Anti-Ageing Beauty Bible

[BusyMum]

I dont know about the rest of you guys but I honestly haven't the energy for all this anti-aging hoohaa! I figure that I'm going to get old (in fact I'm getting old by the minute) I'll try my best to stick to a skincare routine but other than that I just can't be bothered! Life is too blooming short to worry about wrinkles! Bring 'em on I say, as long as I've enjoyed myself whilst they've been creeping on then so be it! lol

quite right too! I think we should be grateful to be getting older when you consider the alternative and speaking for myself I'm quite happy to use down-market products from the high street, Tesco, Morrisons or anywhere else that happens to have a good offer on! :sun:

 

[BusyMum]

PS! Anyone see the pic of the 65 year old in the Daily Mail? To me, she looks like a 65 year old dressed like a 30 year old - we should grow old gracefully and just go with the flow!

 

[Bensmum]

I remember Liz saying in one of her shows once that she doesn't do 'anti-ageing' as its something that happens naturally anyway, or something along those lines. Although I think the superskin moisturiser is in there isn't it?

She used to bang on all the time about neck creams being unnecessary and a moisturiser is all that's needed. It was just marketing apparently. She's now got superskin neck and bust cream I notice.

 

[Jo Fairley]

Dear Cavegirl - just setting the record straight

I saw your comment and am a bit crushed!

All the results in our book are based on our testers' comments and opinions. Yes, Liz Earle has done fabulously well, over the years - because the products have done fabulously well with our testers, who trial things over a period of months, and report back very, very diligenty with the most diligent forms and scores. It really is that simple - and that honest.

There are FOUR Liz Earle products out of 260 or so in the new book The Anti-Ageing Beauty Bible, which again is entirely based on our testers' opinions.

I said that Sarah Chapman's CLEANSER was my favourite cleanser and the one I use. And that the SPF15 moisturiser is the one I use. I actually state that in the new book, because it's true (and if you had a webcam in my bathroom, you'd see that). I also went on to repeat, during the later show when Liz Earle products were showcased, that the Liz Earle Superskin is 'the best moisturiser ever, ever, ever' - because I still think it is. I did not endorse any product on the show which I don't use; I read out genuine testers' comments - which are nonetheless highly impressive. Where I used it myself, I said so - but I would never claim to love something I didn't.

I am honoured to be held in such high regard by the brands - basically, their respect for Sarah and me and the way we conduct our tests is why they continue to support us with huge amounts of product for our trials, each time we write a book. I admit that I was slightly embarrassed by their comments about me, but I am pleased to have the respect of the brands because there is such a huge amount of work that goes into these books - two years, each time - that it is at least part of what makes it worthwhile.

The other great feel-good that we get is from knowing that in an incredibly crowded market, we really are working to help women identify products - out of the thousands out there - that make a difference to skin, hair, body.

I don't think you're a cynical weary old boot, but if you want to come and see how we do our testing, you're welcome, because it is a vast, military-style operation! And we are proud of it.

I hope that this may slightly have changed how you feel about the show, which I thoroughly enjoyed. I do highly rate all the brands involved and was delighted to see them there, because if they didn't deliver impressive results, they'd never make it to the pages of our book. End. Of.

 

[HoodedClaw]

Hello Jo: welcome to the forum!

I think the problem is that QVC is a shopping channel, and while it has helped introduce many people to beauty ranges that they may never have come across before, it is still a shopping channel and not a treatment centre or spa.

And while people do not want to sing "Liar, liar pants on fire", those of us who have watched QVC for a while have heard presenters claim that only the product they are currently endorsing gives them results. Then it's something completely different the same presenter declares is unbeatable in another beauty hour a day or so later. :thinking:

We all know that QVC is there to sell products. That's fine. But when you've heard EVERYTHING described as unmissable you do start to look at the presenters and think "If it's all THAT good then why does ***** look the way she does if she's using it?"

Life and experience makes one cynical. Hey ho! :nod:

 

[BurlyBeaR]

how long before some ST.com snitch at QVC tells the beauty buyers that Jo Fairley has posted and she is "advised" to desist.

 

[barbedwire]

I saw your comment and am a bit crushed!

All the results in our book are based on our testers' comments and opinions. Yes, Liz Earle has done fabulously well, over the years - because the products have done fabulously well with our testers, who trial things over a period of months, and report back very, very diligenty with the most diligent forms and scores. It really is that simple - and that honest.

There are FOUR Liz Earle products out of 260 or so in the new book The Anti-Ageing Beauty Bible, which again is entirely based on our testers' opinions.

