'Lid hydration best practice' : It's an eye opener - and grease is NOT the word!

Source: sienna-x.co.uk

Regular readers will be aware that from time to time, I go a little bonkers on Bonkers. More bonkers than usual, I mean, typically by researching a topic of interest to the absolute max. It damn near kills me every time and I still never feel satisfied that I have scoped all the options. As with the bathroom renovation project in the spring - and still ongoing in fact - I have been off down a research rabbit hole, as I am periodically wont to do...in skincare again. I delved deep below the epidermis you could say, penetrating several layers of dermis no less with the laser beam of my relentless curiosity. Or subcutaneous tissue, should that be? Yes, this time my inquiries were more extensive than ever before, as I sought to identify the optimum skincare products for my skin type in every single usage category, from cleansers and toners to exfoliators, eye creams, day and night creams, serums - the works!

You may wonder what precipitated this current flurry - nay, frenzy - of research. And actually there was a reason, though I also had to dig quite deep to figure it out. Firstly, the recent business with my finger meant I lost out on over two weeks' work, so had time to twiddle my thumbs, which luckily have full mobility. Though to be fair, doing the washing up without getting the affected finger wet is taking up a ridiculous amount of my day, and all chores are proving more tricky and time-consuming indeed. But I suddenly had a tract of time I was not expecting, and which I could devote to research.

As for why I chose to go mad on this particular topic, it was prompted by a casual comment from my local pharmacist to the effect that I may need to have a medication review with the doctor's surgery to which I recently switched, before I can be prescribed further supplies of antibiotics for my rosacea- and acne-prone skin.

Source: touregypt.net

So the mere thought that my customary safety net of 'big gun medication' might be removed - and having some sympathy for that decision, for who knows what decimation the drugs may be wreaking on the delicate ecosystem that is my gut flora ;) - I decided to investigate the very best regimes that could help me look after my skin in the absence of a more heavyweight solution.

It wasn't easy, I should say, right off the bat. I have googled and googled - deep into pages 4 or 5 on any given search term, and studied each citation with interest. I have watched endless videos by Sali Hughes and Lisa Eldridge (who are both fab);  I have read posts galore by other beauty bloggers, including the formidable Caroline Hirons. Following a tip off from Olfactoria I have browsed the highly scientific website of Paula Begoun, a veritable Oprah Winfrey of the US skincare scene. Then I also had an email exchange with Katie Puckrik, who gave me the topline on her own skincare MO, and mentioned a couple of her favourite products. I also read the famous book by Leslie Baumann, 'The Skin Type Solution', which reader AnnieA commended to me in a comment on an earlier Bonkers post. It didn't take long to establish that I am an OSPW type (Oily, Sensitive, Pigmented & Wrinkled). Arrggh!

None of which is directly related to eyes, I hear you say. Which is true, and if I ever go on to write about suitable cleansers and moisturisers for OSPWs, anyone with fundamentally different skin characteristics may wish to skip that post. Though some of the best products I found are in fact 'broad spectrum' in their benefits, to borrow an antibiotic term for a moment.  One thing led to another, basically, and the discoveries about eye care were pretty startling! To someone like me anyway, who has clearly been living under a rock.

And the most striking thing about my inquiries generally was the sheer, dizzying, hyper-segmented diversity of the skincare market. It has exploded beyond all recognition since my childhood, when an opaque tub of Nivea or Astral and the iconic green and white pot of Pond's Cold Cream were the mainstay of our mothers' beauty regimes. It is so deeply, bafflingly scientific nowadays, and the Internet is rife with conflicting information. If you are the sort of person who is likely to find inconclusive research a stressful waste of time, I would counsel you not to undertake any in the skincare sphere, for it nearly drove me over the edge....

You need toner; you don't need toner...fragrance is pleasant and soothing; fragrance is a sneaky way to disguise shoddy ingredients...'you get what you pay for', or cheap doesn't have to mean 'cheap and nasty'...SPF50 is the gold standard sunscreen; SPF30 is better because the sun is a good source of Vitamin D...moisturisers with SPF built-in are a good idea - or a lazy, inferior choice... facial oils make oily skins oily, or oils are good for everyone......foaming gels are good for acne, or they dry the skin out unduly....splash your face with cold water; splash your face with tepid water...you need a separate eye cream; eye creams are a waste of money (see below).  If I had a quid for every flagrant contradiction I encountered in my reading, I could afford a resident dermatologist. And someone to do the washing up!

