The Algorithm vs. The Expert

It is a scenario that has become all too familiar in the treatment room. You have just finished a transformative service, your client is glowing, and you are curating their home care skin rituals. Then, they pull out their phone. They scan the barcode of the clinical-grade serum you just recommended, and an app flashes a bright orange “poor” or “average” rating.  

Suddenly, your years of education, your hands-on experience, and your investment in professional product knowledge appear to be overruled by an algorithm. 

As estheticians, we are facing a significant knowledge gap that brings opportunity. This gap isn’t only between the professional and the client—where we have the power to empower through education—but between the complex reality of cosmetic chemistry and the simplified, often context-free data provided by consumer apps like Yuka. 

These apps are well-intentioned, but they often lack the nuance to distinguish between a raw ingredient in isolation and a sophisticated, balanced formulation. To serve our clients best, we must be ready to bridge this gap, debunk the myths and old science with new scientific data, and reclaim our position as the true skin experts. 

It is important to note that Yuka’s rating system is based on its own specific criteria, which often flags ingredients generally considered safe by cosmetic chemists, estheticians, and dermatologists (such as a reliable preservative, phenoxyethanol) as “moderate” or “high risk,” leading to artificially low scores. Many professionals advise using these apps with caution, focusing on one’s own skin needs and expert advice rather than relying solely on an algorithm. While they can be useful for flagging truly harmful or sensitizing ingredients—such as fragrance and animal-derived ingredients one may want to avoid—they are rarely the final word on product safety.  

The Context Gap: Why Apps Get It Wrong 

The primary flaw in ingredient-scanning apps is that they analyze ingredients in a vacuum. They do not account for the integrity of the complete formula—how emulsifiers, preservatives, active ingredients like chemical exfoliants and texture enhancers work in synergy to create a safe, effective product. 

In the world of toxicology, the phrase “the dose makes the poison” is law. Yet, AI-driven apps often flag ingredients as “toxic” based on studies involving massive oral ingestion or extreme exposure. This data has no relevance to the small, controlled percentages used topically in skincare. 

Demystifying the “Scary” Ingredients 

To empower our clients, we must be able to explain the “why” behind the ingredients these apps often vilify. 

1. The PEG Paradox Polyethylene Glycols (PEGs) are frequently flagged by apps, yet they are some of the most versatile and beneficial ingredients in a formulator’s toolkit. PEGs are compatible with a broad range of ingredients, allowing us to create gentle cleansers, elegant moisturizers, and stable serums. The fear surrounding PEGs stems from outdated concerns about manufacturing impurities like 1,4-dioxane. While this was a valid concern decades ago, reputable cosmetic ingredient suppliers have long since eliminated these impurities from the finished ingredient.

Modern studies have shown various forms of PEGs to be non-irritating to the skin and eyes. Furthermore, because their molecular size prevents them from penetrating intact skin, they are widely considered non-toxic for topical use. When an app flags a PEG, it is often citing data based on testing that was done by feeding large amounts to animals or applying massive doses to compromised mouse skin—scenarios that do not reflect the reality of applying a moisturizer intended for human skin.  

2. The Fear of Alcohols Another common red flag on apps is “Alcohol.” Clients see this word and immediately think of drying rubbing alcohol. However, ingredients like Cetyl Alcohol and Stearyl Alcohol are actually fatty alcohols. Derived from purified plants, these are solids that condition the skin and help stabilize creams. Far from drying, they are nourishing and play an essential role in creating a luxurious product feel.

3. The Necessity of Preservatives Perhaps the most dangerous trend perpetuated by “clean beauty” apps is the demonization of preservatives. A water-based product without a robust preservation system is not “pure”—it is a petri dish. Preservatives like Phenoxyethanol are essential guardians, preventing the growth of mold, yeast, and bacteria that can cause serious skin infections. A well-formulated, well-preserved, and shelf-stable product is a safe product.

4. Silicones: Physics Over Fear-Mongering This is a crucial topic to clarify because it is one of the most common scares in “clean beauty,” yet the science is overwhelmingly on the side of safety. The most powerful defense of silicones is simple physics: Size.

Consider the “Beach Ball” Analogy: Silicones like Dimethicone consist of large, complex molecules. Think of the skin barrier as a chain-link fence. Most active ingredients (like Retinal or Glycolic Acid) are small, like marbles—they can slip through the fence to work deep down. Silicones are like beach balls. They are simply too large physically to pass through the “fence” of the skin barrier. They do not have the chemical structure required to mimic estrogen or testosterone, and they cannot bind to hormone receptors in the body. 

The source of silicones being linked to endocrine disruption comes from studies done on older types of silicones (specifically D4) or extremely high concentrations of D5 (Cyclopentasiloxane) in rats. In these studies, researchers didn’t just apply a primer; they often fed the silicones to the rats or exposed them to high levels of inhalation vapor for prolonged periods. At these massive, internal doses, some hormonal changes were observed in the rodents. 

The Human Reality: most apps still operate on “Hazard Identification” (could this theoretically cause harm?), not “Risk Assessment” (will it cause harm in this product at this specific dosage with this specific intended use?). 

