Cosmetic Ingredient Labels: A Dangerous Game of Latin for Allergy Sufferers

In an era where personal care and beauty products are ubiquitous, a critical issue is emerging: the safety of ingredient labeling. For individuals managing allergies, the cosmetic industry’s reliance on Latin or scientific names for ingredients, governed by systems like the International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients (INCI), presents a significant and often invisible danger. This practice, while aiming for global consistency, is increasingly being scrutinized for its potential to leave consumers, especially younger ones, vulnerable to severe allergic reactions.

The core of the problem lies in the disconnect between the INCI system and widespread consumer understanding. Many cosmetic products list ingredients using terms derived from Latin or scientific nomenclature. For instance, sweet almond oil is listed as “Prunus Amygdalus Dulcis,” and peanut oil as “Arachis Hypogaea.” While these names provide a universal language for manufacturers and regulatory bodies, they are largely unintelligible to the average consumer. A recent survey suggests that less than 5% of young people have formal Latin education, leaving them ill-equipped to decipher these complex labels.

The consequences of this labeling opacity can be severe. Personal stories shared by consumers underscore the real-world impact. One mother recounted an incident where her daughter, who suffers from multiple allergies including to cow’s milk, coconut, eggs, and nuts, experienced a severe skin reaction—hives covering her entire body—after using a new body wash. Initially, the cause was unclear, but upon investigation, it was revealed to be an ingredient that, while listed correctly in Latin, was not easily identifiable as an allergen by the parent. This harrowing experience highlights the critical need for ingredient lists that are as clear and accessible as those found on food packaging.

Makeup artists and influencers also voice their frustration. Amy Loring, a makeup artist with a significant online following, shared her own experiences with hypersensitive skin, which reacts severely to certain ingredients, causing redness, breakouts, and discomfort. “It is frustrating as a consumer when you get reactions like rosacea, redness, breakouts, and that’s just mild allergies,” she stated. “It can be quite severe and life-threatening.” Loring advocates for a system that prioritizes clarity, drawing parallels with food labeling where allergens are prominently highlighted.

Member of Parliament Becky Gittins, who herself has a severe nut allergy, is leading a campaign for reform. She described a recent spa visit where she had to “frantically ‘Google'” Latin ingredient names to ensure her safety, turning a relaxing experience into a stressful risk-mitigation exercise. “Even on a day that’s supposed to be relaxing, I was still mitigating risk. It is incredibly difficult,” Gittins explained. She argues that the current system places an undue burden on individuals and their families, forcing them to become amateur chemists to ensure their own safety.

The Cosmetic, Toiletry and Perfumery Association (CTPA) defends the use of INCI names, citing the need for a universal language in a global market. Caroline Rainsford, the CTPA’s director of science, explained that Latin-based names are part of the Linnaean system for naming plants and animals, which ensures global harmonization. “If you are on holiday and you are looking at the ingredients list, you would need to know the name of the plant in whichever country you’re in,” she noted. “Whereas if we use the INCI system, you then just need to remember that one INCI name.” The CTPA also points to tools like the COSMILE app, designed to help consumers identify ingredients by scanning product labels.

However, critics argue that this reliance on a universally consistent, yet poorly understood, system places a disproportionate burden on consumers, especially those with allergies. The call for change mirrors the stringent labeling requirements in the food industry, where allergens are clearly identified in plain language. This would empower consumers to make informed choices quickly and confidently, reducing the anxiety and risk associated with using everyday personal care products.

The debate underscores a fundamental tension between global standardization and individual consumer safety. As awareness of allergies and chemical sensitivities grows, the demand for transparent and accessible ingredient information in the cosmetics industry is likely to intensify, pushing for a system that truly serves the well-being of all consumers.

Key Ingredients and Their Latin Names:

• Almond (bitter): Prunus amygdalus amar
• Avocado: Persea gratissima
• Apricot: Prunus armeniaca
• Banana: Musa sapientum
• Brazil nut: Bertholletia excelsa
• Cashew: Anacardium occidentale
• Chestnut: Castanea sativa/sylva or castanea crenata
• Coconut: Cocus nucifera
• Egg: Ovum
• Fish liver oil: Piscum iecur
• Hazelnut: Corylus rostrata, corylus americana, corylus avellana
• Kiwi fruit: Actinidia chinensis or actinidia deliciosa
• Oat: Avena sativa or Avena strigosa
• Peach: Prunus persica
• Peanut oil: Arachis Hypogaea
• Sesame: Sesamum indicum
• Sweet almond oil: Prunus amygdalus dulcis
• Walnut: Juglans regia or juglans nigra
• Wheat germ extract: Triticum vulgare

The UK government maintains that regulations require all cosmetics to list ingredients clearly using generally accepted names. However, the efficacy of these regulations is questioned when “generally accepted names” are Latin terms unfamiliar to most consumers. The industry’s adoption of tools like the COSMILE app is a step towards greater transparency, but many, like Rachel Williams, whose son Jacob has severe nut allergies, argue for a more direct approach: “I would have a lot more confidence in the products if they stated all of the top 14 allergens in English.” This sentiment echoes a broader call for a more allergy-conscious approach to cosmetic product labeling, prioritizing consumer safety above all else.