The Beautypedia reviews are based on validated scientific studies of the individual ingredients. While they don't (and logistically/reasonably can't) include long-term use studies of every one of the thousands of products reviewed, they are much more useful than "any random beauty blogger." I especially like them as a counterpoint to the scientifically bogus EWG Skin Deep database.

That said, I was VERY disappointed when she merged her two websites (Paula's Choice products and Beautypedia) as I thought it reduced the appearance of impartiality (I actually believe the website was and still is fairly impartial, but it APPEARS less so now, and is thus harder for me to share with skeptics). I actually wrote them a long letter / complaint, and got a very thoughtful response in return (not just a form letter). Notably, one of the things I'd complained about was that along with the new branding, they'd removed the endnotes citing sources from some some of their articles, and after my letter they added them back.

So, the website isn't perfect, but it is by FAR the best beauty product database on the internet, and is my first line of inquiry when trying something new.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. To clarify, I am not talking about her make up/skin care line per se. I didn't even check it out and don't have anything from her. I am talking about the "Beautypedia: Expert Skin Care Brands & Makeup reviews" http://www.paulaschoice.com/beautypedia-skin-care-reviews/best-products

For someone like me, it has been very enlightening. As an example, I had no idea that citrus oils (orange, lemon, etc) are skin irritants (or lavender for that matter). Or that jar packing and clear bottles are bad for the products because of oxidation.

Anyway, little things like that.

Every single review sounds the same. She really just critiques lists of ingredients and packaging, not how the product works.

I agree with this -- it doesn't seem like the reviews are based on long term use of a product, but rather the ingredient list (as compared to her sense of what is an irritating ingredient) and the packaging and the price. I haven't seen a review say something like, "after a month of daily use, we found that..."
By the way, I don't think any beauty products really live up to their claims. They are fun to purchase and use, but at the end of the day my skin always looks pretty much the same.

Makeupalley.com is also very good. The reviews are from users.

I respectfully disagree pp. Here is an example of reviews that I enjoyed reading and were enlightening to me -

Creme de la mer: "Review Overview
Crème De La Mer is the original product created by aerospace physicist Max Huber, as described in the brand summary for La Mer. As enticing as this dramatic story sounds, the reality is that this very basic cream doesn’t contain anything particularly extraordinary or unique, unless you want to believe that seaweed extract (sort of like seaweed tea) can in some way heal burns and scars, but there is no research to support that claim. Even if it could, burns and scars don’t have much to do with wrinkling, and this product is now being sold as a wrinkle cream.

According to Susan Brawley, professor of plant biology at the University of Maine, “Seaweed extract isn’t a rare, exotic, or expensive ingredient. Seaweed extract is readily available and [is] used in everything from cosmetics to food products and medical applications.” So why then is this product so expensive?

The price really is shocking considering that Crème de la Mer contains mostly seaweed extract, mineral oil, Vaseline, glycerin, wax-like thickening agents, lime extract, plant oils, plant seeds, minerals, vitamins, more thickeners, and preservatives. This rather standard moisturizer also contains some good antioxidants, but the jar packaging won’t keep them stable during use. This also contains a skin-stressing amount of eucalyptus oil, as well as Kathon CG, a preservative that is recommended for use only in rinse-off products. Consumers who have a “steadfast devotion” to this product are not only wasting their money but also hurting their skin.

A good moisturizer doesn’t need to cost a fortune or come in fancy packaging with legions of hype to really work. You’ll find affordable, research-backed options on our Best Moisturizers list on Beautypedia."


Replenix AE Dermal Restructuring Therapy: "Essentially, this moisturizer for normal to dry skin contains everything a great moisturizer should. Its only drawback is the high price. Before we explain what's so great about this moisturizer, you need to know that although we recommend it highly, there are numerous less expensive options to consider on our list of Best Moisturizers.

Now for the details: What makes this formula so compelling for dry skin is its blend of elegant-feeling emollients, skin-repairing ingredients, antioxidants, and cell-communicating ingredients. As the hallmarks of every great moisturizer for dry skin, these help strengthen and reinforce the skin's barrier so it is better able to repair itself and generate healthy collagen. It will look and act younger, too!

All of that is excellent, but as mentioned above, you don't need to spend nearly this much to get those benefits. However, if you choose to do so, Replenix AE Dermal Restructuring Therapy won't disappoint. The formula is fragranced, but the amount is very low, so it's unlikely to pose problems. Still, the presence of fragrance doesn't make this a slam-dunk for those with sensitive skin.

Note: This product is sold with Topix Replenix AE Facial Firming Therapy as part of the company's Topix Replenix AE Therapy Duo ($208).

