opposite happen?


The origins of comedogenicity

'Comedogenicity' is the ability for something to cause comedones or clogged pores. This concept came about in the 1970s to explain how acne can be caused by the application of certain cosmetic products.

The original study involved applying different ingredients on rabbits' ears and see if they caused comedones. The comedogenicity of the ingredients were scored on a scale of 0-5. A non-comedogenic ingredient rated 0 whilst a highly comedogenic one rated 5.


Validity of comedogenicity ratings

Later, it was found that results of the rabbit ear tests were not applicable to human skin and that individual ingredients’ comedogenicity ratings alone do not reliably predict products’ comedogenicity. Hence these tests became obsolete over time.


Modern comedogenicity tests

Today, comedogenicity tests are done on human volunteers using the finished product.

However, like the rabbit ear test, it also has drawbacks mostly because there is no standardised or consistent way of these testings. Therefore, human comedogenicity test design and result interpretation can be both inconsistent and inconclusive. So really, there is simply no way of accurately judging comedogenicity from such tests.


What to look out for instead

Since the 'non-comedogenic' claim is not definitive, what can we do to determine if a product will cause blocked pores?

  • Product consistency

Usually, the thicker the product, the more likely it will block pores. If you are prone to clogged pores, choose lightweight products that spread and absorb quickly instead of thick, tenacious creams.

  • Amount and type of oils

Generally, the higher the oil content, the more likely it will cause comedones. The type of oil also matters. Plant oils (especially olive, almond, coconut oils and cocoa butter) have a higher propensity to clog pores. If you have are particularly acne-prone, it is better to avoid plant oils entirely.

  • Length of time of skin contact

Product that stay on skin for longer has a higher chance to cause clogged pores. Choosing a moisturiser generally needs more careful consideration than a cleanser. However, some cleansers (balm, cream or oil-based) do not actually doesn't wash off completely. So the same degree of caution will apply in those cases.


At the end of the day, 'non-comedogenicity' as a measure may be reassuring but not a certainty. We can make a good guess from observing and feeling the product, but the only sure way to know is to use it.


References

Kligman and Mills, Acne Cosmetica, Arch Dermatol. 1972;106(6):843-850. doi:10 1001/ archderm. 1972.01620150029011

Morris and Kwan, Use of the rabbit ear model in evaluating the comedogenic potential of cosmetic ingredients, j. Soc. Cosmet. Chem., 34, 215-225 (August 1983)

Kligman, Petrolalum is not comedogenic in rabbits or humans: A critical reappraisal of the rabbit ear assay and the concept of "acne cosmetica", J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem., 47, 41-48 (January/February 1996)

Fulton, Comedogenicity and irritancy of commonly used ingredients in skin care products, J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem., 40, 321-333 (November/December 1989)