One of my favourite things about this community is the enthusiasm with which people research; the desire to learn more about ingredients, products, and processes is insatiable! However, as anyone who has done much poking about in this space will know, there’s a lot of dubious sources out there, so today I wanted to give a bit of an overview for things I look for when deciding if a source is trustworthy or not. Some of these “red flags” are bigger than others, and the presence of one or two doesn’t necessarily mean you should outright discard a source, but as always, think critically about claims you read and use common sense 🙂
Does the website look reputable?
This is one of the first things you can check pretty easily. Is the website packed with ads for cheap pornography and weight loss supplements? Are you being besieged with pop-up ads for this “one weird ingredient that kills belly fat”? Is it full of grammatical errors and spelling mistakes? Does something about it set off your spidey senses? If so, do some more research and see if you can corroborate the claims being made.
Are they trying to scare you? Are they appealing to fear and emotions?
Words like “toxic”, “poisonous”, “carcinogen”, and “dangerous” tend to be big red flags for me—but for the source, not the ingredient being discussed! A scientifically backed source will tend to say something like “may contain large amounts of free silica which can produce pneumoconiosis with chronic inhalation” (source), while a source trying to scare me will usually sound more like “this ingredient causes deadly pneumoconiosis“. Both things are technically true, but one of those statements is much scarier, and eliminates quite a lot of important information about the type and scale of exposure required to cause the illness, which can be fatal, but is far from 100% deadly.
I find the people who are most targeted with this sort of messaging are mothers (very understandable!), so definitely be on the lookout for phrases like “don’t use X on your children!” and “never let your child eat/do/touch/etc. X!” as potential red flags.
Are they trying way too hard to get your attention?
Not always a red flag, but if the site is full of rage and fear inducing headlines and rather hard to believe “did you know?!” facts, think critically. Is the writer of the article writing this way to bypass your critical thinking with incredulous rage or terror?
Are they dealing in absolutes?
Nothing is absolutely dangerous or safe (even the botulism toxin can be used safely—that’s botox!), so any source that is asserting anything is always safe or always dangerous is usually requires some critical examination. Look for information on concentration, dosage, usage, and exposure. Titanium dioxide is frequently called a carcinogen, while conveniently neglecting to mention that the required exposure levels are very high, the titanium dioxide must be aerosolized and inhaled, that inhaling fine insoluble powders of any variety in large amounts is likely to produce the same results, and that human studies have not backed up the assertion. From the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health & Safety:
With such widespread use of titanium dioxide, it is important to understand that the IARC conclusions are based on very specific evidence. This evidence showed that high concentrations of pigment-grade (powdered) and ultrafine titanium dioxide dust caused respiratory tract cancer in rats exposed by inhalation and intratracheal instillation*. The series of biological events or steps that produce the rat lung cancers (e.g. particle deposition, impaired lung clearance, cell injury, fibrosis, mutations and ultimately cancer) have also been seen in people working in dusty environments. Therefore, the observations of cancer in animals were considered, by IARC, as relevant to people doing jobs with exposures to titanium dioxide dust. For example, titanium dioxide production workers may be exposed to high dust concentrations during packing, milling, site cleaning and maintenance, if there are insufficient dust control measures in place. However, it should be noted that the human studies conducted so far do not suggest an association between occupational exposure to titanium dioxide and an increased risk for cancer.
Are they using “chemical” like it’s a bad word?
We’re made of chemicals. So are our homes, our pets, our loved ones, and our favourite foods. Chemicals can be naturally occurring or synthetic, and they are not inherently safe or dangerous. Water is a chemical, and so is oxygen. Too much of either can be lethal. Claiming a product or ingredient is chemical free (and therefore safe), or that something is dangerous because it’s “full of chemicals” demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of what a chemical is, and I find claims like this usually go hand-in-hand with a lot of other fear-based communications. One can argue that there’s an unsaid “toxic” or “dangerous” in front of the word “chemical”, but that’s just poor communication. If somebody told you to be afraid of all people, and then told you there was an unsaid “dangerous” in there when you pointed out their statement was so broad as to be utterly useless, I don’t think you’d give that person much credit.
Are they vilifying or praising an ingredient based on its inclusion in other products?
I often see info graphics lambasting ingredients because they are also present in products like antifreeze, as if its inclusion in a thing you shouldn’t eat makes it dangerous. By that logic we shouldn’t drink water—it’s in sewage, after all. The company an ingredient keeps in other formulas is fairly irrelevant. This also goes the other way—claims that an ingredient is safe just because it’s used in baby products (often on the writer’s baby…) also aren’t a true testament to safety.
