With an ever-increasing race for consumers’ limited attention, the skincare industry is getting more and more creative with their claims. This is a vicious cycle: increasing the expectations of the consumer, while leading other brands to follow along.

The truth of the matter is, you can only impact biological processes so much with cosmetic ingredients, and there is little you can do to significantly change the natural cellular turnover rate in skin. One particular area where claims are getting out of hand is in the treatment of hyperpigmentation issues.

Based on my own development and testing of a product in this field, I know how difficult hyperpigmentation is to treat. With multiple pathways triggering hyperpigmentation, a robust melanin production (for natural protection of the skin from UV radiation), to the limited renewal of affected keratinocytes — treatment of hyperpigmentation is counted in multiple weeks to months, with rare cases of permanent melanin issues for some consumers. All of this is well-documented in the scientific literature ranging from treatment of melasma to post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation.

Why do we see claims like this?

It should be impossible to have an immediate brightening effect by modulating any biological process. Yet the claim language goes (carefully crafted in different sentences) “For naturally bright …” followed by “Immediately”. This construct leads one to think that the brightening is of biological origin and immediately achievable. However, looking at the ingredient list, this is not the case. We are talking about a careful selection of ingredients that reflects light and creates the visual appearance of brighter skin. See the ingredient list below, with my emphasis on the “immediately brightening agents”:

AQUA/WATER/EAU, GALACTOMYCES FERMENT FILTRATE*, BUTYLENE GLYCOL, NIACINAMIDE, VINYL DIMETHICONE/METHICONE SILSESQUIOXANE CROSSPOLYMER, GLYCERIN, TRIETHYLHEXANOIN, PENTYLENE GLYCOL, PHYTOSTERYL/OCTYLDODECYL LAUROYL GLUTAMATE, PEG-32, BORON NITRIDE, SUCROSE LAURATE, XYLITOL, PANTHENOL, CAPRYLIC/CAPRIC TRIGLYCERIDE, SUCROSE DILAURATE, INOSITOL, ACRYLATES/C10–30 ALKYL ACRYLATE CROSSPOLYMER, POLYSORBATE 20, PHENOXYETHANOL, POLYACRYLAMIDE, MICA, AMINOMETHYL PROPANOL, UNDECYLENOYL PHENYLALANINE, BENZYL ALCOHOL, C13–14 ISOPARAFFIN, DISODIUM EDTA, XANTHAN GUM, SODIUM BENZOATE, LAURETH-7, METHYLPARABEN, ASCORBYL GLUCOSIDE, NELUMBO NUCIFERA FLOWER EXTRACT, TOCOPHEROL, METHICONE, PARFUM/FRAGRANCE, LIMONENE, CITRONELLOL, CI 77891/TITANIUM DIOXIDE, CI 77492/IRON OXIDES. *PITERA™

Ingredient breakdown

• Boron nitride is a thickener, filler, and spreadability agent that also diffuses light and can provide a matte finish while covering smaller imperfections. Think of a diffuse light in photography, which gives that soft glow. Boron nitride does not change the underlying skin condition and is a temporary cover-up provided by the formulation.
• Mica is a group of silicate minerals used extensively in cosmetics for their ability to reflect and refract light. It creates a subtle shimmer or sparkle effect, which can help make the skin appear more radiant. Mica can range from transparent to opaque based on the concentration and can create other color effects based on co-formulation with titanium dioxide and iron oxides (see a pattern here?). Mica only has optical effects and does nothing for your skin.
• Titanium dioxide is a white pigment used extensively in sunscreen as it has a high refractive index, meaning it scatters light very effectively, providing a “brightening effect”. It is also used in foundations as it, with other pigments, provides a nice opaque coverage to mask underlying imperfections. It does not impact the underlying hyperpigmentation issues.
• Iron oxides (CI 77492 is the yellow kind) are primarily used as colorants in foundations, concealers, and powders. This particular kind of iron oxide can range in color from pale yellow to ochre and is used to create warm undertones covering up purple and bluish undertones in the skin. It also adds a subtle warmth to the skin, creating a more radiant complexion. Iron oxides are excellent for long-wearing makeup products due to their resistance to heat and moisture. Iron oxides are, like the above agents, inactive and do not provide any biological skin benefits.

Clever consumer deception?

So what you have here is a brightening serum combined with a type of “concealer” which gives consumers that immediate wow effect. This is a clever strategy, building on the fact that a lot of consumers suffering from hyperpigmentation issues are using other types of concealers to create an even complexion. It likely also helps with adherence to the product, as you don’t have to go weeks and weeks waiting for any visual changes to your skin. This lets the other “active” ingredients do their work and provide proper biological skin improvements.

However, I still feel this is taking the marketing a little too far. Especially when you pay close attention to the remaining ingredients acting on melanin production, which are: niacinamide, vitamin C (ascorbyl glucoside), undecylenoyl phenylalanine, vitamin E (tocopherol), and lotus flower extract (questionable effect), as well as the hero ingredient galactomyces which have a limited dose-response effect on melanin production with a 22% decrease in in-vitro assays at the highest concentration tested.

In essence, what you are getting here is a stack of cosmetic Instagram filters that will make you look more radiant, while the sprinkle of useful ingredients is pretty standard and will take the usual course of weeks to months to improve your skin. So next time you see immediate brightening claims, think: can biology act that fast? Or am I buying smoke and mirrors? At 265 USD per 50mL, I would have expected more and better formulation work.

Lastly, the product contains parfum/fragrance, limonene, and citronellol, all allergens which can cause skin reactions. The last thing you want if you suffer from post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation. Based on the EU guidance paper on the subject, 2.6% of the general population tested positive for reactions to limonene, and citronellol upwards of 6%.