tellyshopper
Registered Shopper
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2010
- Messages
- 8
Hello everyone!
I too have been ‘lurking’ on this site for quite a while now and have been very amused by all of your postings. The reason I have decided to post something myself now is that I have been reading with interest the various threads regarding the reformulation of Cleanse & Polish over the last few months.
I have been using C&P for around 8 years and, about two years ago, I also noticed that the consistency of C&P had changed; I also found it was thinner and that it seemed to sink into my skin more quickly than before. Through this site I discovered that this change was likely due to the removal of almond milk from the formulation. The removal of this ingredient has since been acknowledged by various LE representatives on their Facebook page and also by the woman herself on-screen upon her recent return to QVC.
Although I must admit that I did prefer the previous consistency, I cannot say that I have noticed a change in how the product makes my skin feel or how effective I consider it to be and I happily continue to purchase, use and recommend it. On occasion I have used an ‘extra’ half a pump but only if I especially want to spend time massaging it on my skin.
A few postings I have read over the months (I know I should get out more!) have stated that almond milk was the first ingredient in the old formulation and that it has been replaced with cocoa butter. I wanted to check this out and managed to find an old ingredient listing here:
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-beauty-list/2009/01/plastic-pump-travel-skin-dry
Cleanse & Polish - Old Formulation Listing:
1. Aqua
2. Caprylic / capric triglyceride
3. Theobroma cacao (cocoa) seed butter
4. Cetearyl alcohol
5. Cettyl esters
6. Sorbitan stearate
7. Polysorbate 60
8. Glycerine
9. Cera alba (beeswax)
10. Propylene glycol
11. Humulus lupulus(hops) extract
12. Panthenol
13. Rosmarinus officinalis (rosemary) extract
14. Anthemis nobilis (chamomile) extract
15. Prunus amygdalus dulcis (sweet almond) extract
16. Eucalyptus globules (eucalyptus) oil
17. Limonene
18. Citric acid
19. Sodium hydroxide
20. Phenoxyethanol
21. Benzoic acid
22. Ethylhexylglycerin
23. Dehydroacetic acid
24. Polyaminopropyl biguanide
As you can see (according to this ingredient listing) almond milk (well, sweet almond extract to be precise!) was in fact the fifteenth ingredient in the old formulation. I have checked my current pump (purchased when it was on the anniversary offer for £9.50, so very recent) and the ingredient listing is exactly the same – except for the almond milk. Cocoa butter has not been added to the formulation, it was always the third ingredient.
I think the confusion regarding the prominence of the ingredients comes from the front of the packaging which used to have ‘Almond Milk’ listed first, followed by Rosemary, Chamomile and Eucalyptus (you can see this on some of the stock photographs used on the Liz ebay outlet). The new packaging lists Rosemary, Chamomile, Cocoa Butter and Eucalyptus.
Therefore, although I do consider Liz’s ‘explanation’ as to temperature etc. altering the consistency of C&P recently to be slightly disingenuous, she – and the rest of the LE team – are correct when they say that the formulation essentially hasn’t changed and that no ingredients have been substituted. The only change is the removal of the almond milk. I do think that their rhetoric of “every ingredient has to earn its place in a product” is on shaky ground here and I don’t think that their explanation is necessarily completely truthful. The removal could very well be for ingredient cost reasons, however I personally think it may be because, if they (or more accurately Avon) are intending to move more aggressively into the US market with LE/C&P specifically, they may need to be more careful regarding allergies due to the potentially more litigious nature of the country (sorry for the broad generalisation!) Therefore the reason for removal being ‘allergies’ could be sort-of legitimate.
Sorry for the incredibly long rant about this but, as you have probably guessed, this has been something that has been bugging me for quite some time! I hope you’ve not died of boredom reading it ;-)
xx
I too have been ‘lurking’ on this site for quite a while now and have been very amused by all of your postings. The reason I have decided to post something myself now is that I have been reading with interest the various threads regarding the reformulation of Cleanse & Polish over the last few months.
I have been using C&P for around 8 years and, about two years ago, I also noticed that the consistency of C&P had changed; I also found it was thinner and that it seemed to sink into my skin more quickly than before. Through this site I discovered that this change was likely due to the removal of almond milk from the formulation. The removal of this ingredient has since been acknowledged by various LE representatives on their Facebook page and also by the woman herself on-screen upon her recent return to QVC.
Although I must admit that I did prefer the previous consistency, I cannot say that I have noticed a change in how the product makes my skin feel or how effective I consider it to be and I happily continue to purchase, use and recommend it. On occasion I have used an ‘extra’ half a pump but only if I especially want to spend time massaging it on my skin.
A few postings I have read over the months (I know I should get out more!) have stated that almond milk was the first ingredient in the old formulation and that it has been replaced with cocoa butter. I wanted to check this out and managed to find an old ingredient listing here:
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-beauty-list/2009/01/plastic-pump-travel-skin-dry
Cleanse & Polish - Old Formulation Listing:
1. Aqua
2. Caprylic / capric triglyceride
3. Theobroma cacao (cocoa) seed butter
4. Cetearyl alcohol
5. Cettyl esters
6. Sorbitan stearate
7. Polysorbate 60
8. Glycerine
9. Cera alba (beeswax)
10. Propylene glycol
11. Humulus lupulus(hops) extract
12. Panthenol
13. Rosmarinus officinalis (rosemary) extract
14. Anthemis nobilis (chamomile) extract
15. Prunus amygdalus dulcis (sweet almond) extract
16. Eucalyptus globules (eucalyptus) oil
17. Limonene
18. Citric acid
19. Sodium hydroxide
20. Phenoxyethanol
21. Benzoic acid
22. Ethylhexylglycerin
23. Dehydroacetic acid
24. Polyaminopropyl biguanide
As you can see (according to this ingredient listing) almond milk (well, sweet almond extract to be precise!) was in fact the fifteenth ingredient in the old formulation. I have checked my current pump (purchased when it was on the anniversary offer for £9.50, so very recent) and the ingredient listing is exactly the same – except for the almond milk. Cocoa butter has not been added to the formulation, it was always the third ingredient.
I think the confusion regarding the prominence of the ingredients comes from the front of the packaging which used to have ‘Almond Milk’ listed first, followed by Rosemary, Chamomile and Eucalyptus (you can see this on some of the stock photographs used on the Liz ebay outlet). The new packaging lists Rosemary, Chamomile, Cocoa Butter and Eucalyptus.
Therefore, although I do consider Liz’s ‘explanation’ as to temperature etc. altering the consistency of C&P recently to be slightly disingenuous, she – and the rest of the LE team – are correct when they say that the formulation essentially hasn’t changed and that no ingredients have been substituted. The only change is the removal of the almond milk. I do think that their rhetoric of “every ingredient has to earn its place in a product” is on shaky ground here and I don’t think that their explanation is necessarily completely truthful. The removal could very well be for ingredient cost reasons, however I personally think it may be because, if they (or more accurately Avon) are intending to move more aggressively into the US market with LE/C&P specifically, they may need to be more careful regarding allergies due to the potentially more litigious nature of the country (sorry for the broad generalisation!) Therefore the reason for removal being ‘allergies’ could be sort-of legitimate.
Sorry for the incredibly long rant about this but, as you have probably guessed, this has been something that has been bugging me for quite some time! I hope you’ve not died of boredom reading it ;-)
xx