Thanks Sam! I agree with all your thoughts on these 🫣 As for snail mucin… I have heard of SO many people have terrible reactions to it & being absolutely shocked that it did that to them given it is raved about so much. As for the rice tone- I know *exactly* what you mean: it leaves a slight film or something & doesn’t feel like it actually absorbs ( I only had a sample of it). The purito serum is an updated version of the original Purito Serum ( increased centella and a few other changes). I have never tried either tho so can’t compare. I will not touch reedle shot until I see more data & long term studies… Ah- and my UA-cam name changed ( not sure you even noticed or care but thought I would mention it!). Who cares what others think- it’s most important that you love what works for your skin. Thank you!
Always so honest!! Love your videos. Thank you for doing this. How long do you give skincare before you know it’s just ok or not worth your time? I find myself using something and after a few days I move on. Thanks for your help.
Thank you :) Usually I'm checking for texture compatibility first, and how it makes my skin feel. If it doesn't pass that, then I move on pretty quickly. If I like a serum then I'll focus on it for a full bottle before deciding if it's in permanent rotation. Cleansers and moisturisers I rotate a bit more frequently.
Always love your insights. There are definitely some amazing Korean skincare brands that isn't as known globally yet, but hopefully they will be more widespread as there are so many more gems than these very trending products. As you say, a lot of these are trending as this is what is being presented and available globally, so this is all a lot of people have access to. Having travelled to Korea on a skincare discovery trip, I definitely discovered that there is so much more :)
@@sambythecounter Oh you must, they even serve you ice cream with ginseng! Just saying. Definitely let me now if you ever plan t go, so I can share some shopping hot spots :).
Appreciate your honest opinions Sam, and happy that you don’t just jump on the hype bandwagon! As you said, we all have different skin and won’t all like the same things 😊
Yeeeah I'm not keen on spicules either. I'd like to see a *lot* more data before I'd consider adding spicule-containing products to my routine. If I want to enhance product penetration, I'd rather do so in a more predictable and controlled manner. I'm also still worried about the off chance of spicules pushing each other deeper into my skin than I want them 😵💫
Oh I'm so happy to read this from you!! I was starting to feel a bit weird about being so conservative around using them. I'm glad it's not such an unusual perspective. If I can also pick your brain about PFAs too...cause I've been using and enjoying the Educated Mess C mask but got tons of feedback about the PFAs bans from industry sources. I knew the environmental side was becoming a hot topic but I was (and still am) pretty unclear on the standing of them in a rinse-off situation like a mask or long wear makeup. Do you think it's best to avoid? I guess I assumed they had enough long term safety standing.
@sambythecounter PFAS are a big family of substances with widely varied structures and behaviours. I'd be wary of anyone treating them as homogeneous in terms of human or environmental saftey. My understanding is that the methyl perfluorobutyl ether in that product is used as a volatile ingredient that evaporates and gets trapped inside the mask, forming bubbles. The benefit of using this ingredient is that it's chemically inert and not a skin or eye irritant, unlike some more common volatile cosmetic ingredients that might sting the eyes when they evaporate off the skin. This ingredient has undergone saftey assessment in Australia including consideration of its use in cosmetics. It's been used in cosmetics since back when animal testing was more common, before bans were introduced in Australia and the EU. There were a handful of studies looked at in that saftey assessment including 90 day inhalation, reproductive and developmental toxicity, intravenous toxicokinetics, and acute oral toxicity. It was described as having a "low toxicity profile". The assessment also identified a known metabolite for which there's some saftey data. AFAIK shorter chain PFAS also don't take as long to degrade, making them somewhat less environmentally persistent. Various industries have been switching to them for this reason. From what I know there's a lot of limitations with existing data and again I'd be wary of anyone lumping all PFAS together or failing to add nuance. There's a saved live on chem.kardashian's IG talking about PFAS that I really enjoyed. She also did a podcast interview with The Eco Well that I really should listen to at some point.
Ah bother, looks like my comment is being held for moderation so I can't edit it. I think maybe I have listened to the podcast I mentioned, and the IG live I mentioned was only talking about a couple of higher molecular weight PFAS that are in food and drinking water. Anyway yeah PFAS are everywhere and I don't think there's much value in consumers stressing about the ones added to cosmetics.
