Nanoblur promises instant gratification. And that’s pretty much what you get. For a mere $19, pretty much any gratification is acceptable. It is a fairly thick, white cream that is a little tacky to the touch after application. It is transparent on the skin, this is not a foundation, but is supposed to work by deflecting light. The thing is that it does – in under a minute – quite significantly (not completely, but nonetheless impressively) reduce the appearance of fine lines.
That’s what I mean by winning round one. Nanonblur does indeed reduce the appearance of lines. It also has some success with open pores. It does not, however, achieve the other claims made for it: it does not (at least in my experience) correct wrinkles or have any effect on sagginess. I wondered what it might do for hyperpigmentation and tried covering up a freckle – the result was zero bluring.
I was impressed enough with the effect on fine lines, to include Nanoblur in my arsenal, but first it had to pass round three: would the ingredients pass the TIA challenge? This really depends on your take on silicones.
Because for all Nanoblur’s bluster about “advanced optics technology”, this product has more silicone that a porn video. The odd silicone is, in my view permissible in a product like this, but here there’s a lot. Silicones may be toxic if absorbed and they seem to enhance the penetration of other ingredients. Might they do that for one of the few other ingredients, adipic acid? Manufactured from either cyclohexane (a petrochemical) or phenol (a hazardous chemical), adipic acid may be a mild irritant to skin, as well as toxic, not to mention that production of adipic acid may account for the largest source of industrial N2O emissions.
There are no actives here and Nanoblur is really a makeup rather than skincare product. Although there is doubtless some light refraction going on, I found that wrinkle fading is more effective if the product is layered several times. Its a makeup version of spackle that fills in the cracks.
Indeed Labs, the company behind Nanoblur clearly likes hyperbole. Nanoblur’s “look 10 years younger in 40 seconds” is matched by its claim for Snoxin (that is such a bad name): “4x better than $500+ serums”. There’s plenty of silicone in Snoxin as well. But lurking amongst them are some peptides including Matrixyl 3000. So, unlike, Nanoblur it doesn’t quite blur the line between a cosmetic and smoke and mirrors. If anyone would like to take Snoxin and give it your own TIA challenge, let me know and I'll send it out to you for review.
Ingredients in Nanoblur: Water / Aqua / Eau, Adipic acid/Neopentyl Glycol Crosspolymer, Dimethicone, Glycerin, Cyclopentasiloxane, VP/VA Copolymer, Cyclohexasiloxane, Sodium Acrylate/Acryloyldimethyl Taurate Copolymer, Amodimethicone, Hydroxypropyl Methylcellulose, Isohexadecane, Polysilicone-11, Polysorbate 80, Citric Acid, Caprylyl Glycol, Phenoxyethanol.
Ingredients in Snoxin: Water / Aqua / Eau, Glycerin, Dimethicone, Cyclopentasiloxane, Sodium Acrylate/Acryloyldimethyl Taurate Copolymer, Butylene Glycol, Acetyl Octapeptide-3, Palmitoyl Oligopeptide, Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7, Dipeptide Diaminobutyroyl Benzylamide Diacetate, Isohexadecane, Cyclohexasiloxane, Polysilicone-11, Polysorbate 80, Polysorbate 20, Carbomer, Caprylyl Glycol, Phenoxyethanol