PROS:
Elegant, creamy texture feels great on dry skin.
Loaded with beneficial anti-aging and skin-repairing ingredients.
Minimal fragrance (though oddly, most Replenix products omit fragrance entirely).
CONS:
Expensive; there are other less expensive and equally well-formulated products."


Clinique - Even Better Essence Lotion Combination to Oily: "Review:
What Clinique is calling an "Essence" is really more of a "toner" than anything else—but a rose by any name is still a rose and in this case, that's actually a very good thing. Even Better Essence Lotion for Combination Oily to Oily is a great toner for its intended skin types (and the acne-prone). In comparison to Clinique's standard toner collection (their Clarifying Lotions), Even Better Essence so far surpasses those it's almost a bit shocking—it includes a nice array of beneficial ingredients in a lightweight formula that isn't alcohol based (like most of their Clarifying Lotions). As is the case with Clinique's products in general, it is fragrance free, so this is a rose that will not irritate your skin!

Even Better Essence Lotion for Combination Oily to Oily is primarily a mix of plant-based antioxidants such as watermelon (Citrullus vulgaris), apple (Pyrus malus), cucumber (Cucumis sativus) and green tea extract—just to name a few. Tamarind (Tamarindus indica seed extract) makes an appearance as well, which has research demonstrating its potential for antioxidant, wound healing and anti-inflammatory benefit (Pharmacognosy Review, 2011).

The amount of moisture provided is slight (and this has a water-like feel on skin, too), which you would expect given this formula is meant for oily to combination skin types. Clinique included a beneficial mix of reparatives—glycerin, wheat germ, lentil extract, and sodium hyaluronate are a few—and each play roles in helping skin replenish and retain the substances that keep it smooth and healthy.

Interesting to note, Clinique added the ingredient, "saccharomyces ferment filtrate", which if you're familiar with the beauty brand SK-II, this is the yeast extract of which they refer to as "pitera". Clinique isn't making any bold claims about this yeast, which is good because there is scant published, independent research demonstrating saccharomyces ferment filtrate has any benefit beyond being an antioxidant (and not all that great an antioxidant either).

Despite all of the pros for this toner, we have to comment on Clinique's statement on the box and enclosed directions that this is "Formulated for Asian skins". Of course, Clinique never actually explains what the "special" needs of Asian skin are or what ingredients in this product fit those requirements. But even more to the point there is no research anywhere in the world showing any skin care or makeup product can be formulated based on race.

The same way there aren't medicines based on your racial background (for example vaccines and antibiotics are universal) skin is the same. Skin is the largest organ of the body and what it needs to be healthy doesn't change based upon your race—just like your heart or kidneys don't need something different to be healthy.

Forgive us if we belabor this point a bit because we find it so infuriating and ludicrous. Skin-care products aren't interested in your ethnicity. All ethnicities need ingredients like antioxidants, cell-communicating agents, daily sun protection, and regular use of a well-formulated AHA or BHA exfoliant. This marketing becomes more silly than helpful when you consider that "Asian skins" doesn't really have any meaning given the United Arab Emirates, Iran, and Israel are West Asia; China is East Asia; India South Asia; and even part of Russia is Northern Asia. Encouraging this separate nation skin-care standard is probably more detrimental and misleading than helpful.

Despite the ethnic-centric marketing statement, what remains true is that this can be counted among the better skin-care products Clinique has released over the past few years, and a fine example of what a well-formulated toner should contain.

Pros:
Contains a beneficial array of antioxidants and anti-irritants.
Sheer, lightweight moisturizing toner that's ideal for oily to combination skin types.
Fragrance-free, gentle formula.
Cons:
This is not specially "Formulated for Asian skins" as there is no research showing that Asians need different skin care ingredients than any other ethnic background."

Anonymous wrote:OP here. To clarify, I am not talking about her make up/skin care line per se. I didn't even check it out and don't have anything from her. I am talking about the "Beautypedia: Expert Skin Care Brands & Makeup reviews" http://www.paulaschoice.com/beautypedia-skin-care-reviews/best-products

For someone like me, it has been very enlightening. As an example, I had no idea that citrus oils (orange, lemon, etc) are skin irritants (or lavender for that matter). Or that jar packing and clear bottles are bad for the products because of oxidation.

Anyway, little things like that.

Every single review sounds the same. She really just critiques lists of ingredients and packaging, not how the product works.

