The ideal solution for a quick beauty effect or in the end simply completely overrated? The magazine “Ökotest” had cream or cloth masks for the face examined in the laboratory. 6 out of 49 failed the testers, but many were also convincing.
Die Zeitschrift "Ökotest" kann zwei Drittel ihrer getesteten Face maskn empfehlen. Die schlechte Nachricht: Wer nachhaltiger leben will, sollte auf Einmal-Produkte verzichten. Die Ergebnisse im Detail: In 33 von 49 Face maskn, die Labore untersucht haben, stecken keine problematischen Stoffe, 27 davon erhielten sogar die Testnote "sehr gut".
6 Face maskn fallen bei "Ökotest" durch
Six cloth or face masks received the mark "poor" or "unsatisfactory" in "kotest". They contain problematic substances such as PEG/PEG derivatives and organohalogen compounds, or the manufacturers did not provide the testers with convincing efficacy studies for an advertised anti-aging effect. Among the losers: The "7th Heaven Pink Oxygen Bubble Sheet Mask ", in which "in addition to organohalogen compounds, perfluorinated and polyfluorinated alkyl compounds (PFAS)" were also detected – ingredients that are used in cosmetics as surfactants and film-forming agents, among other things.
In the "Luvos healing earth moisturizing mask with almondöl " isolated the testers according to test report even traces of arsenic after – a substance, which is considered in its inorganic form as highly toxic. Although there was "no acute danger to consumers here" – too high quantities were nevertheless undesirable.
Many of the tested masks are packaged in portions for one-time use. This also means that waste accumulates with each application, especially with cloth masks. If you want to avoid this, the experts at "Ökotest" recommend buying tubes with more content. Or simply make the masks yourself.
Ökotest test report
With material from dpa