The Scientific Consensus: The Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS)—the strictest regulatory body in the world (European Union)—has reviewed Cyclopentasiloxane repeatedly. Their verdict? It is safe for use in cosmetics. Why? Because dermal absorption is negligible. Even if you slathered your whole body in silicone primer, the amount entering your bloodstream is virtually zero. 

Talking Points for Your Clients: Here is how to phrase this so it sounds educational, not defensive: “Why does the app say my SPF may be an endocrine disruptor?” “That is a classic case of AI missing the context. The app is citing studies where animals were fed massive amounts of pure silicone. But in human skincare, physics protects you. Silicones are ‘large molecules’—think of them like a breathable mesh that sits on top of your skin to smooth texture and lock in moisture. They are physically too big to penetrate your skin barrier and are not capable of binding to hormone receptors.” 

5. Butylene Glycol This ingredient is a humectant (holds water) and solvent (helps ingredients dissolve). Ingredient scanning apps may negatively review products with this ingredient because it can be derived from petroleum (though most are now plant-based). In reality, it is incredibly safe, non-irritating, and essential for making the texture feel light rather than sticky.

6. Retinaldehyde When an app rates Retinal poorly, it is almost entirely because of the pregnancy warning and the potential sensitizing effect. Keep in mind, the app does not take the overall, complete formula into account to see other anti-inflammatory ingredients—like the chamazulene from Blue Tansy—that can counteract Retinal’s sensitizing effects.

Retinoids work by speeding up cell turnover. If used too aggressively, this causes redness, flaking, and peeling (Retinoid Dermatitis). That is all the app sees, so it flags the ingredient as a known “Irritant.” 

However, those side effects are not the reality for all formulations. A professional-grade Retinal sleeping mask is designed to mitigate these issues. The app judges the raw ingredient, ignoring the soothing formulation around it. Furthermore, because Retinal is a powerful, medical-grade ingredient, it isn’t safe for pregnant women. The app flags that risk for everyone. But for anyone who isn’t pregnant, that “risk” is its power. It is the gold standard for aging gracefully and clarifying acne because it changes the skin on a cellular level. The “poor rating” is simply the app acknowledging how potent it is. 

The Esthetician’s Advantage: The Whole Picture 

When we rely on trustworthy, professionally formulated lines that we know are safe, we free up our mental energy to focus on the true root causes of skin issues. If you are working with a line that you trust and has proven to be acne-safe, barrier-supportive, and free of pore-cloggers, you protect your energy. You can then pivot your consultation to the lifestyle factors that an app can never detect: 

• Supplements: Is your client taking “Greens Powders”? Many are high in spirulina, iodides, and Biotin, which can trigger acne. 

• Hormonal Triggers: Is a hormonal IUD contributing to that stubborn jawline and chin breakout? 

• Diet: Is their “healthy” diet actually a high-glycemic trigger? Consuming more than 9 grams of added sugar in a sitting can spike insulin, leading to systemic inflammation, puffiness, and acne. 

Closing the Gap 

An app pulls data. An esthetician pulls from experience, education, and intuition. 

We must encourage our clients to view these apps as tools, not bibles. Remind them that an app cannot feel their skin, understand their health history and lifestyle, or see the context of a formula. 

How to Use This Info The inconsistencies within these apps are a powerful teaching tool. You can offer your clients examples like this:“If you scan my Mineral Primer, an app might tell you it’s rated poorly or average not excellent, because of the high molecular weight silicones that make it silky and smooth. But if you scan my Neroli Nirvana Oil, it might say ‘excellent.’ Yet, both were formulated with the same high quality and safety standards. The difference is that the app is programmed to flag specific ingredients, and those ingredients may be necessary to create a specific texture experience or protect the stability of a certain product.”  

Encourage your clients to bring their questions to you. Remind them that you invest a great deal of time, energy, and resources into learning product knowledge from professional brands. That investment makes you the expert. Trusting a professional over a generic algorithm is the safest, most effective way to achieve their skin goals. To my fellow estheticians,  you do not have to navigate these complex chemistry questions alone. When you are unsure how to answer a client’s concern, reach out to the professional skincare brands you partner with. Lean on their insight, reclaim your authority, and close the gap—one conversation at a time. 

Kaelin Jutras-Zuniga is a Licensed Esthetician, educator, and the visionary founder behind Herbal Skin Solutions and The Esthetics Academy. She has spent her career bridging the worlds of holistic wellness and clinical science through every facet of the industry—from the intimacy of the treatment room to the precision of the laboratory. 

Recognizing a need for professional-grade products that honor both the skin’s intelligence and the earth’s resources, Kaelin works side-by-side with a team of seasoned cosmetic chemists in her California lab. There, she develops high-performance formulas and resources designed to support the success of practicing estheticians, bridging the gap between botanical wisdom and clinical efficacy. 

At her core, Kaelin believes that beauty is a conduit for connection—connecting people to plants, to the planet, and to one another. She is proud to use her brand as a force for good, ensuring Herbal Skin Solutions operates with a philanthropic heart. Through direct support of nonprofits that replenish the earth’s resources and uplift marginalized communities, Kaelin and her team are proving that the skincare industry can be a powerful vehicle for positive global change.