In bringing quality products to consumers, should we compromise on ingredients?
Today, we at JACAVA London read a loaded critique from what we strongly suspect to be a biased commentator. The article disparaged our choice of bringing a better quality product to the consumer.
By carefully selecting premium ingredients – at extra cost and effort to ourselves – we try to provide a wider selection of variety of nail polish. Our nail polish is chip-resistant and is fast-drying, especially with our new premium brand of Prestige Base Coat and Prestige Top Coat, that we are so excited about and which takes just moments to dry – and all without the need to rely on nasty ingredients! Try it and see for yourself.
In sourcing our ingredients, we consider the needs of both consumer and those who work for us and strive to ensure that, in providing a premium product, our production staff are also not exposed to unnecessary harm.
We have chosen not to include formaldehyde, formaldehyde resin, camphor, DBP, toluene, parabens, phthalates, lead, xylene, ethyl tosylamide and animal ingredients. We’re also cruelty-free. You can read a bit more about these ingredients and the reasons we elect not to include these: HERE. Professional journalists and our customers appreciate our reasons. In stating the 9 toxic ingredients we do not include and why we choose this option, it would seem this particular biased commentator would prefer our silence. Perhaps this is because, in speaking out, we shed unwanted light on the choice of ingredients commonly absorbed by other brands?
This biased commentator blusters an excuse that some of the ingredients – that we choose not to include – are ‘Only harmful in high concentrations’. Where have we heard this phrase before – a politician? That’s as maybe but, if there’s even a remote harm, why choose to include it at all, we ask, especially if there are ample alternatives out there? This excuse, it seems, is narrow-minded and is not acceptable to us.
This commentator then goes on to contradict herself and admits that, of the 9 ingredients we choose not to include, ‘some of the ingredients are harmful’! Well!
As far as we are concerned, some ingredients – when they are harmful – there is no denying it: they are harmful! And we thank the commentator for unwittingly reinforcing our philosophy of freedom of choice and quality.
We could use cheaper ingredients – it’s a choice, after all. Or we could – as we in fact do – take a little more time and trouble, to carefully source alternatives and present these for your enjoyment. The choice, of course, remains yours as a consumer – thankfully!
What we must make clear, however, is that we make a statement of what we do not include because we are proud to choose the alternatives available and will not be bullied into silence on this matter and we have you – our customers, the consumer – to thank again for this! Clearly, people care about what they wear and ingest; they care about their products contaminating the food of those they love and that is why we have sought out healthier and more natural alternatives. Should emerging brands be gagged or criticised for this progressive choice? Professional journalists – those recognised and widely respected publications, the latest of which we have shared with you on our Facebook and Twitter edits and who include, among many others, the prestigious Vogue Magazine – think not!
The consumer and all Professional journalists are hugely supportive and encouraging of the constant developments in improving nail polish and cosmetic products.
Perhaps our choice – not to include the 9 toxic ingredients – shines light on other brands that don’t like the ugly reflection of what their choices present to them? Rather than cowardly attempts to bully other brands into keeping quiet on the matter, maybe this odd rattling biased commentator – very much differentiated from the vast array of highly professional journalists – should take a good look at what she is promoting and keep up to speed? It is time for progress from the dark ages. There are now more healthy, more natural options available to be embraced. Free of the 9 toxic chemicals is not just some gimmick, it is very much what the consumer wants. Just a thought… Or are we not allowed these nowadays either?
[share title=”Share this Post” facebook=”true” twitter=”true” google_plus=”true” pinterest=”true” ]