@@sambythecounter okay here's a slightly corrected version of my wall of text that UA-cam ate. PFAS are a big family of substances with widely varied structures and behaviours. I'd be wary of anyone treating them as homogeneous in terms of human or environmental saftey. My understanding is that the methyl perfluorobutyl ether in that product is used as a volatile ingredient that evaporates and gets trapped inside the mask, forming bubbles. The benefit of using this ingredient is that it's chemically inert and not a skin or eye irritant, unlike some more common volatile cosmetic ingredients that might sting the eyes when they evaporate off the skin. This ingredient has undergone safety assessment in Australia including consideration of its use in cosmetics. It's been used in cosmetics since back when animal testing was more common, before animal testing bans were introduced in Australia and the EU. There were a handful of studies looked at in that safety assessment including 90 day inhalation, reproductive and developmental toxicity, intravenous toxicokinetics, and acute oral toxicity. It was described as having a "low toxicity profile". The assessment also identified a known metabolite for which there's some saftey data. AFAIK shorter chain PFAS also don't take as long to degrade, making them somewhat less environmentally persistent. Various industries have been switching to them for this reason. From what I know there's a lot of limitations with existing data and again I'd be wary of anyone lumping all PFAS together or failing to add nuance. There's an episode of The Eco Well where Jen interviewed KC Hyland about PFAS, highly recommend. KC also has a saved live on her Instagram chem.kardashian that I found really interesting talking about PFAS in drinking water.
It's very weird to have opinions on products you did not even try. Also silica reedles have been used for a very long Time in asian and eastern countries so i don't get why so many american influencers are afraid of it especially when you see all the bad things there is in your beauty products and food. 😅
In the video I say which products I haven't tried. If I comment on something, it's because I have used it. Silica needles in current skincare products are finer and micro so the risk is greater than in traditional use. There are no "bad things" in beauty products or food. And I'm Australian, not American.
![Sam [by the counter]](http://yt3.ggpht.com/CzwBcYyrlenJM04eBjxNB_jeOt6rumgyfvMWelTbnUAsDU2Jeo_YBWB7WLaPgud4uc1z7nu-uA=s48-c-k-c0x00ffffff-no-rj)
Great reviews!! Also, I LOVE your cabinets! Where are they from?
Well done, by the way! 🫶
Thank you!! They are just CD storage towers from Ikea. Nice and shallow.
Thanks Sam! I agree with all your thoughts on these 🫣
As for snail mucin… I have heard of SO many people have terrible reactions to it & being absolutely shocked that it did that to them given it is raved about so much.
As for the rice tone- I know *exactly* what you mean: it leaves a slight film or something & doesn’t feel like it actually absorbs ( I only had a sample of it).
The purito serum is an updated version of the original Purito Serum ( increased centella and a few other changes). I have never tried either tho so can’t compare.
I will not touch reedle shot until I see more data & long term studies…
Ah- and my UA-cam name changed ( not sure you even noticed or care but thought I would mention it!).
Who cares what others think- it’s most important that you love what works for your skin.
Thank you!
Good to know, thank you :)
Always so honest!! Love your videos. Thank you for doing this. How long do you give skincare before you know it’s just ok or not worth your time? I find myself using something and after a few days I move on. Thanks for your help.
Thank you :) Usually I'm checking for texture compatibility first, and how it makes my skin feel. If it doesn't pass that, then I move on pretty quickly. If I like a serum then I'll focus on it for a full bottle before deciding if it's in permanent rotation. Cleansers and moisturisers I rotate a bit more frequently.
@ Thank you Sam as always. I have come to trust your advice. I will try this and see. Thank you.
Always love your insights. There are definitely some amazing Korean skincare brands that isn't as known globally yet, but hopefully they will be more widespread as there are so many more gems than these very trending products. As you say, a lot of these are trending as this is what is being presented and available globally, so this is all a lot of people have access to. Having travelled to Korea on a skincare discovery trip, I definitely discovered that there is so much more :)
Ahh definitely need to visit one day and see for myself. The Sulwhasoo store is calling my name.
@@sambythecounter Oh you must, they even serve you ice cream with ginseng! Just saying. Definitely let me now if you ever plan t go, so I can share some shopping hot spots :).
Appreciate your honest opinions Sam, and happy that you don’t just jump on the hype bandwagon! As you said, we all have different skin and won’t all like the same things 😊
🥰
I am shocked that Numbuzin didn’t make the line up 😮
They had a few products appear in the voting just there wasn't one that stood out by itself to make it to top 10.
Yeeeah I'm not keen on spicules either. I'd like to see a *lot* more data before I'd consider adding spicule-containing products to my routine.
If I want to enhance product penetration, I'd rather do so in a more predictable and controlled manner.