Are they vilifying or praising an ingredient based on how it is manufactured?
This is typically followed by an assertion that the end product is contaminated with something harmful because of how it is manufactured. Sometimes this is true, sometimes it’s not, sometimes it’s true for an industrial grade version of an ingredient, but not cosmetic or food grade. Definitely do some more research! On the other side of things—something is not safe just because it was cold pressed, steam distilled, fair trade, or organic.
Are they vilifying or praising an ingredient based on how “natural” it is or isn’t?
“Natural” is a word with no hard definition, and whatever that definition may be to you, or the writer of whatever it is you’re reading, “natural” is not a synonym for safe. Arsenic, botulism, hemlock, and cancer are all 100% “natural” by most definitions (they all occur in nature with no human intervention), but they definitely aren’t safe! It’s important to research individual ingredients to learn about how to safely and effectively use them, and putting them in a “natural” or “not” category isn’t a shortcut for that research.
Are they vilifying or praising an ingredient based on how common it is?
I see this most often in skin care recipes that use a lot of kitchen ingredients, asserting their safety because you already have them in your pantry and use them for other things in your life (usually cooking). Sometimes these ingredients are great multi-purpose ingredients (arrowroot starch comes to mind), while others (baking soda!) are not all they’re cracked up to be on Pinterest.
Are they appealing to your ignorance of an ingredient to make it sound scary?
This one is downright lazy—I don’t know a lot about many, many things, but that doesn’t mean things I don’t understand are bad. “Doesn’t X sound scary?! The name is long and has many syllables! It’s chemically and terrifying and must be avoided!” Agh.
Do they have sources? Are the reputable?
Are assertions of safety, danger, contamination, etc. being backed up with links to reliable, scientifically-backed resources that don’t set off a bunch of research red flags? Are they using a bunch of other articles they’ve written on their own website as their source?
Are there any conflicts of interest?
I once read a study that concluded that soaps and detergents were both wonderful. Said study happened to be sponsored by a very large corporation that owns many smaller brands that sold both soaps and detergents. Surprise, surprise.
Are they trying to sell you something or otherwise make money off you?
This isn’t always a red flag, but it’s definitely something to be aware of. Keeping a popular website online is not an inexpensive thing, so I don’t think you can fault a website simply for having ads or participating in an affiliate program (I definitely use both to offset the high costs of keeping Humblebee & Me online). However, if they are telling you that X ingredient is toxic and dangerous while conveniently selling a product line that is marketed on the basis of being X-ingredient-free, I’m skeptical and off to look for other sources. Basically, if you spot a bunch of other red flags the selling thing is a bigger deal than if they are otherwise providing sources and not trying to scare you.
Are they sourcing entire statements and assertions?
Eg: X ingredient contains Y (no source), and Y is a carcinogen (source). Both parts of this claim need to be true for it to be at all meaningful, but there’s only a source for half of it.
How recent is the information?
Check both the publication date of the article and the sources they’re using. I’m sure I could write a well-sourced article on the merits of Phrenology if I was sure to only use the finest resources from the early 1800’s! Science is a process of constant learning and growing, so if you’re reading something that’s using an article from the 1960’s as its sole source, do some checking and see if that 1960’s research is still supported.
Are they over-simplifying a complex issue?
Sometimes you won’t find much in the way of conclusive information, and then you’ll stumble across a single source claiming to fully understand what causes cancer or obesity or acne. If the general consensus seems to be “it’s complex, there’s lots going on here, we’re still learning”, it’s highly unlikely a single website has it all figured out and the rest of the world has simply failed to notice.
Is it an infographic being rampantly shared on Facebook or Pinterest?
Not all of them are bad, but many of them are—I’ve seen dozens of them that are basically a quilt of research red flags. They’re usually the ingredient equivalent of an urban legend like the type Snopes debunks every day; designed to be sensational and shocking to motivate people to share them. Sensational things are more likely to go viral, so these sorts of things are usually very inflammatory and if not outright wrong, are often very misleading.
Are they treating anecdotes as stone-cold truths?
There’s obviously quite a lot of variety in these sort of statements; many are just nice stories and add to a recipe or other research, but when they’re given too much weight it’s time to be wary. Statements like “this lotion made my dry skin less dry” are quite different from “my friend cured her cancer with X kitchen ingredient”. As Carl Sagan said, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”.
Are they asking you to trust them for irrelevant reasons?
