Every one of these ends with something written down that you keep. What none of them are: a diagnosis, a treatment, or a promise about how your skin will look afterwards.
We go through everything you currently own. What stays, what goes, what order it belongs in — with a reason attached to every line, not just a verdict.
Not: not a diagnosis, and not a judgement on your skin — only on what is in the bottles.
One product, or one list. What the evidence actually supports, how strong it is, and which part of the claim is doing the marketing.
Not: not a safety clearance and not a recommendation to buy.
A conversation. You bring the questions, we work out what matters first and what can wait a year.
Not: not a medical appointment. If something needs examining, you need someone who can examine it.
My testing rule as an accompanied format: one product at a time, forearm patch first, everything written down. Most “this does not work” is really “I did not give it a chance”.
Not: not a promise of a result. It is a method for finding out honestly whether there was one.
The subjects that come up most often. She works on the products and the evidence behind them — the skin itself stays with the people qualified to examine it.
A barrier that stopped coping
Tight, stinging, reactive skin after too many actives at once. Usually a subtraction problem, not an addition one.
Actives and how to combine them
Retinoids, acids, vitamin C, niacinamide — what genuinely conflicts, and which warnings are formulation folklore.
Sun protection that actually protects
Which filter, and far more importantly how much of it, how often, and where everyone misses.
Pigmentation and uneven tone
What topicals can realistically shift, over what timescale, and where the honest ceiling of a cream sits.
Ageing claims, sorted by evidence
Retinoids and sunscreen have the data. Most of the rest is a texture described in scientific language.
Reading a label properly
INCI order, concentration claims, “clinically proven”, and what a percentage on the front does and does not tell you.
Too many products
The most common finding: eleven products, three doing the work, two cancelling each other out.
A study someone quoted at you
What it measured, on whom, for how long, and how much of the claim survives the reading.
None of this is diagnosis or treatment. Where something needs examining, she says so and stops there — that is the actual limit of the work, not a disclaimer bolted on.
You send what you have — a questionnaire, photos of the products, a link, an ingredient list. Photographs are of packaging, never of your face. I do not need to see your skin to tell you that four of your products contain the same active.
You get back something written: what stays, what goes, in which order, and why. Where the evidence is strong, I say so. Where it is thin, I say that too, and I would rather tell you a product is fine but unremarkable than sell you a story about it.
If something needs looking at by a person who can examine you, I will say that plainly and stop there. That is not me being careful with my wording. It is the actual limit of what this work is.
No diagnosis, and no opinion on what a mark, a rash or a change on your skin is. That conversation belongs with someone who can examine you properly.
No promised results, no before-and-after photographs, and no timeline for when you will “see” something. Cosmetic ingredients work in modest effect sizes over months, and anyone quoting you a fortnight is quoting marketing.
No naming and shaming of brands. Categories, yes — I will tell you that a whole class of claim is overselling itself. Individual names, no.
No affiliate links, anywhere. If I recommend something, I bought it.
Fees are quoted when you enquire, because the right service depends on what you actually need — and reasonably often that is the shortest one on this page rather than the longest.
There are no affiliate links anywhere on this site. If a product is recommended, it was bought.
