The Beautypedia bait that needs to STOP

We certainly agree on the importance of eyebrows.

This is one of those strange, unexpected posts that just pop up from the heart, not my blog schedule.
It’s been happening a while, but has become more noticeable recently. It seems that whenever I write a review, I get comments either pointing out that Beautypedia ‘hate it’ or that I couldn’t possibly seriously think this is a good product because it ‘contains essential oils that Beautypedia says kill cells’ or some such other comment comparing my opinion to Beautypedia’s. And most importantly, repeating Beautypedia’s opinions as solid fact.

I met Paula Begoun back in May. She was utterly charming, funny and intelligent and someone you would absolutely hang out with.
I have the utmost respect for her and what she has achieved in the industry. Anyone who writes a book called ‘Blue Eyeshadow should be Illegal’ is alright by me.
During our meeting, Paula told me point blank that she has absolutely nothing to do with the online reviews and hasn’t done for years. She is only interested in product development these days. The reviews on Beautypedia are written by her large team of researchers headed up by her business partner Bryan Barron. Bryan was a Sales Associate working the shop floor when he met and started working with Paula.
Beautypedia write their reviews by reading an INCI list and reporting back on it, not by trying the products on the skin.

When Paula asked me what I was enjoying using recently, I laughed and said ‘Oh you hate it. I’m loving Tata Harper at the moment.’ Paula had never heard of Tata Harper. She had to defer to Bryan. She then said ‘Oh don’t get me started on french skincare brands. They’re the worst.’ To which I obviously replied ‘Oh I bloody love me some french skincare!’ And we laughed. Because it’s ok for two grown women to disagree without being threatened or competitive.

Here’s the thing: the entire beauty industry (like most) is built on opinion. Beautypedia, like this blog, is an opinion-led website.
It is not the word of God. Having said that, we actually agree on more than we differ on. We agree on parabens, animal testing, cellulite products, skin needling, acne, blackheads, the pointless word ‘hypoallergenic’ and so much more.

I personally – along with a whole host of other people/brands – disagree with a couple of key things, namely mineral oil and fragrance.
Paula told me point blank that the skin can breathe when mineral oil sits on it. I politely disagreed.
Beautypedia as a team stand by a research paper that Paula read over 20 years ago (again, her words to me) stating that fragrance – especially essential oils, cause cell ‘death’. I, along with a lot of other people, other brands, other doctors and other papers published since, disagree.

That’s pretty much it to be honest. There might be other smaller things, but those two are the ones that come up the most when Beautypedia is mentioned as having a differing opinion to myself/other brands. And that’s totally fine by me.
For every paper saying parabens are the devil, there are others stating that they have been used effectively for decades.
For every paper stating that essential oils cause ‘cell death’ there are other papers ‘proving’ the opposite (not to mention an entire worldwide aromatherapy industry).

What is not ok is the underlying element of some commenters that are clearly trying to get me to speak negatively about Paula and her brand, whilst actively defending myself. I don’t publish a lot of them. You’re goading the wrong blogger people. She’s a lovely, intelligent, charming, funny woman with a great brand. What’s not to like?

Use Beautypedia as the great resource that it is – I often do, and use this blog the same way, but then take that information, apply it to what you know about your own skin, and make your own mind up.

I do not see me changing my mind about mineral oil and fragrance in a hurry. Nor will Paula. We’re ok with that. I do wish you could be too.

Sell crazy someplace else. We’re all stocked up here.