Statements like this often start with statements like “as a parent” or “as a survivor of X disease”, and are then followed with a assertion that has very little to do with the previous statement. For example, “As a parent I just knew I could never use X on my child because it’s dangerous.” Being a parent definitely imbues one with a massive sense of responsibility to raise their children safely, but it does not not give one bomb-sniffer-dog-like abilities to determine the safety of all the ingredients in everything at the drug store. Of course it’s very possible that this person has done lots of research and knows what they are talking about, but they shouldn’t be asking you to accept their assertions of safety or danger based on the sole fact that they have reproduced—they should be sharing their sources!
Are you finding exactly what you are searching for?
Thanks to Laura for this one—it’s great! If you do a search for “X ingredient danger” or “X ingredient causing cancer”, you’re almost certain to find something, but that doesn’t mean it’s a good source, or true. You just found a website that agrees with you.
Recommended sources
- PubMed (try using Sci-Hub to read full articles; Google “Sci-Hub” to find the current URL as it changes frequently.)
- Cosmetics Info
- CosING
- Chemists Corner
- The Beauty Brains
Alright, those are my red flags when I’m researching something! What are yours? And what are your tips for finding good information?
Had to share this anecdote, only because of the extreme irony! When reading this article, the ad that was on the page declared:
3 Foods to Remove from – The Fridge Forever
Cut a bit of belly bloat each day, by avoiding these 3 foods nucific.com
Good thing we’re able to filter out the red flags when necessary! I love your site, recipes and articles Marie! Keep ’em coming!
Ha! Well, the ads you see on Humblebee & Me are determined by your browser history, so what have you been googling? 😉 (If you clear your cookies often you usually end up getting lowest common denominator junk like this, lol).
Well written and thought out as usual. In college I had a great professor who dedicated one class period to scholarly research and sources each term. I’ve applied this advice to everything in my life and its saved me from many regrets and mistakes. Just because someone says it or publishes it doesnt mean its true. This article is a great checklist for researching and makes one think about what her assumptions and beliefs are truly based on. Thank you.
Thanks, Tonya! I had similar classes in university and they were so helpful. I grew up in a time when the internet was looked at as a dodgy source for information, so it was always drilled into us to vet our sources before we used them for any papers. Thank heavens, it’s an invaluable skill!
I’m glad you wrote this article, Marie. I found this to be a good reminder for myself, and I’m sure it will prove useful in the near future when reviewing product labels and DIY’ing.
Thanks so much, Laura!
Brilliant article Marie. Thank you for sharing this! I often have a hard time finding reputable information online due to the slew of unsubstantiated blog posts of “ahhh X ingredient is terrible!”
Thanks, Jennifer! I hope this can help a bit with the scared emails I often get about perfectly safe ingredients that have been vilified for heavens knows what reasons.
Thank you so much for this article! There are so many businesses that promote their products by vilifying particular ingredients in bath and body. It so refreshing to hear your words of common sense and wisdom in an industry rife with misinformation.
Thanks for reading, Summer! I’m definitely tired of the “everything will kill you but our products” shtick. It’s got to be one of the laziest kinds of marketing there is 😛
Thank you for this post – I can’t like it enough. Except that ‘botulism’ really can’t be used safely … botulinum toxin, on the other hand, can 😉 (Botulism is the illness caused by the toxin!)
I can’t think now what the site I’m thinking of is – if I remember when I get home (I’m away from my computer for the next few weeks) I’ll look it up and post back – but there are a couple of good pages that let you input “substance x” and “indication y” and it will they will throw up any studies that have been done, the quality of those studies, levels of evidence for use, cautions, or otherwise. Cochrane review would probably give the same end result, but needs a bit more searching.
Whoops, fixed! Thank you 🙂
I would LOVE to see that resource if you find it again, it sounds like magic!
I’ve been trying so hard to explain what kind of website to look for when looking for information that I think I’ve made a couple people so very frustrated. This is a brilliant article!
My biggest one is for ads. If there are ads all over the place and they make Disney inspired claims (bite this apple and sleep forever! Wear these shoes and a man will fall head over heels in love and stalk you!), I close that page down.
Thanks, Penny! The ads can be a bit misleading if they’re served up by an external ad service—they are usually based on things you’ve looked at on the internet recently, and the webmaster has no choice in the matter. That said, if there are 30 ads per page and they’re all junk, that also means the webmaster hasn’t deactivated the tackier categories of ads and is using some pretty low quality ad networks as high quality ones restrict the number of ads per page so the websites showing their ads don’t look like trash 😛
I’ve an ad block on my browsers so I don’t see many ads unless a page makes a widget into an add for something, I won’t see it. Those widgety ads are the ones I find tricky to handle.
