504 JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS This places cosmetic chemists in a difficult position as they become in- creasingly aware of the widening gap between their products and copy- writers' prose. In the process of making products designed to satisfy the innate desire of women for the beautiful and unattainable, they must learn to work with those who are responsible for creating the illusions. Similarly, the advertisement and sales men must realise that behind their flowing prose and elegant packs is a product which will ultimately be used by the purchaser, a regrettable necessity which should compel them to recognize the importance of technically competent products! In the cosmetic industry the illusions created are so attractive ancI powerful that unless the products are more than averagely competent, a: large number of users will experience disappointment. Unfortunately, the comparative ease of selling cosmetics on illusory merits could lead to a state of comparative technical backwardness in the industry. Leaving aside specialized work on the skin, which is mainly carried out elsewhere, it would be fair to state that most of the activities of cosmetic chemists are directed towards the production of better cosmetics. But the concept of "better cosmetics" can include a whole number of improvements in product stability and shelf life which do nothing to improve their actual application and the appearance on the skin. For example, present-day cosmetic creams seldom exhibit symptoms of emulsion break-down or develop gross bacterial contamination. Cosmetics and toiletties no longer corrode the collapsible tubes in which they are packed. Lipsticks do noir develop rancidity and symptoms of pigment separation in the crayon, These improvements are only designed to enable the product to reach the customer in a better condition, which comes within the designation of shelf testing rather than user testing. Whilst we can be fairly confident of the thoroughness of shelf testing the situation With regard to user testing is much less satisfactory. Once a woman commences to use a product, she is evaluating the illusion- reality relationship. The discrepancy she finds between these two qualities will influence her decision to repeat her purchase or throw the product away in disgust. Our ability to discover from customer complaints the seriousness. of this discrepancy is limited. It would be much better to evaluate the. special features of the relationship for this particular product in advance and to conduct adequate user-testing to ensure that the discrepancies are not abnormal. The gap between illusion and reality is not constant over the whole range of cosmetic products and it is now proposed to examine this variation in greater detail. It is possible to divide cosmetics into three main groups-- skin care, make-up and specialities. As a broad generalisation, the dis- crepancy may be said to vary with the group, being greatest with skin care

MODERN COSMETICS--ILLUSION AND REALITY 505 and least with the specialities, make-up standing half-way. The differences are partly basic to the group, e.g. it is much more difficult to demonstrate the effectiveness of a cream which will moisturise in "x" minutes, than a depilatory which removes hair in "x" minutes. There are, however, other factors which reflect the failure of the technical side of the industry to provide the best possible products within the limitations of a particular group. Cosmetic specialities are many and varied representative examples include anti-perspirants and deodorants, depilatories, suntan preparations, shampoos, hair lacquers and hair waving preparations. With most of these products, women find what they have been encouraged to expect from the advertising and sales promotion. This is often restrained, sometimes in- formative and occasionally cautionary of the results which can be expected. The reason for this modesty is due to the fact that it is possible for the user to make critical comparisons of both the product and promise and, even more important, of various brands of the same product. Even the most sophisti- cated advertising will not persuade a woman of the speed and safety of a particular depilatory if it takes 15 minutes to act and leaves her skin raw and inflamed. With suntan preparations, anti-perspirants and home perms, the ability of the user to make objective comparisons between the various brands has the interesting result that the selling value of an expensive name is at a discount and these particular products are brought largely on their merit. Much technical effort had to be put into the formulation of these products to enable them to withstand this user appraisal. Thus, the comparatively low key to which the users' expectations are pitched, together with the existence of a basis for real criticism of the products, makes it difficult to sell inferior products however well they may be advertised. This group of products is generally satisfactory not because it presents easier problems of formulation than the other two groups, but possibly because testing is easier. Few scientists would quarrel with the proposition that formulation and testing should be a continuous process in which changes of formula are immediately evaluated and the final test on the final formula merely a confirmation of all the work which has gone before. The testing of cosmetic products, by which I mean solely their evaluation by users or potential users, is still at a rudimentary stage, and conventional laboratory testing is only of limited help. It is fortunate that in the specialities group, the product characteristics which enable the user to differentiate between good and bad products also enable semi-quantitative laboratory tests to be developed which are of enormous value in formulation. For example, the successful depilatory is a compromise between speed of action of hair removal and potential skin damage. Variations in ease of hair removal between individual testers can