I said that Sarah Chapman's CLEANSER was my favourite cleanser and the one I use. And that the SPF15 moisturiser is the one I use. I actually state that in the new book, because it's true (and if you had a webcam in my bathroom, you'd see that). I also went on to repeat, during the later show when Liz Earle products were showcased, that the Liz Earle Superskin is 'the best moisturiser ever, ever, ever' - because I still think it is. I did not endorse any product on the show which I don't use; I read out genuine testers' comments - which are nonetheless highly impressive. Where I used it myself, I said so - but I would never claim to love something I didn't.

I am honoured to be held in such high regard by the brands - basically, their respect for Sarah and me and the way we conduct our tests is why they continue to support us with huge amounts of product for our trials, each time we write a book. I admit that I was slightly embarrassed by their comments about me, but I am pleased to have the respect of the brands because there is such a huge amount of work that goes into these books - two years, each time - that it is at least part of what makes it worthwhile.

The other great feel-good that we get is from knowing that in an incredibly crowded market, we really are working to help women identify products - out of the thousands out there - that make a difference to skin, hair, body.

I don't think you're a cynical weary old boot, but if you want to come and see how we do our testing, you're welcome, because it is a vast, military-style operation! And we are proud of it.

I hope that this may slightly have changed how you feel about the show, which I thoroughly enjoyed. I do highly rate all the brands involved and was delighted to see them there, because if they didn't deliver impressive results, they'd never make it to the pages of our book. End. Of.

Dear Jo

Well, you know what - I am impressed you came on here to say your piece and explain a bit more about how it all works :handshake: thank you for that.

I apologise to you if I came across in an overly harsh manner, my initial feeling about the show was most definitely cynical - I tend towards that with most beauty products these days as they promise the world yet rarely deliver, but that really is just my opinion - as you've seen on here there are a few forum members who have tested for you and got a lot out of it.

I have in the past applied to become a tester for the Beauty Bible to see how it all worked, but appreciate there is a vast waiting list for it and not everyone can be included - which is fair enough, I am sure that my time will arrive one day and that my (cynical :wink: ) opinions will be altered.

I know the whole idea is about testing products at very different price points and seeing which works best, I think you just caught me in a bad mood on Sunday.

Again, my apologies and thank you for taking the time to reply to me - and the other forum members.

cavegirl :handshake:

 

[donna255]

I have tested for the Beauty Bible and even bought the books in the early days too.

Okay here is my take.

Woman tries product loves it greatest thing ever. But there is no actual scientific proof. Just because you think you look better does it actually make it so? Ask friend what do you think, do I look better? Friend is not likely to say,Oh sorry you look like a dog. There was a tv documentary on the other year where the Boots No7 product came out top. Now the woman doing the show was a doctor and looking at claims of beauty companies etc. She was honest and saying I want facts and real proof. I totally agree with her. Before and after results on real women done by techs with black lights etc. Instead of 1000 women(?) testing products, smaller groups with real before and after tests now this would be something.

Perhaps as I have got older the fairy tale claims from companies have failed to dazzle me. Its all smoke and mirrors, false eyelashes, photo shopping etc in the ads. Now I use Elemis, I enjoy the brand it does not annoy my roseaca. Did I ever think it would make me look younger? No.
If a product came out and really worked then there would be no plastic surgeons, no one would use fillers and botox(which for some reason is not classed as having work done).

I by the way did not mean to come across as nasty with my comments about you. But you are a woman in your 50s you look as if you have had no work done(good for you). If these wonder products really worked then lets be honest you and the rest of us would not look our age, no matter if we are well turned out or not.

 

[silversequin]

I am glad Jo has come on here and explained in detail how the testing is conducted and I respect her for doing this.
As far as skin care goes I really am cynical., Stroll through the ground floor of the massive Boots in my home town followed by a trip to John Lewis and behold shelf after shelf full of endless ranges of skin care, the choice is bewildering and overwhelming. It is an overcrowded and very compettive market which has its roots in a fear of ageing. I feel that looking after our skin should be about making the best of ourselves and should also be a pleasure. Now I would love it if there really was a potion out there that could make me look the way I looked at 20 but I know that's impossible. I also know that if there was a potion out there that would prevent the ineviable deterioation in my complexion I would buy it. But I know that nothing out there other than surgery will preserve what is left of my looks. We live in such a lookist, image concious and youth centred society which puts great pressure on women and to a lesser extent men to try to avert signs of growing older.

 

[boffy]

there is no such thing as anti-ageing all you have to do is look at all the skincare experts on qvc. you either have good skin that does not line or sag or wrinkle or you dont.
you can make your skin look better with a moisturiser,sunscreen and keeping it clean and not losing lots of weight suddenly but thats about it.
i like the beauty bible as i found it informative for all sorts of beauty products and saved some expensive mistakes not so sure about the anti-ageing bible.