When InnBeauty Project, a rising star in Gen Z skincare since the brand’s launch in 2019, decided to launch its first anti-aging product this January, co-founders Jen Shane and Alisa Metzger knew they had to up the ante somehow to adequately back up their claims. in a new category.
“We wanted to show the consumer, not tell them why our product is different,” said Metzger of Extreme Cream, which sells for $48 and aims to eliminate fine lines and wrinkles with a formula containing 7 percent lifting peptides and 2 percent bio-lifting peptides. retinol and ceramides. The product is sold at Sephora, Skinceuticals, Kiehl’s, Dr. It competes with more established and often pricier anti-aging offerings from brands like Barbara Sturm and the like.
More from WWD
InnBeauty’s solution? To prove the product’s claims, it’s doubling down on clinical testing on a $102,000 budget (nearly seven times the brand’s previous launches, which are expected to reach $50 million in retail sales this year).
“We wanted to pit our product against any $200, $300, $500 alternative on the market and have data points that showed it could perform just as well,” said Shane.
So to further support its sensitive skin-friendly and hypoallergenic claims, the duo increased the product’s Repeat Insult Patch Test panel from the typical 50 panelists to 200, and for the first time utilized confocal imaging via VivaScope 1500 to assess the cream’s ability. to visibly increase skin elasticity and moisture at the cellular level. This is in addition to the brand’s standard microbial, non-comedogenic and freeze-thaw testing, as well as consumer perception studies.
Since launch, the product has reigned as InnBeauty’s top-performing product at Sephora — previous launches have typically held the spot for one to two months — while Metzger predicts Extreme Cream “will continue to hold the top spot long term.” This increased investment in clinics has been extensively leveraged to market the product more attractively both online and in Sephora stores.
“As a young brand, you have to use your budget very limitedly and clinical tests are quite expensive. We are happy that we can now do this at the level we want,” said Shane, adding that the brand invested almost the same amount in clinics for the “sister product” of Extreme Cream, which was launched in May. added.
Claims and clinical trials in skin care have always been an arms race, but as consumer demands for industry transparency grow, a group of brands like InnBeauty are becoming more notable in terms of both methodology and marketing when it comes to clinics.
“[Clinical testing] “This is becoming a ‘checkpoint,’ so to speak, among results-oriented consumers who want to see brands that have support and validation for the claims they make,” said cosmetic chemist and BeautyStat founder Ron Robinson.
The claims for clear and truthful claims go far beyond what the plaintiffs consider to be deceptive marketing tactics, as evidenced by class action lawsuits against brands like Grande Cosmetics and Nutrafol, both of which have been filed against brands like Grande Cosmetics and Nutrafol.
Although the brand has denied any wrongdoing, Grande Cosmetics agreed to pay $6.25 million in January to settle a lawsuit alleging the brand failed to adequately disclose the presence of isopropyl cloprostenate in its products, which could cause adverse effects. Nutrafol, meanwhile, faces multiple class action lawsuits — including two lawsuits filed in New York last May and June, respectively — alleging that inconsistencies in the brand’s clinical trials in terms of panelist diversity and the root cause of hair loss led to the product being labeled. Supplements are stated to be “clinically proven” deceptive.
Although there is relatively broad agreement on certain parameters of what clinical testing should look like – panels of at least 30 people; Trials run by independent, third-party laboratories – most other things about the process, including panelist diversity commensurate with the general population, are laissez-faire (laissez-faire) and will ideally be tabletop at this point, and even the context in which the word “” is used. clinical” can be used and marketed.
Without any government-regulated standards for clinical testing, “the onus is on brands to prove their claims,” said K&L Gates partner Ronie Schmelz, citing safety and the need to demonstrate evidence, unlike drug claims. While effectiveness is unquestionable, “determining how cosmetic companies must prove these claims is not something the FDA wants or necessarily needs to be involved in.”
Getting the industry on the same page when it comes to accurately and separately labeling consumer perception study claims (which are subjective) to clinical claims (which are expert-rated and therefore objective) could be a lower barrier to being more honest. messaging.
“It’s a one-two punch; “There are some claims that you should absolutely make sure you measure clinically if you’re going to make them,” said Jennifer Stansbury, co-founder of The Benchmarking Company, adding that because consumer perception studies tend to collect higher and therefore potentially more convincing percentages (e.g., “95” percentage agree…”), a brand “can always lead with higher value” [consumer perception] number followed by the clinical claim to support that hydration or whatever it is is actually occurring.
When it was founded in 1968, its distinctive feature was that it was a brand led by dermatologists, long before dermatologist-led brands became fashionable. Today, he thinks about how to honor his legacy while constantly evolving his approach.
This goal has led the brand to routinely conduct new clinical trials across its existing product range in order to meet emerging consumer needs; for example, recognizing Dramatically Different Moisturizing Lotion, introduced in 1968, as safe for use after intense pulsed light therapy (IPL). in a two-week clinical test.
“This is a product that’s been around for a long time, and yet it has one of the most modern claims you can look for,” said Christie Sclater, Clinique’s senior vice president of global product marketing, insights, analytics and omnichannel education. “We are seeing growth in aesthetic procedures, and there is this element of: How can we continue to modernize storytelling through new test claims that will resonate with our consumers?”
Part of that also means showing how Clinque’s current products compare to some skin-boosting aesthetic treatments. At the American Academy of Dermatology conference in California last month, the brand revealed to attendees a recent clinical trial for its Smart Clinical Repair Wrinkle Smoothing Serum ($76); This test showed that women who used the serum twice daily for 16 weeks showed “the same improvement.” As another group receiving Deka dot SmartSkin CO2 laser treatment, we touched on the “overall appearance of fine lines and wrinkles.”
The brand is now trying to bring a clinical approach to its makeup portfolio by introducing the “Eye Safety Promise” with the launch of New York High-fi Mascara last August. The brand’s first guide ophthalmologist, Dr. In collaboration with Ashley Brissette, each of Clinique’s eye makeup products is now ophthalmologist-tested and deemed safe for sensitive eyes and contact lens wearers.
“Eye safety is something we’re just starting to work on, and we’re going to turn up the volume a little bit there,” Sclater said.
A very different but similarly unconventional type of clinical testing informed the birth of veteran beautician Liz Whitman’s Exponent Beauty, which was founded in 2019 and features dosed product systems, each comprised of a powdered active ingredient (retinol, vitamin C, and the like). and its moisturizing counterpart, which when combined together aim to create a powerful serum.
In developing the first Brightening Boost Vitamin C Power Serum, priced at $98 for 30 doses, Whitman “supplemented popular vitamin C products.” [Essex Testing Clinic in New Jersey] Whitman asked them to test the concentration of the active ingredient as they opened each day, from Day One to Day 60; This essentially mimicked a consumer using the serum dropper bottle at home, Whitman said.
The lab found: Most products lost up to half their strength over the period; so Whitman’s goal is to combat potency loss with activated serums that are effective at 30, 45, or whatever doses the consumer chooses to purchase. .
“Consumers shouldn’t have to be investigative journalists,” Whitman said. “There is no apples-to-apples comparison between brands, but we need to create reliable ways for consumers to understand the performance of their products.”
The best of WWD