Getting you a comprehensive review of the product
Reading every ingredient in the formula…
Reading every ingredient in the formula…
Join The Clean Sheet™ community
Science-backed beauty tips, ingredient alerts, and early access. Straight to your WhatsApp.
Join for free →
While a classic for dry skin, this Clinique moisturizer's 'Oil-free' claim is misleading, and its 'No. 1' status lacks public substantiation, urging consumers to look beyond marketing.
₹3,950 • Analysed 22 September 2026
This premium moisturizer, priced at Rs. 31.60/ml, is positioned for very dry to dry combination skin, making it well-suited for India's drier climates or for those with compromised barriers. The '100% fragrance-free' claim is a significant plus for sensitive Indian skin, especially given the prevalence of fragrance sensitivity. However, the 'Oil-free' claim is directly contradicted by the INCI, which is an ASCI concern for misleading advertising, and the 'No. 1' claim lacks public substantiation.
Independent and free. The Clean Sheet takes no money from brands to review, rank, or approve a product. This is a web evidence review, not a Clean Sheet certification. We checked the ingredient list, publicly available test reports, marketing claims, and formula logic using only public information available at the time of review.
Product name, not a claim requiring external evidence.
A statement about product development, not a performance claim. Clinique is a reputable brand known for dermatologist input.
Brand states specific 8-hour duration on its website and product pages, implying internal testing. No full study report or methodology is publicly visible.
Brand states specific percentage and timeframe on its website and product pages, implying internal testing. No full study report or methodology is publicly visible.
These are subjective appearance claims, generally supported by effective moisturization and the product's formula.
These are subjective appearance claims, generally supported by effective moisturization and the product's formula.
These are tactile and absorption claims, generally observable by users and consistent with the lotion format.
A standard safety claim for a face moisturizer, implying testing has been conducted.
What we could confirm from public sources and the verified ingredient list.
Ingredient Safety & Toxicity
Full ingredient list retrieved and verified against the label.
Brand describes ingredient origin in its claims.
Screened against the ingredient database (14 of 32 ingredients matched); no cosmetics-prohibited ingredient found.
No ingredient with a recognised endocrine-activity concern found in the database.
No IARC-classified or formaldehyde-releasing ingredient found in the database screen.
Contains ingredient(s) commonly rated comedogenic: isopropyl myristate, lanolin. May not suit very acne-prone skin.
Irritation & Allergen Risk
No EU-declarable or database-flagged allergen found in the list.
No high-sensitisation preservative (MI/MCI/formaldehyde-releaser) from our screen was found.
Brand claims dermatologist testing (claim stated; underlying report not seen).
Ingredient Transparency
The full INCI list is publicly available, not just hero ingredients.
Any proprietary 'complex' is broken down into its actual ingredients.
Ingredients are listed in the descending order required by India Cosmetics Rules 2020.
Standards & Compliance
Usage warnings and directions are clear on the label.
No retinoid or other pregnancy-cautioned active found in the screen.
Screened against a curated reference set that we are continuing to verify and expand, so “clear” means no flag from that set, not a guarantee. Not a substitute for a full toxicological or clinical assessment.
| Ingredient |
|---|
Water\Aqua\Eau |
Mineral Oil\Paraffinum Liquidum\Huile Minerale |
Glycerin |
Petrolatum |
Stearic Acid |
Glyceryl Stearate |
Sesamum Indicum (Sesame) Oil |
Urea |
Lanolin Alcohol |
Triethanolamine |
Hordeum Vulgare (Barley) Extract\Extrait D'Orge |
Cucumis Sativus (Cucumber) Fruit Extract |
Helianthus Annuus (Sunflower) Seedcake |
Propylene Glycol Dicaprate |
Dicaprylyl Carbonate |
Isopropyl Myristate |
Cetyl Alcohol |
Lecithin |
Butylene Glycol |
Polysorbate 60 |
Tocopheryl Acetate |
Caprylyl Glycol |
Dimethicone |
Sodium Hyaluronate |
Butyl Stearate |
Hexylene Glycol |
Acrylates/C10-30 Alkyl Acrylate Crosspolymer |
Disodium Edta |
Phenoxyethanol |
Yellow 5 (Ci 19140) |
Red 4 (Ci 14700) |
Yellow 6 (Ci 15985) |
INCI order as declared on packaging. Position reflects approximate concentration (high to low).
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
Flags are based on publicly available INCI only. Not a substitute for full regulatory compliance review.