OP here. To clarify, I am not talking about her make up/skin care line per se. I didn't even check it out and don't have anything from her. I am talking about the "Beautypedia: Expert Skin Care Brands & Makeup reviews" http://www.paulaschoice.com/beautypedia-skin-care-reviews/best-products

For someone like me, it has been very enlightening. As an example, I had no idea that citrus oils (orange, lemon, etc) are skin irritants (or lavender for that matter). Or that jar packing and clear bottles are bad for the products because of oxidation.

Anyway, little things like that.

I actually purchased one of her products recently and love it, just got another one, but jury's still out. haven't read her reviews though.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a longtime fan too. I enjoy the occasional splurge on something that smells and feels wonderful, but thanks to Paula I'll never spend $$$ on bogus ingredients like crushed pearls or pseudo-scientific potions.

I think her thing about eye creams was that they're generally way overpriced for what are (souped-up moisturizer) and what they do. I'm not familiar with her eye cream, but if it's reasonably priced that would still be consistent with her philosophy.

No -- her point was that you don't need a separate moisturizer and eye cream -- that the moisturizer for your face would work just as well under your eye and that cosmetics companies are selling women a bill of goods by making them think that the under eye area requires a special moisturizer. I wish I could find the youtube video of her saying that. I think it was when she was on Oprah. And Oprah was like, "LOVE THAT!"

Now here she is hawking an eye cream? I don't know. It seems like she realized that by not coming out with an eye cream she was leaving money on the table.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a longtime fan too. I enjoy the occasional splurge on something that smells and feels wonderful, but thanks to Paula I'll never spend $$$ on bogus ingredients like crushed pearls or pseudo-scientific potions.

I think her thing about eye creams was that they're generally way overpriced for what are (souped-up moisturizer) and what they do. I'm not familiar with her eye cream, but if it's reasonably priced that would still be consistent with her philosophy.

Looks like .5 oz is $32.

I'm a longtime fan too. I enjoy the occasional splurge on something that smells and feels wonderful, but thanks to Paula I'll never spend $$$ on bogus ingredients like crushed pearls or pseudo-scientific potions.

I think her thing about eye creams was that they're generally way overpriced for what are (souped-up moisturizer) and what they do. I'm not familiar with her eye cream, but if it's reasonably priced that would still be consistent with her philosophy.

I had one of her first books. The number one thing I remember was use vaseline as your night time under eye cream. Don't remember the rest but she was right about that.

Also, I remember her coming out as being adamantly, categorically against eye creams -- saying they are a marketing scam and no one needs a separate under eye cream.

And now, voila, she has her own eye cream:
http://www.paulaschoice.com/shop/skin-care-categories/eye-treatments/_/Resist-Anti-Aging-Eye-Cream/?ftlt=branded&p=omsem5off&gclid=Cj0KEQjwnrexBRDNmZzNkf7c4c4BEiQALnlxhVzQzpbCPsoahS5bTocL2r9f3EaRHcSd8QtTjp3nMHsaAtus8P8HAQ&gclsrc=aw.ds

So basically, I too treat her like any random beauty blogger. I also don't think that any beauty products actually live up to the hype. I think we all have to moisturize and use sun screen, and then I think those people with "next level" perfect skin (i.e., celebrities) are going to fancy dermatologists to get Botox and Fraxel and to use high concentration retinoids. So, I buy cosmetics and creams that I like, regardless of Paula's advice, which I do read, but take with a grain of salt. no product that she's ever claimed was irritating actually irritated my skin.

Eh, I disagree with lots of her negative reviews, both about ingredients that she thinks are worthless or harmful/irritating, and personally, after trying a product and liking it. So I look at her reviews, but don't value them any higher than any random blogger on the internet who liked or disliked something.

She is upfront about where she's coming from, extremely sensitive skin that reacts to lots of common ingredients. My skin reacts to some things her skin does, to things her skin doesn't, and many things her skin cannot tolerate are OK for me. She has/had acne and eczema, I have rosacea.

I've know about her for over 10 yrs now. Before everything when on the internet, she had books, and I had two or three of them.

They are quite informative, but just beware, she does state that if something works for you, but she's given it negative reviews, she says just keep doing what you like. Likewise, not everything she states works for everyone.

Having stated that, before I go buy a new cosmetic or skin care product, I do check it first on her website. Unfortunately, there are so many products out there she can't rate them all.

Not her website per se, but the one with the reviews of beauty products - I wish I had known about it before because I am such a sucker for sales pitch at Sephora/beauty counter since I don't actually understand what each ingredient is really supposed to do, if they work or how they are supposed to work.

Those reviews are wonderful for someone like me! So far I have just been looking at skin care product reviews… didn't even touch the make up stuff yet.