| Author |
Message |
havana8
Moderator
 
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 3449
|
|
|
Thu Apr 05, 2007 10:50 am  |
In case anyone is interested, another Special Report by Paula on Mineral Make-up....
http://www.cosmeticscop.com/bulletin/bb.asp?type=0407
She does provide some discussion on the ingredients in mineral makeup such as titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, talc, bismuth oxychloride etc. as well as its SPF-abilities. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:27 am |
Thanks for posting, that really was an interesting read. Although I can't say I buy into every single claim she makes about MMU, some do make things clearer to me.
For example:
zinc and titanium oxide being occlusive in nature and leading to clogged pores - no wonder I get those tiny little bumps that go away after washing, it's not because of a reaction but more likely to be little clogged pores from the ingredients (more so in those where zinc is part of the first 2 ingredients) and why I don't have this problem with Lumiere FF.
This is also very true for me:
"the very nature of theiringredients results in a textured application that can look powdery and “made-up” on the skin."
I need a lot of coverage so no matter how I spritz or layer it generally looks powdery on me (it looks natural for all those who use need 1-2 sheer layers!), and most do excerberate my dryness and flaking unless I use a thicker cream underneath.
The pros-cons at the end is also quite useful. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:03 pm |
Ok, I don't know anything about this woman, but this articel seemed very biased and hateful towards MMU. Very unbalanced and in total lack of objectivity and sientific data. I kow that MMU is not for everybody, I also know that it is difficult to set a spf on these products (and therefore they are not marked on spf) and I do know that some of the ingrdients can be pore clogging (considering how many cannot use physical SS for same reason...).
And doesn't this woman own her own company? I would think it VERY BAD buissness manner to write negative articels about the competition....? |
_________________
Live in Switzerland, age 32, dehydrated combination skin, sensitive to climate changes, some food and cosmetic products. Very fair. |
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:33 pm |
| Very interesting read that is for sure. I am not sure I believe in everything she is saying, but at least maybe I had more information on MMU. I still think they work the best for my skin and like any make up, if it works for us ladies, we stick to it. I have good days and bad, even using the same MMU daily. Depends on what my skin feels like doing that day. |
_________________
39 Year "young" female, Using PTR glycolic cleanser and Finacea with success! Passion for living and love Sunny Days/Beaches and The Ocean |
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:54 pm |
| Schnee wrote: |
Ok, I don't know anything about this woman, but this articel seemed very biased and hateful towards MMU. Very unbalanced and in total lack of objectivity and sientific data. I kow that MMU is not for everybody, I also know that it is difficult to set a spf on these products (and therefore they are not marked on spf) and I do know that some of the ingrdients can be pore clogging (considering how many cannot use physical SS for same reason...).
And doesn't this woman own her own company? I would think it VERY BAD buissness manner to write negative articels about the competition....? |
I agree with Schnee--- I found the article to be a bit biased. Yes, I appreciate that not all products that call themselves "Mineral Make up" are created equal, and that some are full of fillers and irritants, but I'm still galled beyond belief by the all-seeing, all-knowing Paula, deigning to rescue us from being taken advantage of by the cosmetics marketing machine.  |
_________________
27, sensitive/reactive/acne prone skin, dark brown hair, blue eyes, possibly the palest woman alive... |
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:56 pm |
| Schnee wrote: |
| Ok, I don't know anything about this woman, but this articel seemed very biased and hateful towards MMU. Very unbalanced and in total lack of objectivity and sientific data. I kow that MMU is not for everybody, I also know that it is difficult to set a spf on these products (and therefore they are not marked on spf) and I do know that some of the ingrdients can be pore clogging (considering how many cannot use physical SS for same reason...). |
I couldn't agree more. I dont think she likes anything though.
Maybe someone should send her some Alima, since there seemed to be something wrong with every MMU she tested. Or maybe she didn't actually try them herself, maybe they just "can't work because of this and that..." |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 05, 2007 5:34 pm |
| This woman irritates me. |
_________________
late 30's, medium/olive tone, learned recently I'm oily, not dry and my pores clog if you just look at them, love natual products...in beautiful Seattle |
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 05, 2007 6:41 pm |
| A very good report. Now we know. I did use Pur Minerals for the longest time and just thought my face always looked "flat" too matte looking. PB's discussion at least dispelled the hyperbolle surrounding mineral makeup and the delusional claims by the companies. I applaude her. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 05, 2007 6:55 pm |
| I take a lot of what she says with a grain of salt. That being said, I never bought MMU for the supposed 'skin care benefits'...I knew that was hype. I just like the way it looks-natural. It was hard to find one that matched my skin tone & didn't look powdery but kinda became one with my skin-sounds corny, I know. I like coverage without looking like I'm wearing anythng. Period. I do agree with her reviews on individual brands; the ones not meant for oily skin & the most natural one etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 06, 2007 1:52 am |
I found it an interesting article, keeping in mind this woman makes a living by being the "Devil's Advocate" (or Ralph Nader) when it comes to beauty products. Really, all make-up is pretty much pushed down your throat by savy marketing...regardless of it's pros & cons. I'd love to hear what she has to say after opening a magazine with copious adds for beauty products that make all sorts of claims. How many foundation ads have we all seen that could be slammed the same way as MMU...tons!!!