Source: wimbledonguardian.co.uk

'Orbital "eye bypass" cream'

The biggest paradox I stumbled upon was to do with eye creams. In the past I have often noticed on pots of day cream the warning 'avoid the eye area'**. For the longest time I thought that was synonymous with 'avoid contact with eyes', as in 'don't get this stuff in your eye', but it is only relatively recently that I learnt that in the case of day creams, the whole area in and around the eye should be given a wide berth, and that specially formulated eye creams were designed to be more suited to the thin and ultra-sensitive skin here. Though that premise is disputed by some beauty experts in a YDMMV (Your Dermatological Mileage May Vary) kind of a way, including by Sali Hughes herself.

"I'm not convinced that eye cream is anything more than a tiny pot of anti-ageing moisturiser (which I like, by the way), and I don't think all skins need the extra product and considerable financial outlay."

And whether you believe they are more marketing hype than not, who knew eye creams ALSO shouldn't actually be used in the eye area?! Well, most of it, anyway. This bombshell has yet to 'sink in' in fact. I had not twigged that according to 'lid hydration best practice' - which I didn't even know existed as a concept either till this week - you should never put eye serums or moisturisers on your actual eyelids, or the crepey stretchy bit just above (which some readers may know as their 'upper eyelids'). Or, for that matter, on the skin immediately below the eyelashes, but rather follow the orbital bone structure of your eye socket and bypass the eye itself completely.

Source: targetwrinkles.com

The idea is that if you dot the cream or serum on the bone well away from the eye itself the cream will migrate to where it needs to go. You need to use your weakest finger for the purpose (typically your ring finger), and blend the dots in in a clockwise motion for the right eye and an anti-clockwise one for the left. This is in order to avoid stretching the super thin skin around the eye, thereby completely negating the effects of using a restorative product in the first place. Too rough a touch, and you might even precipitate the creation of new wrinkles. Actually, the idea of blending is also hotly contested. Some people say that dotting and tapping only is the way to go.

Now I am sure that to the vast majority of readers, especially those in the US who have recourse to dermatologists - an all but unknown breed of healthcare professionals over here, outside of Harley Street, maybe - none of this is news, but it was a staggering revelation to me! For when you buy a mass or mid-market moisturiser completely unaided by a sales assistant, the information on the pack simply does not clarify this point about the correct deployment of eye cream. No indeedy. It was only in the act of buying an expensive eye serum in Boots that the Estee Lauder sales consultant happened to volunteer this nugget of information about the orbital blobbing technique - I wouldn't have had the first clue where to put the serum otherwise, and would doubtless have slapped it all over my eyelids, as I have done with pretty much everything else that looks remotely emollient. Though not SPF-containing products anymore, thanks to a recent tip off from Undina in a comment on my post about Aldi's Lacura range.

Some of my motley collection of day creams - pre-research

Yes, I gather now that if the cream gets applied directly to the eyelid and immediate vicinity, it may irritate for starters, and there was some (admittedly rather apocalyptic) talk about eye creams transferring to the eyeball, singleblobbedly forming under-eye bags and taking up permanent residence - and causing swelling - in eyelids. Plastic surgeons performing eyelift surgery were said to have discovered gunky deposits of eye cream in the course of doing their procedures.  This could be true or scaremongering by the manufacturers, fearful of claims from people who have stung their eyes on account of creams having been applied so close to the eye itself. Me, I am going to avoid the eyelids from now on and see how I go, if it is not too late to reform my ways. And eye cream in my view should be renamed: 'Orbital "eye bypass" cream'.

(**So I just reread the instructions on some of the many day creams I have accumulated in recent years. Two say 'avoiding the eye area', while a further three say 'avoid contact with eyes', which as I have established above, is not the same thing at all. One was more explicit, with 'avoid direct application into the eye'. FOUR just say 'apply to face and neck'. Well, hey - are eyes not part of one's face? They were the last time I looked in the mirror. One - Astral (which appears to have missed the photo shoot) - calls itself an 'all over moisturiser' and claims to provide 'all the intense moisturing care your skin needs'. So just based on that small straw poll, you can see why I might have been confused.)

My shameful stash of facial wipes

Wiping wipes off the face of the earth

And here is the other area of skin maintenance where I have been going wrong all my life - using wipes to remove make up from the delicate eye area. Wipes - with their often harsh formulae, rough textures, resultant pulling and incomplete cleansing action - are the abomination of make up artists and beauty experts, for all but emergency and in-flight scenarios. Yup, I am afraid that my own chronic use of wipes to take off eye makeup has been so cavalier and rufty tufty as to be tantamount to dragging my face through a hedge backwards. Moreover I have stockpiled a load of packets of wipes that were on offer - probably at least 3-4 months' worth! They are mostly by the brand Simple, whose products are generally well regarded in the budget category, but they remain wipes and hence are still off-limits. I do also possess a Liz Earle Cleanse & Polish set, and should be using that for makeup removal as well as my morning cleanse it seems. At least I was doing something right! The watchword generally on the beauty blogs is to use a gentle product - even for oily skins - and to take makeup / dirt off with a hot muslin cloth or impregnated cotton wool pads. And to do so in such as way as to minimize tugging of any kind...