Oooh yeah—if they’re going to great lengths to slap you upside the head with ads, that’s definitely not a good sign!
Exactly! And why I’ve always appreciated your blog. You provide links to off site, but never smack us upside the head with ads. I may no be able to buy from the links you use, but they provide those of us in funny countries a great base to begin looking at brand names and such to look for.
I am a nurse studying to become a family nurse practitioner. In school they drill us on having an evidence based practice. Every home work assignment has to be full of references to articles from professional sources. Most of us don’t have time to pour through multiple journals so you find the ones that do a good job of covering your specialty and rely on those for the current research. With getting into this hobby, I knew I wanted to find one or two blogs like this that would provide ongoing education and recipe ideas. There are a lot of people who seem to be experts but once you know enough, you can see major flaws in their recipes. I am so happy that I have found your blog. I have discovered this interest in dermatology that I never would’ve guessed before this hobby as being a field I would care about.
Thanks so much, Mandy! I am definitely still learning and finding holes in my knowledge and misunderstandings all the time, but I am happy to know I’m still learning and growing 🙂
Well said, Marie! One of the things that gets me is that many people completely disregard the fact that most ingredients are used in dilution and not neat. Why do they freak out ‘that even the product documenatiin/MSDS states that the product is an irritant.’ So is chilli powder but no-one complains that is is an irritant and everyone knows it needs to be used at small percentages. Why not apply that common sense to cosmetics?!
This is such a good point! I find in vitro studies are another type of info that are often the source of panic; bathing a small collection of cells in lavender essential oil in a petri dish is not the same thing as using lavender essential oil at a very low dilution in lotion 😛
Hi marie
Your article makes me more determined to fight for laws to make ingredients clearly marked and a national rules and regs for specific terminology. What is ‘organic, natural, holistic, green? All are interchangeable. I ask my pharmacist and check my university library.
I agree, but dang… that’s hard. It’s like foods labelled “healthy”—I’m not sure we could ever adequately define that word to a level where it could become regulated as science continually learns more, and so much of “healthy” is in dose. I guess I figure targeting the end consumer is easier, and maybe if they start making smarter decisions, the companies will listen!
Hi Marie,
Enjoyed this article. There is a lot of misinformation surrounding the words “chemical” and “natural”. These words seem to have a vast range of connotations that have nothing to do with their actual definitions. I had an interesting conversation with an eight-year old a few months ago. He wanted to know if my liquid water enhancer was “a chemical”. I said “…sort of…” and explained how everything (even water) is a chemical, that the product was sweetened with stevia (which is derived from a plant similar to anything mint-flavoured), and that as an adult I get to choose which chemicals I do and don’t want in my body (I prefer stevia to refined sugar). While my liquid water enhancer is less natural than plain water, it’s more natural than soda and has less sugar than many juices. Of course sugar is natural too. Each person has to come to their own conclusions regarding an ingredients’ “goodness”. Hopefully they’ll have science to back up their position.
Yes! I’m glad you’re getting the 8-year-olds in on this—let’s get ’em thinking scientifically from the get-go!
Hi! Another research red flag is to search for the dangers or benefits of some ingredient. Whatever you search, you are almost certainly going to get at least one source saying it causes cancer and one source that it cures cancer!
This is so awesome—I’ve added it to the post and credited you! SO true!
Thanks Marie! Love your work. I’ve been using ‘Cosmetic Amalyser’ application on my phone called ‘Cosmetic Free’. Whilst it’s very informative and easy to use compared to my weak google attempts, I cannot find out who’s created, produced or funded it. I can’t even remember how I started using it but I love it and wanted to share in case you didn’t know about it or had some input/insight. Thanks for the tips and helpful resources. You’re fantastic. Thanks:).
I’ve tried googling that app name but nothing is coming up; do you have a direct link?
I feel honoured to hear back from you :). Hope you’re having a wonderful start to the new year!
The mystery app is Cosmetic Ingredients Analyser Free by Sercan Sevindik
https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/cosmetic-ingredients-analyser-free/id829260961?mt=8
Thanks
This was so great for me to read. Thank you so much for all of the research you do. I am terrified of all of the ingredients as I read the lists to make your products. This article has really eased my mind. I am just starting out – so simple is best. Super interested in Shampoo Bars. I can’t wait to start formulating.
P.S. I found you via Bramble Berry, so thank you to Ann Marie as well!