Burden of proof

I've always loved that phrase. Sounds very mature, very legal. Harkening back to my days of watching any and all episodes of Law & Order and, before that, taking an undergrad course in communication law. Good stuff.

Last week the only post I was good for was about Living Proof, which puts out a line of haircare products by the same name and is co-owned by none other than the forever perfectly-coifed Jennifer Aniston. Mostly it was a rant about messaging and marketing, so today we're actually looking a little deeper at the products themselves. And why you shouldn't touch these things with a ten-foot pole.

The brand gets similar marks from EWG and GoodGuide -- not so great. The two databases can't agree on which Living Proof product is the least or most hazardous, but then again, both databases are reporting on limited data. We know this usually means ingredient disclosure is less than ideal. Keep inferring and the hole that we're digging here just gets bigger and bigger.

The Skin Deep ratings for the Living Proof line is here, and on GoodGuide here.

I'm lambasting Living Proof not just because their products are pretty toxic, but also to illustrate that packaging and marketing are Totally. Meaningless. For sure it is a huge sales coup for Living Proof to snag the endorsement (and financial backing) of an A-Lister like Aniston, but there is nothing -- NOTHING -- behind the claims that science makes their products better. If anything, the science makes their products more toxic and less consumer-friendly. All that anti-frizz business doesn't happen naturally, you know. 

So please, don't be fooled by seductive marketing. Save your money for safer, gentler products. Value your health and well-being over the need to attain a nearly impossible ideal. Rise above the noisy, destructive messages that women need to look a certain way and instead embrace what makes you beautiful, inside and out.

Yours,
Jazzy