Liz Earle Cleanse & Polish

Now I haven't tried all the products for eyes which my research threw up, but here is a tiny(!) list of products I have ordered or am already using, plus a few promising-sounding things to investigate. Though I must use up some of those wipes first!

Eye serum (day / night) - Estee Lauder Advanced Night Repair Eye Serum Synchronized Complex II (currently using).

Eye cream (day / night) - at the moment I only possess sundry Crème de la Mer samples Blacknall kindly gave me in a swap package (eg Baume de la Mer, Emulsion de la Mer), so I will carry on using these all up. Additionally I do have my eye on Boots Botanics 80% Organic Hydrating Eye Cream - which Lisa Eldridge cites as a cheaper alternative to Kiehl's Eye Treatment with Avocado - and I have also come across multiple recommendations for Eucerin Hyaluron Filler Eye Treatment and Eyes It's Potent! by Benefit. I would be very open to further suggestions here, as I haven't properly eyeballed this category by any means. ;)

Cleansers suitable for the eye area (also to take off makeup) - Liz Earle Cleanse & Polish, Bioderma Sensibio (a Lisa Eldridge recommendation which I have ordered), Clinique Take The Day Off Balm Cleanser (recommended by a friend, and also well rated on blogs).

There is one eye-related procedural conundrum I haven't cracked yet. Short of wearing prescription sunglasses - as Katie Puckrik favours - I don't know how to go about applying SPF protection to the eye area without provoking another stinging episode. And I am also not sure I would be brave enough to use a retinol cream near the eye without medical supervision!

My hotchpotch collection of skincare samples

Yes, this post has been more about my methodological epiphany than about recommending the perfect skincare products for eyes, not least because everyone is different. And I may in fact be the only person in the world who didn't know that you should put dots of cream around your eye and give wipes a miss. But if anyone would like to share their favourite eyecare finds, that would actually advance the cause of skincare wisdom - or eye lore...a bit further. That's 'eye lore' as opposed to 'Eyelure', which, as everyone knows, is the world's favourite eyelash brand.

Oh, and the picture at the top of this post reminds me that I also learnt you shouldn't stand with your head under the shower, not even in the interests of hydration - the skin around the eyes isn't robust enough to withstand powerful jets of hot water. So there you go.

"If I Could Blur Back Time": Review Of Indeed Laboratories Nanoblur Anti-Aging "Not A Cream" Advanced Optical Cream

It has been quite a week. I just passed the 100th follower mark (thanks, followers No 100 - 104!), and this is my 300th post. (Celebratory giveaway coming up next time...) And then there was my guest post on Now Smell This on the subject of perfume blogging, during which I set myself the challenge of being not once, twice, but "three times an American", by trying to stay up through all the time zones to respond to readers' comments. I gave up at about 7pm PST on the day my piece went up, but had fun trying! In the introduction to that post, I describe myself as having the apparent dermatological oxymoron of "problem mature skin", a reference to my ongoing rosacea, though it is a lot better at the moment. And to be honest, some might consider the mere fact of having "mature skin" a problem in itself, unless you are have the self-confidence to roll with the punches of the aging process - and the morning quilt face, crow's feet and lip lines they leave behind.

I am a bit on the fence with the whole business of skin care. Having abused my skin in my 20s and 30s through chronic sunworshipping, when I finally started an active moisturising regime in my 40s - and all but gave up sunbathing through circumstance as much as anything - part of me thought it was all rather like shutting the stable door after the collagen had bolted... I persist with my efforts even so, like smokers who give up in their 50s, hoping for health benefits from that point onwards.

Now when I say "regime" that is perhaps overstating things: mostly I just slap on whatever kind of day or night cream I happen to have to hand, and just occasionally I investigate products with more tantalising claims, such as the Avon Anew Ultimate (Day) Cream I featured a while back on Bonkers, which had the unfortunate side effect of stinging and smelling of burning flesh.

Then recently - partly mindful of the fact that I now have an unintentional Wikio Beauty Blog ranking to maintain ; - ) - I have been dabbling with Indeed Laboratories' Nanoblur, available from Boot's in the UK for £19.99. Indeed Laboratories Inc is based outside Toronto, and Nanoblur is on sale via specific retailers in Canada and a handful of other countries; it can also be ordered online. The name Nanoblur was an immediate draw to me, because of course the prefix "Nano-" is such a Zeitgeist-y word, along with "offset mortgage", "carbon trading", "bluetooth" (also as a verb!) and "vuvuzela". "Nano-" takes me right back to a company I interviewed in California in 2010, which made an array of products, including actual "arrays"(!), fashioned out of epitaxially grown silicon wafers (I believe). I strongly suspect nanotechnology was involved somewhere along the line...