I'm also still worried about the off chance of spicules pushing each other deeper into my skin than I want them 😵💫
Oh I'm so happy to read this from you!! I was starting to feel a bit weird about being so conservative around using them. I'm glad it's not such an unusual perspective. If I can also pick your brain about PFAs too...cause I've been using and enjoying the Educated Mess C mask but got tons of feedback about the PFAs bans from industry sources. I knew the environmental side was becoming a hot topic but I was (and still am) pretty unclear on the standing of them in a rinse-off situation like a mask or long wear makeup. Do you think it's best to avoid? I guess I assumed they had enough long term safety standing.
@sambythecounter PFAS are a big family of substances with widely varied structures and behaviours. I'd be wary of anyone treating them as homogeneous in terms of human or environmental saftey.
My understanding is that the methyl perfluorobutyl ether in that product is used as a volatile ingredient that evaporates and gets trapped inside the mask, forming bubbles. The benefit of using this ingredient is that it's chemically inert and not a skin or eye irritant, unlike some more common volatile cosmetic ingredients that might sting the eyes when they evaporate off the skin.
This ingredient has undergone saftey assessment in Australia including consideration of its use in cosmetics. It's been used in cosmetics since back when animal testing was more common, before bans were introduced in Australia and the EU. There were a handful of studies looked at in that saftey assessment including 90 day inhalation, reproductive and developmental toxicity, intravenous toxicokinetics, and acute oral toxicity. It was described as having a "low toxicity profile". The assessment also identified a known metabolite for which there's some saftey data.
AFAIK shorter chain PFAS also don't take as long to degrade, making them somewhat less environmentally persistent. Various industries have been switching to them for this reason. From what I know there's a lot of limitations with existing data and again I'd be wary of anyone lumping all PFAS together or failing to add nuance.
There's a saved live on chem.kardashian's IG talking about PFAS that I really enjoyed. She also did a podcast interview with The Eco Well that I really should listen to at some point.
Ah bother, looks like my comment is being held for moderation so I can't edit it. I think maybe I have listened to the podcast I mentioned, and the IG live I mentioned was only talking about a couple of higher molecular weight PFAS that are in food and drinking water.
Anyway yeah PFAS are everywhere and I don't think there's much value in consumers stressing about the ones added to cosmetics.
@@sambythecounter okay here's a slightly corrected version of my wall of text that UA-cam ate.
PFAS are a big family of substances with widely varied structures and behaviours. I'd be wary of anyone treating them as homogeneous in terms of human or environmental saftey.
My understanding is that the methyl perfluorobutyl ether in that product is used as a volatile ingredient that evaporates and gets trapped inside the mask, forming bubbles. The benefit of using this ingredient is that it's chemically inert and not a skin or eye irritant, unlike some more common volatile cosmetic ingredients that might sting the eyes when they evaporate off the skin.
This ingredient has undergone safety assessment in Australia including consideration of its use in cosmetics. It's been used in cosmetics since back when animal testing was more common, before animal testing bans were introduced in Australia and the EU. There were a handful of studies looked at in that safety assessment including 90 day inhalation, reproductive and developmental toxicity, intravenous toxicokinetics, and acute oral toxicity. It was described as having a "low toxicity profile". The assessment also identified a known metabolite for which there's some saftey data.
AFAIK shorter chain PFAS also don't take as long to degrade, making them somewhat less environmentally persistent. Various industries have been switching to them for this reason. From what I know there's a lot of limitations with existing data and again I'd be wary of anyone lumping all PFAS together or failing to add nuance.
There's an episode of The Eco Well where Jen interviewed KC Hyland about PFAS, highly recommend. KC also has a saved live on her Instagram chem.kardashian that I found really interesting talking about PFAS in drinking water.
@@rubysresource Thank you!! I usually listen to all of Jen's podcasts but I must have missed that one.
It's very weird to have opinions on products you did not even try. Also silica reedles have been used for a very long Time in asian and eastern countries so i don't get why so many american influencers are afraid of it especially when you see all the bad things there is in your beauty products and food. 😅
In the video I say which products I haven't tried. If I comment on something, it's because I have used it. Silica needles in current skincare products are finer and micro so the risk is greater than in traditional use. There are no "bad things" in beauty products or food. And I'm Australian, not American.
Ve reedl shot Nasty makes my all over my face acne l hate it
I’m shocked Beauty of Joseon and Isntree isn’t here
Probably more well known for their sunscreen which was in a separate vote.