The major players in the beauty industry - Laura Mercier, Clinique, Neutrogena, L'Oreal, to name a few - are all now on the mineral make-up bandwagon.
Sales of mineral-based products have been running hot this year and there are no signs of it abating. Mineral-only make-up lines, such as Jane Iredale and Bare Minerals, both of which are on sale in Hong Kong, are facing increased competition from global brands. It seems if you don't have a mineral line, you're not making the grade. But are they all they're cracked up to be?
According to a recent Choice magazine article from Australia, mineral foundations are not as natural as they claim to be and are no better than conventional foundations.
In a report following a trial that Choice undertook, most of the mineral foundations tested contained many of the same chemicals found in non-mineral-based liquid and powder foundations.
'Of the 14 mineral foundations tested by Choice testers, 10 contained bismuth oxychloride, a synthetic ingredient that is a by-product of lead, tin and copper refining. It is used to give the skin a sheen that camouflages lines and wrinkles,' Choice spokeswoman Elise Davidson says in a statement.
The testers reported 21 cases of skin irritation and 11 cases of eye irritation across different brands, most of which contained bismuth. Other ingredients include titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, mica and iron oxides.