Fountain Of Youth in a Jar

By Anastasia Toufexis

In the fantasy world of cosmetics, hope and hype have always been the rulers, and truth the rude beggar at the gate. Americans have long recognized that fact -- and dismissed it. "Oh, I know it probably doesn't do everything they say it does," admits Evelyn, a San Diego secretary, while purchasing some skin cream at a Nordstrom counter. "But it makes my skin look and feel better, so I'll keep buying it."

These days, however, manufacturers are going to greater lengths to exploit consumers' unwary nature. Critics charge that cosmetics promotion has moved beyond the bounds of puffery and into the realm of unsubstantiated medical claims. "Where is the evidence?" asks dermatologist John Reeves of San Francisco. "It's time for cosmetics manufacturers to put up or shut up."

The growing debate centers mainly on the pricey potions, lotions, creams and gels that promise to thwart the wrinkly ravages of aging and smooth the pockets of fat, dubbed cellulite by cosmetologists, that dimple many women's hips and thighs. Thanks to the aging of the baby boomers, U.S. sales of skin- care products have surged more than 50% since 1985, to $3.7 billion a year. That makes them the fastest-growing segment of the toiletries and cosmetics industry, which rakes in almost $24 billion annually.

The cosmetics firms are trying to capitalize on preliminary scientific research suggesting that certain vitamins and other chemicals may improve skin appearance. Some seem to counteract the bad effects of substances called free radicals, which are produced regularly by the body's metabolism. These highly volatile substances -- oxygen ions are one example -- react with cell membranes, and over time the radicals may play a role in various ailments and the aging process itself. There is evidence that at least one radical-fighting skin cream, a vitamin-A derivative called Retin-A, stimulates skin-cell production, but it is sold only by prescription. Another prescription product, Lac-Hydrin, contains 12% lactic acid, one of a class of compounds called alpha-hydroxy acids. These chemicals seem to help combat dry skin.

But researchers are a long way from putting the Fountain of Youth in a jar, and there is no rigorous scientific evidence to support the sweeping claims made by the manufacturers of scores of cosmetics sold over the counter. They contain some of the same ingredients as prescription drugs, but in much lower concentrations.

Elizabeth Arden boasts that its Ceramide Time Complex Capsules contain various ingredients, including retinyl palmitate, and vitamins E and F, that together "fix, replenish or repair the barrier function of the skin." Shisheido touts Bio-Performance as a "super-revitalizer" that awakens the "skin's youthful balance." Avon is pushing three different antiaging treatments: BioAdvance (with vitamin A), Collagen Booster (vitamin C) and a new product to be introduced next year, Aneu (alpha-hydroxy acids). As for cellulite nostrums, Arden promotes its gel and moisturizer by citing clinical tests "from a renowned university in France." Lancome says its gel can provide "relief" from cellulite in two to four weeks. And Clarins contends that consumers can slim down and firm up with the help of its concentrated anticellulite gel.

Medical specialists are leery of the aggressive marketing. Advertisements, they complain, frequently imply that the treatments alter body physiology. If that is true, then the products should be reclassified as drugs by the Food and Drug Administration and thus be subject to the same rigorous -- and costly -- testing for efficacy required of all medications. Doctors are skeptical of the evidence that cosmetics firms currently offer in support of their claims, including before and after pictures and clinical reports. Albert Kligman, a professor emeritus of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, says he has never seen an industry research paper that was "believable."

Manufacturers insist that their promotional materials suggest only that use of the products will improve a person's appearance. "We can claim that the product helps to promote younger-looking skin," says Mari Chihaya of Shiseido, "but we cannot say it is younger skin because that becomes a drug claim." Other companies are bolder in their assertions. Alex Znaiden, director of product development at Avon, says, "Our eye gel contains materials that, as they go into the skin, are able to influence the cellular environment and cause changes to occur." Not everyone is happy to hear that. Says Alice Longley, an industry analyst with the Donaldson, Lufkin and Jenrette investment firm: "It's pretty frightening if there are products out there that change the body and haven't gone through that rigorous testing process."

Critics hope that the FDA and the Federal Trade Commission, which oversees advertising, will do more to curb the cosmetics industry's excesses. Since 1987, the FDA has sent complaints to 50 cosmetics companies over specific claims, and in response most firms have changed these pitches. In 1989 the FTC cited Revlon for unsubstantiated advertising promises for an anticellulite treatment, by then taken off the market by the company. But new products and promotions are being launched all the time. Consumers should take most of the claims with a grain of salt, or at least a dollop of blusher.

With reporting by Sally B. Donnelly/Los Angeles and Kathryn Jackson Fallon/New York