The register
Unproven Claims
Somebody has to write down what was actually tested. Every entry here takes one beauty claim, restates it as a proposition somebody could go and check, and records what turned up — including, often, that nobody has looked. No brand is named in a verdict. Nothing here is sponsored, and nothing here links to a shop.
The useful column is not the verdict. It is the one next to it, which says what kind of evidence is missing — because “there is no evidence” is nearly always false, and the accurate answer is usually that the study exists and belongs to something else.
-
Daily sunscreen prevents visible skin ageing
EstablishedRandomised, in people, over four and a half years, measured on skin rather than in a survey. It holds.
-
Beef tallow as a skincare base
No adequate source foundClaims for acne, eczema and psoriasis are common on social video and largely uncited; a 2025 analysis found most promoting posts showed financial bias.
-
Topical NAD+ and NMN serums
Untested as claimedNo controlled human trial of topical NAD+ or NMN with skin endpoints has been published. The formulation literature exists because the molecule penetrates poorly.
-
Blue light from screens ages your skin
No adequate source foundVisible light from the sun does cause pigmentation. That evidence belongs to sunlight, not your monitor, and was carried across without a trial.
-
The four-night skin cycling sequence
Untested as claimedThe ingredients in skin cycling have evidence behind them. The four-night sequence, which is the actual product, has never been tested as a sequence.