Desk · Skincare Intelligence

III · Active & Tolerance

Not a toxicity score.
A state of play.

Clear, Watch, Hold, Verify. What we do not know, we say we do not know.

Verify

Requires label, source, or professional confirmation.

Anything that changes what is appropriate

Are you pregnant, trying to conceive, or breastfeeding?

It changes which ingredients are usually paused and which procedures are usually postponed. Nothing here is stored anywhere but this browser, and nothing here is a safety assessment.

Two ratings, two different questions

Name match: How sure we are the product contains what we matched — we only ever read the name.
Evidence: How well-supported the ingredient's main claimed effect is. Not a claim about your skin.

They do not average. A name we are sure about can carry an effect that is barely supported, and the reverse.

Active ingredients we recognised

We match these from your product names, not from the formula. If we cannot recognise a name we say nothing about it rather than guess.

Sunscreen / SPF
Sunscreen · Usually morning
Evidence for the effect
Strong evidenceOne of the few randomised results on this desk: daily SPF15 produced 24% less skin ageing over 4.5 years, and invasive melanoma fell in the same cohort. The catch is dose — the SPF number is measured at 2 mg/cm2 in a lab, and people routinely apply less than half of that.
Confidence in the name match
High confidenceMatched from “Mineral SPF 50”.
Mechanism: filters UV that drives pigment and photoaging. Wearability + volume beat filter prestige. Maintenance: budget for reapply sticks/minis — a $70 SPF you ration loses to an $18 bottle you finish. Skip: under-applying luxury SPF; skip stick-only as sole morning coverage.
Reassess white cast, sting, and actual wear habits at 1–2 weeks.
What we read (4)
- Sunscreen and prevention of skin aging: a randomized trial — Annals of Internal Medicine 158:781–790, 2013 · Trial (opens in a new tab)903 adults under 55 in Queensland. Daily SPF15 against discretionary use produced 24% less skin ageing by microtopography over 4.5 years (odds 0.76, 95% CI 0.59–0.98).Does not establish: Generalisation beyond a high-UV setting and a mostly fair-skinned cohort using SPF15.Checked 2026-09-02.
- Reduced melanoma after regular sunscreen use: randomized trial follow-up — Journal of Clinical Oncology 29(3):257–263, 2011 · Trial (opens in a new tab)1,621 participants followed to 2006: invasive melanoma hazard ratio 0.27 (95% CI 0.08–0.97).Does not establish: A significant reduction in all melanoma — that result (HR 0.50, p=0.051) did not reach conventional significance.Checked 2026-09-02.
- 21 CFR 201.327 — Over-the-counter sunscreen labeling and effectiveness testing — US Code of Federal Regulations, 2024 · Regulatory / official (opens in a new tab)The only skin-cancer claim permitted for broad-spectrum SPF 15+ is that it decreases risk *if used as directed with other sun protection measures*. Also the source of the 2 mg/cm² figure: that is the dose at which SPF is measured in the lab, in the test procedure itself. Reapplication is mandated at least every two hours, and after swimming, sweating or towel drying.Does not establish: That 2 mg/cm² is a clinically derived recommendation. It is a laboratory test condition, which is why applying less does not simply scale the number down.Checked 2026-09-02.
- Your skin and the sun — Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, 2024 · Regulatory / official (opens in a new tab)Studies show people frequently apply less than half the sunscreen needed for the protection on the label. Practical rule given as at least six teaspoons for the body.Does not establish: A single agreed quantity — the WHO's 2025 review gives about nine teaspoons for the same job. The disagreement is real and worth stating.Checked 2026-09-02.

Introduction order

The order for this job, and where you actually are in it.

Name the job
SPF if relevant
One treat
Everything else waits

Check these with a professional

Educational flags only — nothing here is a diagnosis, and nothing here clears you for anything. These are the things a clinician will want to know about.

Does any of this apply to you?

Flagging one of these does not mean something is wrong. It means it changes what is appropriate, so it belongs in the record you take to an appointment.

Nothing flagged.

An empty list here is a perfectly normal state. Add anything you would want a clinician to know before they decide.

Do this next

Framework gap: treat
Reasonably confident
Ordered framework is incomplete — explainability and weekly cadence suffer.
Based on Framework · job playbook slots vs inventory

Then

Framework gap: moisturizer
Reasonably confident
Ordered framework is incomplete — explainability and weekly cadence suffer.
Based on Framework · job playbook slots vs inventory
Schedule reassessment (~28 days)
Reasonably confident
Without a calendar hook, expansion decisions become vibes-based.
Based on Reassessment · reassessment

Keep an eye on

Add a climate / lifestyle context
Reasonably confident
Dry winter, altitude, travel, mask friction, and post-procedure windows change which slots protect first.
Based on Climate / lifestyle · context layer
Affordable workhorses still open (Drugstore / value)
Needs checking
You can complete a working routine at drugstore prices — prestige is optional texture, not efficacy.
Based on Playbook · product catalog

Where this goes next

Continue in Makeup Intelligence

Continue into makeup compatibility

SPF in makeup does not replace your SPF step — worth checking what you are double-counting.

The link opens the right panel and carries your job, tolerance state, no leave-on actives and your 28-day window in the address bar. That desk does not read them yet, so expect to enter what it asks for — it keeps its own record, in your browser, the same way this one does.