05/02/2026
A note on science, skincare and credibility
A loyal customer recently brought to our attention that another skincare business is disparaging Natural Elements imagery and name to promote their own approach to skincare. Interestingly, their approach is one we fundamentally disagree with and one we believe can actively damage the skin over time.
So we want to be very clear about who we are, what we stand for, and why our approach is different.
Natural Elements is not driven by trends, labels or social media soundbites. Our work is led by decades of scientific understanding of human biology, ageing and skin function. This work has been developed into two research papers in collaboration with the University of Birmingham. We are also actively involved with a world-leading scientific advisory board where ongoing research is shared, and we closely follow developments from leading institutions such as Harvard and Stanford in the fields of longevity and cellular science.
This level of scientific engagement goes well beyond typical cosmetic industry standards and reflects a far higher level of formulation expertise than that of most conventional cosmetic formulators and, in many cases, even medical formulations.
John, our founder, is not “just a formulator”. He is a biogerontologist, with many years spent studying how the body ages, adapts, repairs and responds to long-term exposure. That depth of knowledge fundamentally changes how you think about skin health, barrier integrity and ingredient choice. It moves the conversation beyond textbook assumptions and into real-world biology.
Skin is not an inert shield. It is a living, responsive organ, and modern science continues to show that cumulative exposure, compromised barriers, inflammation and particle size all matter. What the body encounters repeatedly over time is not irrelevant simply because it is inconvenient to measure or explain.
A key part of this work involves the physicochemical and rheological characterisation of botanicals. This is rarely examined by standard formulators, whose focus is typically on assembling finished products using long-established ingredients, because it is easier than understanding how active ingredients behave at a cellular level, including within fibroblast cells. It is rather like asking a chef to be a rocket scientist. They are entirely different disciplines, requiring very different expertise.
This is why we formulate the way we do and say what we say.
We are transparent about the term naturally derived. It has a recognised definition, and we have been awarded ISO 16128 certification confirming our products as natural. This is a standard rarely seen in skincare and is, in many respects, a higher benchmark than even organic certification. Naturally derived ingredients may be processed for safety, stability and efficacy while remaining rooted in natural raw materials. This is responsible formulation, not marketing spin.
As for being used as a point of comparison, we take it as a sign that our work is being noticed.
When you operate outside big corporate frameworks, refuse to overload formulations, and prioritise long-term skin health over short-term results, you tend to attract attention. We are used to being challenged by much larger companies. In our experience, it usually means you are doing something advanced enough to disrupt the status quo.
Natural Elements exists for people who want skincare rooted in biology, restraint and long-term skin health, not fear tactics, hierarchy or oversimplified science.
We will continue doing what we have always done:
quietly, scientifically, and with complete confidence in our work. As new research emerges, we will increasingly share and advise on alternative approaches to healthier, more youthful ageing, just as we have done since pioneering truly natural products in the late 1990s. John Hamilton.
