China approved Mexoryl 400 and won’t say how much you can use. Elemis sold with no price.

POLA, the Japanese skincare company, says it has [cleared a claim](https://www.pola.co.jp/about/news/20261026-01/index.html) that a capsule maintains collagen density in the dermis. It announced this on 26 October and will sell the product in 2027. Its two functional ingredients are a fatty acid from a marine microalga and a tomato-seed compound. Neither is collagen. The claim was not approved. Japan's Foods with Function Claims system (FFC) works by notification, and the Consumer Affairs Agency says the state does not review the science.

Our read is that the paperwork is the story. POLA notified an almost identical capsule in May, same ingredients, same doses. On the register's wording, that filing said the ingredient acts on skin collagen to maintain elasticity. The July filing names the dermis and promises the collagen density there is maintained, and POLA announced that wording as a first for Japan. POLA's evidence is a review of published papers, not a trial of the capsule, and it says so itself. Behind it sit one or two small studies per ingredient, with 21 to 25 people an arm. On 8 August we wrote that a pooled review of 19 peptide trials gave the category a soft mark. We said the molecule was real while the marketing ran a lap ahead of the data. POLA has put that gap into a government register. The claim promises only that the density is maintained. POLA has used the reviewed route before: Japan approved its wrinkle-improvement active as a quasi-drug ingredient in July 2016. This capsule did not go through that route.

[Two studies](https://doi.org/10.1111/ics.70113) trace the scalp scaling and irritation seen with very tightly curled hair mainly to washing habits, not the hair. Researchers at a not-for-profit institute in Princeton, New Jersey, published them on 2 November in the International Journal of Cosmetic Science. They recruited women with wavy, curly and very tightly curled hair in the US and South Africa. Those with the tightest curls washed less often and wore more braids and extensions. Dermatologists found the most hair loss from pulling in that group, in both countries. All the women then washed four times in one week with the same shampoo and conditioner. Women in every group said their scalps felt better, and oil levels on the scalp no longer differed by curl type.

The women with the tightest curls thought their scalps were drier than other women's, and washed less. The measurements found more oil instead. Our read: routines built on that belief may be treating the wrong problem. The scalp findings say nothing about breakage. Another paper in the same issue found that tightly curled hairs broke much sooner than straight ones when pulled over and over, and that harder combing made it worse. Readers should know who paid. The shampoo makers Procter & Gamble and Unilever are named as funders of the second scalp paper, with the ingredient makers Lubrizol, Symrise and Solvay. The shampoo makers gain if people wash more. The trial lasted one week, in healthy women whose hair had not been chemically treated.

Pitman Comms, a consultancy for business-to-business firms, asked ChatGPT three times to name five suppliers of functional cosmetic ingredients serving the UK. Distributors took four of the five places in every answer, and Azelis, Brenntag and Harke [were named each time](https://cosmeticsbusiness.com/exclusive-croda-azelis-and-brenntag-identified-as-top). Croda, an ingredient maker, was the only maker named, and it appeared in every answer. In the full report, which asked about five types of ingredient, Croda appeared in all 15 shortlists. The next makers, Lubrizol and Provital, appeared in four each. The report says it shows what ChatGPT returned, not how buyers behave. It does not explain why Croda came up so often.

In September and October we covered Estée Lauder and Coty hiring firms to get their brands named by AI assistants. Those deals were about shoppers. This test asks the same question for formulators and other people who buy ingredients. Our read: distributors publish long product lists covering many makers, which gives a chatbot more to match. A maker that sells through a distributor may never be named. Pitman's own advice is for makers to check that distributor listings say who makes each ingredient. The test was small: three repeats of each question, in one country, on one chatbot whose answers change. Distributors led for functional ingredients, while makers did better in other categories. Treat this as a first look at the problem, not a ranking of suppliers.

CVS Health [announced on 4 November](https://wwd.com/beauty-industry-news/beauty-features/beauty-and-wellness-have-more-space-to-shine-in-a-revamped-cvs-1239400818/) that it will split in two. Its roughly 9,000 drugstores, mail pharmacy and MinuteClinic will become a separate company, CVS Pharmacy. Aetna and the prescription-benefit business, CVS Caremark, form the other. The split should be done by mid-2028. CVS is testing Fresh Beauty Finds, a discount section that has carried prestige brands including Patrick Ta, a make-up brand. On 14 October Patrick Ta Beauty sued CVS and Akstrom Imports, a Montreal distributor it says supplied the products and promotional materials. It says CVS was never allowed to sell them, that the displays suggest the brand approved, and that CVS shoppers lose its warranty.

Our read: a drugstore without an insurer behind it needs more reasons to visit than prescriptions. Cut-price prestige make-up is one, and CVS has been stocking it without deals with the brands. On 18 September we wrote that CVS was selling prestige make-up at more than 80% off, and that the brands had no say. One shopper reported paying $8 at CVS, after coupons, for a Patrick Ta gloss that costs $26 at Sephora, the brand's exclusive retailer. The law may favour CVS. Genuine goods can usually be resold after their first sale, and the complaint does not say the products are fake. Legal commentary cited by Beauty Independent suggests the argument about the displays could matter more than the warranty claim. A ruling would tell other brands whether they can stop a drugstore stocking them.

