Free From Marketing vs. Science: Uncovering Nail Product Safety

As someone deeply embedded in the professional nail and products industry, I’ve seen firsthand how “free-from” claims influence buying decisions, often without a clear understanding of what they actually mean. In this blog, I want to break down the reality of these claims, the science behind allergens, and why critical thinking is beneficial and transparent when evaluating these marketing trends.

Understanding ‘Free-From’ Claims in the Nail Industry

The idea behind “free from” branding is simple: by excluding certain ingredients that have been deemed harmful or allergenic, companies suggest their products are safer or healthier. Common examples include:

• X-Free nail polishes, which claim to exclude formaldehyde, dibutyl phthalate, toluene, and other supposedly harmful chemicals.
• HEMA-Free gels marketed as a safer alternative for those prone to allergies.
• Hypoallergenic products

But the real question is: Were these ingredients ever a real concern for most users, or is this just clever marketing?

And let’s not overlook the pressure applied in reverse upon companies to join “free from” formulating and marketing claims to ‘give the people what they want’. It’s a double-edged sword and no one seems to be winning.

The Science of Allergens: Everything is a Potential Allergen

One of the biggest misconceptions in “free from” marketing is the assumption that the absence of certain ingredients makes a product safer. The truth is that every substance has the potential to cause an allergic reaction.

For example:

• Lavender oil – A natural ingredient often used in “natural” beauty, but also a known skin allergen.
• Nuts – Completely natural but can be deadly to those with severe allergies.
• Water – Even water can cause irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) with overexposure.

Yet, we don’t see brands marketing their gels as “free from lavender or nuts,” even though they are just as capable of causing allergic reactions as the ingredients being demonized. This selective marketing plays on fear rather than fact.

Acrylates Are Everywhere: Household Products and Daily Exposure

Acrylates, particularly those being villainized in nail products, are not unique to the nail industry. Many of these chemicals are found in everyday household and industrial products, yet no one is rushing to remove them from those applications.

For example:

• Ethyleneglycol Dimethacrylate (EGDMA) – Used in plastic bottles for soft drinks, dental materials, printing inks, automobile antifreeze, and engine-cooling liquids.
• Methyl Methacrylate (MMA) – Used in medical prosthetics, dental work, and industrial applications, yet banned in liquid monomer form in some countries for nails due to misuse, not because of toxicity when used correctly.
• Hydroxypropyl Methacrylate (HPMA) – Found in medical-grade adhesives, contact lenses, and of course, nail coatings.
• Tetrahydrofurfuryl Methacrylate (THFMA) – Used in dental materials, artificial nails, and 3D printing, yet has been flagged for its potential allergenic effects.
• Propylene Glycol Monomethacrylate (PGMA) – Found in adhesives, cosmetics, and medical devices, but rarely discussed despite being a known allergen.
• Trimethylolpropane Triacrylate (TMPTA) – A multifunctional acrylate monomer used in UV-curable coatings, adhesives, and inks, but like other acrylates, has the potential to cause skin sensitization and allergic reactions in some individuals.
• Benzyl Methacrylate – Used in artificial nail products, dental materials, and medical devices. It contributes to the durability of polymer formulations but, like other methacrylates, has the potential to cause allergic reactions in sensitive individuals.

This raises an important question: If these chemicals are safely used in other industries without mass hysteria, why is the nail industry so reactive to every ingredient trend?

Irritants vs. Allergens: Knowing the Difference for Nail Tech Safety

Another key point often ignored in these discussions is the difference between allergens and irritants. Not all concerning-sounding ingredients are allergens; some are simply irritants when used improperly or in high concentrations.

For instance:

• Ethyl Acetate – A common solvent in nail polish and removers, classified as an irritant rather than an allergen.
• Acetone – A well-known, widely used solvent in nail products that can cause skin and respiratory irritation with overexposure but is not classified as an allergen.
• Methacrylic Acid (MAA) – A key organic component used to maximize adhesion between the nail and artificial coating. It is highly reactive and can cause skin and respiratory irritation upon direct exposure. Not considered a strong allergen but certainly a strong irritant.