To be fair, no foundation is really great for our skin, and I think we are all smart enough to know that. It all boils down to finding something that works for your skin type, lifestyle, and is safe to use. That said, I have used Purminerals for years and have been super happy with it, although I do occassionally like to use liquid foundation as well...it all depends on the time of year, the weather, and condition of my skin. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 06, 2007 8:37 am |
| havana8,thanks for sharing. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:26 am |
| michelec wrote: |
| This woman irritates me. |
Summed up in one sentence! LOL
This article was posted on the delphi forum - mineral makeup mania. Other than some people who had tried the Rare Minerals and did not think it did much; most agreed that she had overlooked a lot. She talks about the highly advertised companies such as BE and in the same article the drug store copies of mineral makeup such as Jane, L'oreal, etc. Those drug store brands are not really true mineral makeup as they contain a long list of ingredients and possible problem ingredients such as silcones, etc.
She makes no mention of the smaller hand crafted companies that use NO BISMUTH and only a few ingredients. She slams zinc oxide and titianium dioxide; however she does use those ingredients in her own makeup and sunscreens. If these ingredients are pore cloggers; it can be possible that they are not properly removed at night. Those two ingredients are often in water resistance sunscreens.
Also as someone who tried many brands of foundation before deciding on which ones are worth buying full sizes; it really varies on coverage, formulas, shades, etc. A proper brush is a must. Of course, no mention on tools. Besides the proper tools; it is necessary to try a few samples. Most of these smaller companies offer samples at reasonable costs.
She should go spend some time on a mineral makeup forum where the ladies really know their stuff before trying to comment on MMU as "an expert". |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:49 am |
| autumn95 wrote: |
| michelec wrote: |
| This woman irritates me. |
Summed up in one sentence! LOL
This article was posted on the delphi forum - mineral makeup mania. Other than some people who had tried the Rare Minerals and did not think it did much; most agreed that she had overlooked a lot. She talks about the highly advertised companies such as BE and in the same article the drug store copies of mineral makeup such as Jane, L'oreal, etc. Those drug store brands are not really true mineral makeup as they contain a long list of ingredients and possible problem ingredients such as silcones, etc.
She makes no mention of the smaller hand crafted companies that use NO BISMUTH and only a few ingredients. She slams zinc oxide and titianium dioxide; however she does use those ingredients in her own makeup and sunscreens. If these ingredients are pore cloggers; it can be possible that they are not properly removed at night. Those two ingredients are often in water resistance sunscreens.
Also as someone who tried many brands of foundation before deciding on which ones are worth buying full sizes; it really varies on coverage, formulas, shades, etc. A proper brush is a must. Of course, no mention on tools. Besides the proper tools; it is necessary to try a few samples. Most of these smaller companies offer samples at reasonable costs.
She should go spend some time on a mineral makeup forum where the ladies really know their stuff before trying to comment on MMU as "an expert". |
Sing it sister! I take Paula's musings with a grain of salt as some of what she says rings true but there are also a lot of discrepencies, IMO. In this case, a lot of facts are left out, as you noted, and pity the average consumer who doesn't have the wealth of information we share on EDS.  I love MMU and would never go back to liquid, ever. |
_________________
42; medium, warm-toned; large pores prone to congestion; oily; using Karin Herzog exclusively right now!  |
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 06, 2007 12:47 pm |
I love MMU, I dont think I will ever go back to regular foundation. I did find that a proper brush is crucial.
I like to read paulas opinions, but I think that a lot of times she just glances at the ingredient list and forms her opinion from there, rather than actually testing the product.
2nd the happyness to have forums such as this one to get a wide range of opinions! |
_________________
31yo, student, fair and dry skin. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 06, 2007 1:01 pm |
I always take her reviews with a big grain of salt (most of what she sells does not have any appeal to me either).
Just my 2 cents.
Lucy. |
_________________
Early 50s, Skin: combin.,semi-sensitive, fair with occasional breakouts, some old acne scars, freckles, under-eye wrinkles; Redhead with hazel eyes |
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 06, 2007 4:17 pm |
| vikki_cooler wrote: |
| havana8,thanks for sharing. |
Same here... I think she's just jealous with all the MMU-users. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 06, 2007 7:35 pm |
| I expect to see Paula's Choice Mineral Foundation anytime now. Lol. |
_________________
25, very fair, dry/sensitive, mild rosacea, otherwise good skin!  |
|
|
|
|
Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:11 am |
| I ocassionally read her reports but I just can't distinguish which is right or wrong. |
|
|
|
|
| Fri Apr 19, 2024 11:53 am |
If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.
Click Here to join our community.
If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site. |
|
 |
|