I have just Wiki-ed the term and it means "the study of manipulating matter on an atomic and molecular scale". So what is this cream then, and why is it on nodding terms with atomic and molecular matter, if it is indeed? "Indeed" being of course the operative brand name!

"Our promise: look 10 years or more younger in 40 seconds or less."

That is not the happiest of grammatical constructions, but we will overlook it, given the generous nature of the promise and its super speedy delivery.

"This product is based on advanced optics technology and is not makeup."

The packaging then refers you to the company's website for more information, where I firstly learnt the rationale for developing this product, namely to make people look better on TV.

"Since the advent of high-definition technology, skin imperfections have become far more apparent on camera and Nanoblur was created so that celebrities could 'blur' out imperfections that were previously not visible with traditional cameras."

And the most meaty additional information I could glean on the website is as follows:

"It is not a cream. It is a suspension of millions and millions of particles that reflect light perfectly in billions of directions to make the skin’s surface appear completely flawless. Within seconds, pores appear to disappear. Fine lines appear to vanish. The skin texture appears nearly perfect. With one application on any skin surface (even on your hands), you will be convinced that Nanoblur will make you look up to 10 years younger in a matter of seconds. It’s just that simple."

Not a cream? Yet it is described as an "advanced optical cream" on the packet. Moving on...

That is a very big claim, especially the 10 years younger bit. I will see if I have a photo of me when I was 10 years younger, so you can use it as a point of reference. Okay, here is my current passport photo, which is 9 years old...let's not set the bar too high. : - ) Actually, I am not sorry to have lost the hair and glasses, though I think the grooves either side of my mouth were less pronounced back then.

Oddly, the accompanying before and after photos on the website (completely untouched, and of the subjects' naked faces) look quite honest to me - but there again I don't see a whole lot of improvement either!

Further research on the Interwebs unearthed the fact that at only 700 nanometres (sounds big, but clearly isn't!) the "nanoparticles" in Nanoblur are smaller than the ones used in YSL's iconic product Touch Eclat, for example. This means they do a better job of diffusing the light in a flattering manner, like looking at skin through the soft focus medium of frosted glass. They are, however, too big to be absorbed by skin, which people may be glad to know.

Having tried Nanoblur a few times - and arguably you are only supposed to need to try it once for 40 seconds to see the years roll back.... - I will say that my vertical lip lines looked fainter, no question. Downside was that my top lip was slightly pushed out and appeared thinner, which it can ill afford to do. Though at the same my cupid's bow appeared more prominent, which I was quite pleased about. There is a pleasant sensation of tautness and no disagreeable smell, as with the Avon product.

BEFORE (SOME MONTHS BEFORE, BUT NOT TO WORRY)

ME MINUTES AFTER APPLICATION

ME SLIGHTLY MORE FACE-ON, THOUGH I DON'T THINK IT MAKES MUCH DIFFERENCE

The "not a cream" - or "advanced optical cream" as you prefer - had its work cut out with the long lines either side of my mouth, which have rather disconcertingly started to sprout tributaries lately at the ends - they also remind me a little of a snake's forked tongue... I would say that the effect there was of a slight plumping out and softening and then over time I thought I might even have detected a slight flattening of the grooves. However, I wouldn't say they vanished, or even appeared to vanish. Probably because they weren't "fine" lines to start with. The lip lines (which I would call "fine") do appear visibly reduced in photos and in the mirror. The effects also seemed to last till the following day, which may say more about the sloppiness of my so-called skincare regime than any inherent merit of the product. : - )

The members of Makeupalley rated this product 3.1 out of 5, which isn't a great score. Anything under 4.0 counts as a lukewarm response over there, I'd say. Some people found it didn't work well OVER foundation, the recommended method of application - or even UNDER it, for those who like me decided to flaunt the instructions - and I would agree with that. So that could be a stumbling block right there for anyone who usually wears full coverage foundation. People who had a good experience with the product talked of its "smoothing" and "mattifying" effect, which was the finding of my next-door-neighbour, who also bought herself a tube.

So I get the feeling that Nanoblur is a product that works best for obscuring fine lines (and possibly large pores or bits of unwanted pigmentation, though I wasn't trying it out for that). I would recommend it in a guarded way, as I think different people may get different results. As for the taking off ten years, I don't think so. Up to ten years - well, that's a more forgiving timespan.

And according to the website, Nanoblur comes with a customer satisfaction guarantee, so if you find you can't blur back time, you can get your money back at least...