Last Saturday I posted this review about Goldfaden MD's Sun Visor product. Understandably a lot of their customers that read the blog were concerned and I started receiving worried messages and comments immediately via my social media channels.
After two of my readers, Sarah and Jaquie, left comments with replies they had received from both Goldfaden and Space NK to their queries, I emailed the UK PR and reiterated my offer of letting Goldfaden use this platform to respond to my review, which I thought was only fair.
Below is Goldfaden's response (complete with their own capital letters/punctuation) with my further comments below them.
From the blog:
'Not only that, the titanium dioxide is nano-encapsulated, something which the California senate is so concerned about that Goldfaden MD have to have the proposition 65 warning on their website. The list includes 'airborne titanium dioxide' in 'a list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity’.'
Nano-encapsulated titanium dioxide is a topic of much discussion in the SPF world, but what everyone pretty much agrees on is that inhaling it is probably not the best idea. And this is a spray.'
Goldfaden MD:
This is to clarify that the product has NOTHING TO DO WITH NANO PARTICLES (NANO). Micronized is NOT the same as Nano. This is an entirely false accusation and wrongful claim. The Titanium Dioxide that we use is broken up in smaller particles (i.e. Micronized), which are much larger by definition than Nano particles. Nano is an entirely different process defined by size and production procedure, etc. The micronized Titanium Dioxide used in this product is bound to the formula’s ingredients, including water, and therefore is not harmful for its intended use. To summarize: THERE IS NO NANO ENCAPSULATION IN THIS PRODUCT WHICH IS WHAT CALIFORNIA STATE PROP 65 IS REFERRING TO AND ALL CLAIMS ELUDING TO “CANCER-CAUSING” PARTICLES. Out of respect to California state residents and to avoid any customer confusion, the link to the background and explanation of the proposition appears across the entire website.'
CH:
Happy to clarify. My apologies. Goldfaden have added the term non-nano to their website here, which should comfort their customers that can simply google 'titanium dioxide micronized' and see for themselves that industry thinking is generally that the term micronized equates to 'nano'.
Micronized TD is a particle of an average of 15nm and thus it is considered a nano-sized particle. No confirmation from Goldfaden on the size of their particles.
This is why a lot of 'green' brands specify 'non-nano' on their packaging. Perhaps something for Goldfaden to consider on their next repackaging to avoid any possible confusion in stores?
Note however, that Proposition 65 refers to 'airborne titanium dioxide, unbound particles of respirable size', it makes no mention of nano. And it's not on the Goldfaden website 'out of respect to California state residents'. It's the law.
From the blog:
'Do not use on or near the eyes.' It's a spray. Recommended for the face.'
Goldfaden MD:
The blog writer’s configuration is looking at this in a very different direction than what’s intended to beconveyed on the packaging. This is a simplistic warning label under the guidance of the FDA and safety control about keeping any consumer products away from getting directly in the eye (other than what is intended to go directly into the eye, i.e. drops). It’s not “harmful” to the skin around the eyes, but this is to encourage users to be cautious. Customers are encouraged to use common sense when applying any topical agent on the face.
CH:
Whether it's clear on the packaging, or it's 'intended', this is the message taken directly from Goldfaden's YouTube channel. 36 seconds in - two spritzes to the face, two to the neck.
If they think that offers enough protection, so be it. That's their opinion, it's their brand and their product.
It's personally not how I would advise applying SPF, or how much I would suggest using to be fully protected, but it's only fair to show what they mean.
From the blog: the box clearly states 'silicone-free' like a badge of honour - below:
- Goldfaden have added the term 'non-nano' to the product page on their website
- Goldfaden have removed 'zinc oxide' from the product page on their website
- Goldfaden admitted that the product contains silicones
- Copy has been significantly altered on Spacenk.com to exclude zinc oxide and add organic red tea to the ingredients list
- Copy has been altered on Net-a-Porter to remove the term 'silicone-free'