“Oil-free”
This claim is directly contradicted by the product's own ingredient list, making it misleading advertising.
“The #1 dermatologist-developed moisturizer.”
Absolute 'No. 1' claims require clear substantiation and methodology under ASCI guidelines, which is not provided.
Product name, not a claim requiring external evidence.
Missing
A statement about product development, not a performance claim. Clinique is a reputable brand known for dermatologist input.
Evidence visible
Brand states specific 8-hour duration on its website and product pages, implying internal testing. No full study report or methodology is publicly visible.
Evidence visible
Brand states specific percentage and timeframe on its website and product pages, implying internal testing. No full study report or methodology is publicly visible.
Evidence visible
These are subjective appearance claims, generally supported by effective moisturization and the product's formula.
Evidence visible
These are subjective appearance claims, generally supported by effective moisturization and the product's formula.
Evidence visible
These are tactile and absorption claims, generally observable by users and consistent with the lotion format.
Evidence visible
A standard safety claim for a face moisturizer, implying testing has been conducted.
Evidence visible
A standard safety claim for Clinique, implying testing has been conducted.
Evidence visible
Verified by INCI list, no fragrance ingredients (e.g., Parfum, essential oils) found.
Evidence visible
Public evidence the brand could provide to close verification gaps
This review evaluates brand claims against visible evidence and formula logic. It does not replace a full ingredient safety analysis or a clinical product test. Results vary by individual, and the consumer should always read the full ingredient list and follow usage guidance.
Are you the brand? If you have published test data or want to request a re-review, write to us at hello@thecleansheet.in.
No ingredient with a recognised endocrine-activity concern found in the database.
No IARC-classified or formaldehyde-releasing ingredient found in the database screen.
Contains ingredient(s) commonly rated comedogenic: isopropyl myristate, lanolin. May not suit very acne-prone skin.
Irritation & Allergen Risk
No EU-declarable or database-flagged allergen found in the list.
No high-sensitisation preservative (MI/MCI/formaldehyde-releaser) from our screen was found.
Brand claims dermatologist testing (claim stated; underlying report not seen).
Ingredient Transparency
The full INCI list is publicly available, not just hero ingredients.
Any proprietary 'complex' is broken down into its actual ingredients.
Ingredients are listed in the descending order required by India Cosmetics Rules 2020.
Standards & Compliance
Usage warnings and directions are clear on the label.
No retinoid or other pregnancy-cautioned active found in the screen.
Screened against a curated reference set that we are continuing to verify and expand, so “clear” means no flag from that set, not a guarantee. Not a substitute for a full toxicological or clinical assessment.
Brand states specific percentage and timeframe on its website and product pages, implying internal testing. No full study report or methodology is publicly visible.
These are subjective appearance claims, generally supported by effective moisturization and the product's formula.
These are subjective appearance claims, generally supported by effective moisturization and the product's formula.
These are tactile and absorption claims, generally observable by users and consistent with the lotion format.
A standard safety claim for a face moisturizer, implying testing has been conducted.
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
No prohibited or restricted ingredients identified
Flags are based on publicly available INCI only. Not a substitute for full regulatory compliance review.
Product name, not a claim requiring external evidence.
Missing
A statement about product development, not a performance claim. Clinique is a reputable brand known for dermatologist input.
Evidence visible
Brand states specific 8-hour duration on its website and product pages, implying internal testing. No full study report or methodology is publicly visible.
Evidence visible
Brand states specific percentage and timeframe on its website and product pages, implying internal testing. No full study report or methodology is publicly visible.
Evidence visible
These are subjective appearance claims, generally supported by effective moisturization and the product's formula.
Evidence visible
These are subjective appearance claims, generally supported by effective moisturization and the product's formula.
Evidence visible
These are tactile and absorption claims, generally observable by users and consistent with the lotion format.
Evidence visible
A standard safety claim for a face moisturizer, implying testing has been conducted.
Evidence visible
A standard safety claim for Clinique, implying testing has been conducted.
Evidence visible
Verified by INCI list, no fragrance ingredients (e.g., Parfum, essential oils) found.
Evidence visible
“Oil-free”
This claim is directly contradicted by the product's own ingredient list, making it misleading advertising.
“The #1 dermatologist-developed moisturizer.”
Absolute 'No. 1' claims require clear substantiation and methodology under ASCI guidelines, which is not provided.
Public evidence the brand could provide to close verification gaps