So where are we drawing the line? Are we choosing to live in fear, removing every potential allergen regardless of context? Or are we simply waiting for the next ingredient panic to be dictated to us?

The HEMA Controversy: Ingredient Swapping or Real Progress?

One of the biggest ingredient shifts we’ve seen in recent years is the demonization of HEMA (Hydroxyethyl Methacrylate). Initially flagged due to allergic reactions in some users, the backlash against HEMA led to the rise of HEMA-free alternatives using IBOA (Isobornyl Acrylate) and HPMA (Hydroxypropyl Methacrylate). But now, we’re seeing the same cycle—concerns beginning to emerge over these replacement ingredients….

This raises a critical point: Are we actually making products safer, or just playing an endless game of ingredient swapping?

The truth is any acrylate or methacrylate-based system carries a potential risk of allergy. The real solution isn’t just removing ingredients but focusing on proper education, safe application, and correct handling.

I have worked with, handled, and discussed formulations for over 20 years—before the panic, before the quick-fix courses, and before the constant, in-your-face marketing. I’m all for growth, knowledge, and awareness, but I often question: how did we get here? And will we ever find a way out?

Critical Thinking: What Are Nail Products Really Free From?

Whenever I’m asked, “What’s the best free-from brand?” my go-to response is: “I can tell you what it’s NOT free from.”

I then list random natural allergens—lavender, pollen, nuts—to drive home the point that free from does not mean safer. More often than not, this sparks a “lightbulb moment,” where professionals realize how flawed this approach is.

The only time I’ve ever received pushback was from someone affiliated with a brand that heavily markets itself as 10-free. They argued that I couldn’t dismiss something I didn’t understand. I clarified that I don’t misunderstand—I simply refuse to support misleading marketing designed to manipulate professionals and consumers for profit. Silence followed.

The REAL Conversation: Safe Nail Product Use & Application

Instead of fixating on what’s NOT in our products, we need to shift the conversation to how to use them safely and effectively. That means:

• Proper ventilation and extraction in salons.
• Wearing gloves.
• Keeping workspaces, equipment, and product bottles clean and free from residue.
• Correct application to minimize skin contact.
• Educating professionals (and clients) on real safety concerns rather than fear-based marketing.

The goal should always be science-backed education, not chasing the next “bad” ingredient.

References

1. DermNet NZ (n.d.) Allergy to acrylate. Available at: https://dermnetnz.org/topics/allergy-to-acrylate (Accessed: 04/03/25).
2. Steunebrink, I.M., de Groot, A. and Rustemeyer, T. (2024) ‘Contact allergy to acrylate-containing nail cosmetics: A retrospective 8-year study’, Contact Dermatitis, 90(3), pp. 262–265. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38093676/ (Accessed: 03/03/25)
3. National Library of Medicine (n.d.) Tetrahydrofurfuryl Methacrylate – GHS Classification. Available at: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Tetrahydrofurfuryl-Methacrylate#section=GHS-Classification (Accessed: 04/03/25).
4. British Association of Dermatologists (2018) Dermatologists issue warning about UK artificial nail allergy epidemic. Available at: https://www.bad.org.uk/dermatologists-issue-warning-about-uk-artificial-nail-allergy-epidemic/ (Accessed: 28/02/25).
5. DermNet NZ (n.d.) Contact allergy to propylene glycol. Available at: https://dermnetnz.org/topics/contact-allergy-to-propylene-glycol (Accessed: 28/02/25).
6. Wen, L., Zhang, X., Wang, M., Wang, W., Gao, Y. and Zhang, J. (2017) ‘Effect of propylene glycol monomethacrylate on allergic reactions in humans: A systematic review’, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 140(2), pp. 500–507. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28656588/ (Accessed: 07/03/25)
7. New Jersey Department of Health (n.d.) Right to Know Hazardous Substance Fact Sheet: Acetone. Available at: https://nj.gov/health/eoh/rtkweb/documents/fs/0841.pdf (Accessed: 05/03/25).
8. Liu, X. et al. (2023) ‘Occupational exposure to acrylates and associated health risks’, