The science behind what we leave out.
Sorrel & Co is defined as much by what we exclude as what we include. This page documents the peer-reviewed clinical evidence behind every “free from” claim we make — and flags, honestly, the formulas that contain an exception.
Why this exists
Most skincare brands make ingredient claims. Few cite the evidence behind them.
We built Sorrel & Co because the gap between what skincare formulations contain and what most people actually understand about those ingredients is enormous. Walk into any beauty aisle and you’ll see hundreds of products labeled “clean,” “natural,” or “free from” — terms that mean almost nothing under US labeling law. The FDA does not regulate the term “clean.” Manufacturers can call almost anything natural.
So instead of marketing claims, we publish citations. When we exclude an ingredient, we do it for documented reasons — and when a formula still contains one, we flag it in the table below rather than round up to a claim that isn’t true. We use PubMed links so you can verify everything yourself.
The seven ingredient categories below cover the most consequential exclusions. We’ve graded each one by evidence strength — because not every “free from” claim is equally supported, and pretending otherwise would betray the trust of the customers we want most: the ones who read labels.

The science is either there or it isn’t. Here we show you which, and how strong the evidence is. — CONNOR
What our formulas are free from — and the exceptions
All 17 formulas are USA-made. Most are free from synthetic fragrance, parabens, silicones, and drying alcohol — but not every one, and we flag each exception in the table rather than round up. Most are vegan and cruelty-free; those exceptions are marked too.
| Product | Key Ingredient | Synthetic Fragrance-Free | Paraben-Free | Vegan | Cruelty-Free | Silicone-Free | Alcohol-Free |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Face Serum | Retinol & Liposomes | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Hydration Serum | 4-Weight Hyaluronic Acid | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Glow Serum | Vitamins B3, C & E | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Clarity Serum | 10% Niacinamide | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Defense Serum | Green Tea EGCG | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Repair Serum | Snail Mucin & Centella | ✓ | ✓ | ✗* | ✓ | ✗* | ✓ |
| Firming Cream | DMAE & CoQ10 | ✓ | ✗§ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Dew Cream | Niacinamide & Allantoin | ✓b | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Renewal Cream | Retinol & Ceramides | ✗† | ✓ | ✗† | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Eye Cream | Acetyl Tetrapeptide-5 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Face Oil | Jojoba, Squalane & Magnolia | ✓b | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Balance Gel | Green Tea & Bisabolol | ✓b | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗‡ |
| Daily Cleanser | Licorice & Mushroom | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗‡ |
| Clearing Cleanser | Tea Tree & Charcoal | ✓b | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Brightening Bar | Kojic Acid & Turmeric | ✓b | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Calming Mist | Rose Water & Aloe | ✓b | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Collagen Powder | Hydrolyzed Bovine Collagen | ✓ | ✓ | ✗** | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
* Repair Serum contains snail secretion (animal-derived) — not vegan — and cosmetic silicones (dimethicone). Cruelty-free per industry definition.
** Collagen Powder is bovine-derived — not vegan or vegetarian. Cruelty-free per industry definition.
† Renewal Cream contains added fragrance and milk lipids (dairy) — not synthetic-fragrance-free or vegan.
‡ Balance Gel and Daily Cleanser each contain a small amount of denatured or ethyl alcohol — not alcohol-free.
§ Firming Cream’s preservative system (Phenonip) contains parabens — not paraben-free.
b Free from synthetic fragrance, but contains a naturally derived botanical or essential oil, or a floral water (Balance Gel, Brightening Bar, Calming Mist, Clearing Cleanser, Dew Cream, Face Oil).
7 ingredient categories we scrutinize — and the research behind why
We keep these out of our formulas wherever the formula allows. A few products still contain a small amount of one — denatured alcohol, silicones, or a paraben-based preservative — and every one is flagged in the table above. Here is the research on why we minimize them.
Fragrance
The most common cause of cosmetic contact allergy. Decades of patch test data confirm 1–4% of the general population is sensitized.
Read the research →Strongest evidenceSulfates (SLS/SLES)
Direct disruption of the skin barrier’s lipid matrix. Among the most well-established concerns in dermatology.
Read the research →Strongest evidencePhthalates
Endocrine disruption with reproductive and developmental implications. Primary cosmetic exposure route is fragrance, which sixteen of our seventeen formulas leave out — the exception is flagged in the table above.
Read the research →Strong evidenceParabens
Estrogenic activity established in vitro. Direct causation for breast cancer not proven; the EU has restricted multiple paraben types.
Read the research →Strong evidenceDenatured Alcohol
Barrier disruption via lipid solubilization. Particularly problematic for compromised, atopic, or rosacea-prone skin.
Read the research →Mixed evidenceSilicones
Dermatological concern is moderate; environmental persistence is the stronger argument. We’re honest about which is which.
Read the research →Mixed evidenceMineral Oil
Pure occlusion without barrier benefit. Not a safety concern — a functional one.
Read the research →Not all “free from” claims are equally supported
The evidence for excluding different ingredients varies in strength. Being upfront about that hierarchy is itself a differentiator. We grade our exclusions in three tiers.
Strongest
Fragrance, sulfates, phthalates. Multiple well-designed studies, consistent findings, clear mechanisms, decades of clinical data.
Strong
Parabens, denatured alcohol. Real effects established; the most-cited concern is qualified (paraben causation not proven; alcohol effect is concentration-dependent). Regulatory action or clinical caution supports precaution.
Mixed
Silicones, mineral oil. The case is real but qualified — environmental more than dermatological for silicones, functional rather than safety for mineral oil. We tell you which.
A brand that tells you the evidence against silicones is mostly environmental rather than dermatological is more credible than one that treats every “free from” claim as equally backed by science. We choose precision over marketing language because the customer who reads labels respects it.
How we evaluate research
Every claim on this page is supported by peer-reviewed research published in dermatology, toxicology, or environmental health journals. We rely primarily on:
- Multicenter clinical studies — large patch test datasets like NACDG and EU registries
- Mechanistic research — studies showing how an ingredient affects skin biology
- Regulatory positions — EU restrictions and EWG ratings as supporting context, not primary evidence
- Peer-reviewed reviews for synthesis
We do not cite:
- Single-source blog posts or aggregated “natural beauty” databases
- Industry-funded studies without independent corroboration
- Animal-only studies as standalone evidence for human relevance
We update this page as new research emerges. Last reviewed: July 2026.
Latest from our research blog
Long-form writing on ingredients, formulation, and how to use what you put on your face.
Glycerin: The Unglamorous Humectant That Outworks Its Reputation
Hyaluronic acid gets the marketing budget. Glycerin gets the results. Here's what actually separates the two humectants, why glycerin sit...
"Dermatologist-Tested" and Six Other Phrases That Mean Less Than You Think
Seven phrases that appear on skincare packaging every day, and what each one actually requires — which in most cases is close to nothing....
Dark Circles vs Puffiness vs Fine Lines: Three Different Problems
Three complaints, three unrelated causes — and one eye cream cannot address them equally. Here's how to tell which one you actually have,...