China has registered a new sunscreen ingredient for the first time under the cosmetics rules in force since January 2021. The [state broadcaster CCTV reported the approval](https://www.chinanews.com.cn/sh/2026/10-29/10722764.shtml) on 29 October, quoting the regulator. The ingredient is the filter L'Oreal sells as Mexoryl 400. China has published no concentration limit and no conditions of use. The 3 percent figure in circulation is the European limit, set in 2020. The regulator's announcement names no company. One consultancy, which says it read the register, names BASF as the certificate holder.

Our read is that the approval is not usable yet, because the part saying how to use it is missing. Chinese rules put sunscreens in the registration tier, so the regulator sets their technical requirements. Those decide the concentration and the products it may go into. Until they are published, a formulator outside the registration has nothing to work to. On 9 August we wrote that America added bemotrizinol to its sunscreen rulebook, at a stated maximum concentration, and gave DSM Nutritional Products 18 months of exclusive rights. We said whoever owns the molecule owns the reformulation beneath every bottle. In China that cannot be tested yet, because the terms saying who may use it are missing. The regulation does set out a three-year tail. For three years after first use, the holder reports each year on how the ingredient is used and how safe it proves. Only if no safety problem appears does it join the list any company may use. The thing to look for next is those requirements.

Korea's Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) has [issued a guideline](https://m.korea.kr/multi/visualNewsView.do?newsId=148974019) on putting braille, and codes that play audio or sign-language video, on cosmetic packaging. It is dated 20 October. Since a change in the law in April 2025, companies may add these to packs, but they do not have to. The guideline sets a standard for those that do. The product name, or part of it, goes in braille where it does not overlap the printed text. Moulded or embossed braille, stickers and braille tags are all allowed. MFDS recommends a check by a braille proofreader. MFDS says it will find and reward good examples. On 2 November its minister visited a company that already puts braille on products such as sheet masks, and called such labelling essential.

Our read: few brands will add braille soon, because the cost falls on their packaging. When MFDS consulted on a draft, companies said their containers vary too much in size and suggested making more use of electronic labels, a Korean trade paper reported. A lipstick or a sample sachet has little room for braille. That makes the audio code the likelier route for small packs. A printed code read by a phone needs less space than braille. For brands exporting from Korea, the guideline is a ready specification if a buyer asks for accessible packs. It also gives MFDS a standard it could make compulsory later, although it has not said it will.

Elemis, the British skincare brand behind the Pro-Collagen Cleansing Balm, is changing hands. L'Occitane Group has [agreed to sell it to PAI Partners](https://www.paipartners.com/mediaitem/loccitane-group-and-pai-partners-announce-agreement-for-pai-to-acquire-elemis/), a French private equity firm, with completion expected in early 2027. No price was disclosed. L'Occitane agreed to pay up to 900 million dollars for Elemis in January 2019. The brand's net sales passed 300 million dollars in the year to March 2026. Reinold Geiger, who runs L'Occitane, calls the sale a disciplined portfolio decision. He gives no other reason.

Our read is that both sides came to this short of money. Mergermarket reported on 28 October that the two had been arguing over valuation and that PAI was struggling to fund the purchase. It also said L'Occitane was constrained by debt from taking itself private in 2024. No rival bidder has been reported. The release gives Elemis's sales for the year to March 2026 only as over 300 million dollars, with no exact figure, and no profit figure for the brand exists anywhere. So the one number in circulation, Mergermarket's value above 800 million dollars, cannot be set against earnings or growth by anyone outside the deal. On 16 July we wrote that Estee Lauder ran a sale process for Too Faced, Smashbox and Dr. Jart+, could not get its price, and kept the brands rather than book the loss. L'Occitane is doing the opposite, and the reporting says debt is why.

Unilever [said on 3 November](https://www.investegate.co.uk/announcement/rns/unilever--ulvr/unilever-investor-event-2026/9856507) that it will stop reporting its beauty division on its own. Once its food business has combined with McCormick, expected by mid-2027 at the latest, Unilever will report three categories: Beauty & Personal Care, Home Care and Other. It also plans €1 billion of productivity savings by the end of 2029. Part of that covers costs the food deal leaves behind, which Global Cosmetics News puts at €400 million to €500 million. Six regional presidents will each answer for profit across every category, with the new leaders in place from January.

Our read: outsiders will lose the clearest view of how Unilever's beauty business is doing. On 29 October we reported that Beauty & Wellbeing grew 5.7% in the third quarter, with price adding 2.1 points. Under the new reporting, that figure will be combined with deodorant, soap and oral care. The combined number would have hidden a difference in that same quarter. Personal Care grew 6.3%, faster than Beauty & Wellbeing's 5.7%, while oral care fell. Reporting the two together has some logic. Dove sells hair care in Beauty & Wellbeing and body wash in Personal Care, so one category puts more of the brand in one place. Unilever has not said whether jobs will go with the savings, and says the changes are subject to consultation with works councils. The first results under the new categories will show whether it still gives a separate beauty number.