607 SKIN MICROBIOME INNOVATIONS
A notable limitation of this model is that, while it effectively evaluates the impact of various
cosmetic ingredients on individual and combined bacterial species commonly found on the
skin, the experiments are conducted under controlled laboratory conditions. It is critical to
acknowledge that certain skin bacteria, such as C. acnes, are capable of forming biofilms,
which can significantly alter their behavior in comparison to planktonic structures.
CONSUMER CLARITY
This new study brings new opportunities on how to bridge the gap between the scientific
community and the everyday beauty consumer. The scientific community is witnessing
firsthand the ability to manipulate the vast environment that lives on the skin in a way
that does not disturb the beneficial microbes and simultaneously helps repair and maintain
the epidermal barrier. Scientists are discovering ways to signal the body to heal itself. It is
crucial to standardize and clearly communicate this process so that consumers understand
the importance of products that support the skin’s microbiome.
By examining the gut health industry, it is clear that they effectively address a problem:
take probiotics and the bloating will stop. They have invested time and effort into
educating consumers about what a “probiotic” is and how it will benefit them. In contrast,
the personal care industry falls short in both education and solutions regarding the skin’s
microbiome. What problem are they solving? Beyond the average consumer, the phrase
“microbiome friendly” is not necessarily well-defined scientifically.
To provide clarity to consumers, the personal care industry must take several crucial steps.
With scientific breakthroughs already available and more on the horizon, it is imperative
that industry does not let this knowledge go to waste. The first valuable step is educating
the consumer. Most consumers currently do not associate their skin issues with the skin
microbiome, nor are they familiar with the specific microbes involved. Furthermore,
addressing the common misunderstanding that all bacteria are bad bacteria is important
as well. However, the consumer interest in learning is present as seen by the growing
appreciation of immunocosmetics. In 2022, the market size for global microbiome skin
care products was valued at $381.5 million and is expected to grow at a compound annual
growth rate of 10.9% from 2023 to 2030.16 This solidifies the potential for microbiome
success in the personal care industry.
The second step is highlighting the problem. Anti-aging has been the forever goal of beauty
consumers. However, skin and scalp conditions such as acne, eczema, atopic dermatitis,
psoriasis, rosacea, dandruff, and dry scalp hinder that goal from being reached and affect
a sizable portion of the global population. Even minor issues like skin inflammation can
be linked to the skin microbiome. Due to the popularity of these common conditions, it
makes sense that the expected global microbiome skin care market is expected to grow so
much in the next ten years.16
This ties in the third and ultimate step: present consumers with a solution. Educate them
that when the skin’s microbiome is disrupted or there is an overgrowth of certain bacteria
strains, these unwanted conditions can arise. Commercially available services, known
as “microbiome profiling,” offer detailed analysis of the skin’s microbial communities.
Examples of companies providing such services include HelloBiome and Skin Trust
Club.17,18 Additionally, simple explanations, engaging visuals, and attention-grabbing
signs on products can make a significant difference in helping consumers understand

608 JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE
the importance of microbiome rebalancing. Explanations, visuals, and figures can be
extracted from these cutting-edge scientific advancements. In fact, the personal care
industry would benefit from leveraging the successful marketing strategies of the gut
microbiome sector. Consumers are already familiar with the term “probiotic.” It is time
to take the foundation a step further and demonstrate that rebalancing the microbiome
is not only vital for gut health but also essential for addressing a wide variety of skin
concerns.
Consumers in the future will be able to get a reading of their microbiome profile, and
perhaps the future holds products with specifically tailored microbiome benefits. Only
time will tell which brands will pioneer this space with effective enough communication
for consumers to start listening.
REFERENCES
(1) Salem I, Ramser A, Isham N, Ghannoum MA. The gut microbiome as a major regulator of the gut-skin
axis. Front Microbiol. 2018 9:1459. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2018.01459
(2) Collado MC, Isolauri E, Salminen S, Sanz Y. The impact of probiotic on gut health. Curr Drug Metab.
2009 10(1):68–78. doi:10.2174/138920009787048437
(3) De Pessemier B, Grine L, Debaere M, Maes A, Paetzold B, Callewaert C. Gut–skin axis: current
knowledge of the interrelationship between microbial dysbiosis and skin conditions. Microorganisms.
2021 9(2):353. doi:10.3390/microorganisms9020353
(4) Grice EA, Segre JA. The skin microbiome. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2011 April 9(4):244–253. doi:10.1038/
nrmicro2537. Erratum in: Nat Rev Microbiol. 2011 August 9(4):244–253. doi:10.1038/nrmicro2537.
(5) Callewaert C, Knödlseder N, Karoglan A, Güell M, Paetzold B. Skin microbiome transplantation
and manipulation: current state of the art. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2021 January 4 19:624–631.
doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2021.01.001
(6) Banchereau J, Briere F, Caux C, et al. Immunobiology of dendritic cells. Annu Rev Immunol.
2000 18(1):767–811. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.18.1.767
(7) Roghanian A. Dendritic Cells. British Society for Immunology.
(8) Liu K. Dendritic cells. Encyclopedia of Cell Biology. 2016:741–749. Epub August 20, 2015.
(9) Alberts B. T cells and MHC proteins. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 4th ed. United States National Library
of Medicine. January 1, 1970.
(10) Pérez-Cobas AE, Gomez-Valero L, Buchrieser C. Metagenomic approaches in microbial ecology: an update
on whole- genome and marker gene sequencing analyses. Microb Genom. 2020 August 6(8):mgen000409.
doi:10.1099/mgen.0.000409. Epub July 24, 2020.
(11) Chen Y, Fan L-C, Chai Y-H, Xu J-F. Advantages and challenges of metagenomic sequencing for the
diagnosis of pulmonary infectious diseases. Clin Respir J. 2022 October 16(10):646–656. doi:10.1111/
crj.13538. Epub September 6, 2022.
(12) Pérez-Losada M, Narayanan DB, Kolbe AR, et al. Comparative analysis of metagenomics and
metataxonomics for the characterization of vermicompost microbiomes. Front Microbiol. 2022 May
10 13:854423. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2022.854423
(13) Kowalska-Krochmal B, Dudek-Wicher R. The minimum inhibitory concentration of antibiotics:
methods, interpretation, clinical relevance. Pathogens. 2021 10(2):165. doi:10.3390/pathogens10020165
(14) Giuliano C, Patel CR, Kale-Pradhan PB. A guide to bacterial culture identification and results
interpretation. P T. 2019 April 44(4):192–200.
(15) Ceri H, Olson M, Morck D, et al. The MBEC assay system: multiple equivalent biofilms for antibiotic
and biocide susceptibility testing. Methods Enzymol. Academic Press. 2001 337:377–385. doi:10.1016/
s0076-6879(01)37026-x