From billboards to social media, consumers are bombarded with adverts promising youthful, flawless skin. These marketing campaigns often feature celebrities and influencers, creating the illusion that the right product can unlock the secret to eternal beauty.
From billboards to social media, consumers are bombarded with adverts promising youthful, flawless skin. These marketing campaigns often feature celebrities and influencers, creating the illusion that the right product can unlock the secret to eternal beauty.
A stroll down the cosmetic aisles of South African retail stores shows shelves overflowing with serums, creams and lotions, each claiming to be the ultimate skincare solution. But behind the glossy packaging and persuasive endorsements lies an industry that is largely unregulated, leaving consumers vulnerable to misleading claims and potential health risks.
In an age where skincare serums promise radiance and hair oils tout miracle growth, the average South African consumer might assume that the beauty products lining our shelves are both safe and scientifically vetted. But beneath the glossy labels and celebrity endorsements lies a disconcerting truth — South Africa’s cosmetics industry operates in a regulatory grey zone.
Unlike medicines or medical devices, cosmetics are subject to minimal oversight. This regulatory gap leaves the public vulnerable to unsafe ingredients, misleading claims and potentially serious long-term health risks.
Who’s (not) watching the shelves?
The South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (Sahpra) — formed in 2018 to replace the Medicines Control Council — plays a critical role in regulating medicines and health products. However, its authority largely excludes cosmetics, unless those products make therapeutic claims such as treating acne or healing skin conditions.
This distinction creates a dangerous loophole. If a product merely claims to “beautify,” “cleanse” or “enhance appearance”, it evades the kind of scrutiny applied to medicines — even if it contains active ingredients like retinoids, hydroquinone or alpha hydroxy acids.
These substances, while effective, can be harmful when misused or poorly formulated. Yet under current law, they often avoid the testing and licensing required for pharmaceuticals. Sahpra only intervenes if a product crosses into the murky territory of being considered a “medicine”, as per the Medicines and Related Substances Act (Act 101 of 1965).
But even then, enforcement tends to be inconsistent and reactive, rather than preventative.
Looking abroad: Lessons from the FDA
The US’s Food and Drug Administration offers a more proactive model. While far from perfect, it enforces basic safety measures, such as accurate labelling, prohibition of harmful substances and product safety under labelled conditions of use. It also monitors adverse reactions and maintains a clear recall process.
Recent reforms under the Modernisation of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 have gone even further — requiring manufacturers to register facilities, disclose ingredients (including allergens) and adhere to stricter safety standards.
South Africa, by contrast, is still bumping between two regulatory bodies: Sahpra and the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association of South Africa (CTFA). While the CTFA provides guidance based on international norms, it is a voluntary industry body with no enforcement power. If CTFA identifies an ingredient as too potent or unsafe, it merely advises manufacturers to adjust their formulations. But because Sahpra doesn’t regulate cosmetics unless they make medical claims, manufacturers are often left to police themselves.
This self-regulation model is outdated — and dangerous.
The cost of self-regulation
Companies that comply with high safety and manufacturing standards find themselves unfairly competing with backyard formulators who may lack proper training and equipment.
As an industry player, it is frustrating. Qualified practitioners spend on Sahpra licenses, the department of health, the Pharmacy Council compliance — but find themselves competing with people mixing products in their garages. They buy raw ingredients off retail shelves, while law-abiding practitioners source pharmaceutical-grade ingredients with proper certificates of analysis and technical data sheets.
But it’s not just the ingredients that matter — it’s the method. The process of formulation — the temperatures, mixing phases, emulsification — determines the safety and effectiveness of the final product. For trained professionals, method is intellectual property. For hobbyists, it’s guesswork.
Vulnerable consumers, serious risks
The consequences of poor oversight are especially visible in the proliferation of skin-lightening products, many of which still contain banned substances like mercury and high concentrations of hydroquinone. Despite their illegality, such products remain widely available — especially in informal markets.
A 2015 study published by the University of Cape Town, found that many skin-lightening products sold in Gauteng townships exceeded permissible levels of harmful chemicals, posing risks such as kidney damage, mercury poisoning and skin cancer.
Without a national database to track adverse reactions, consumers have little recourse. And without enforcement, manufacturers have little incentive to improve.
What needs to change?
Strengthen Sahpra’s mandate. Sahpra must be empowered — both legally and operationally — to regulate cosmetics, especially products with active ingredients or those targeted at vulnerable demographics such as children or people with sensitive skin. The binary classification of “cosmetic” versus “medicine” is outdated. We must recognise the growing category of cosmeceuticals, which straddle both definitions.
Introduce mandatory ingredient disclosure and pre-market safety checks. All cosmetics should be registered in a central database, with full disclosure of ingredients and safety data. High-risk substances should be restricted or banned outright, in line with the EU Cosmetics Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009.
Establish a national adverse event reporting system. Dermatologists, pharmacists and consumers need a streamlined platform to report harmful reactions. These reports can then inform recalls, public alerts and safer industry practices.
Prioritise public education. Consumers often assume “natural” means “safe” and might not know that salon or online products are not always regulated. The government, media and healthcare professionals should collaborate to raise awareness about how to read cosmetic labels and recognise harmful ingredients.
The influence of unqualified voices
In today’s digital age, science often plays second fiddle to social media. Qualified professionals with years of experience in formulation science are sidelined in favour of popular influencers with no background in chemistry or dermatology.
It’s a troubling trend. Many doctors launching cosmetic brands might never have studied formulation at all — yet their status lends credibility. Qualifications matter. Just as one wouldn’t trust an influencer to perform surgery, consumers shouldn’t rely on popularity as a substitute for proper formulation expertise.
Toward a safer beauty future
South Africa prides itself on its progressive Constitution and commitment to human rights. That commitment should extend to the safety of everyday products used by millions — especially women, who make up the vast majority of cosmetic consumers.
With proper regulation, the beauty industry can be a force for empowerment, confidence and economic growth. But without it, we risk a ticking time bomb of preventable health issues.
The time has come for Sahpra — in partnership with lawmakers, civil society and qualified experts — to take urgent action. Consumers deserve more than pretty packaging and lofty promises. They deserve safety, transparency and trust.
A call for action: Regulations, retailers and consumer awareness
Dodgy labelling hides nasty ingredients and a lack of proper checks on products means problems often go unnoticed, putting the public at risk. We need strict rules forcing companies to fully disclose ingredients and ban known toxins, alongside properly funded regulators who can investigate complaints and prosecute wrongdoers.
But that’s not all — we need to educate the public so they can make informed choices. It’s time for Sahpra and other relevant authorities, including the department of health, to step up and close regulatory gaps in the cosmetics sector.
We should also challenge unrealistic beauty standards that fuel demand for these products, promoting a more inclusive and healthy view of beauty. As an industry player, action is needed to protect the public. It’s about transparency, responsibility and empowering consumers to break free from this dangerous cycle for the health of our communities.
Dr Judey Pretorius is a biomedical scientist with expertise in wound healing, regenerative medicine and cell therapy. She has a master’s in genetics and molecular biology and a PhD in pharmaceutical chemistry and is the founder of Biomedical Emporium.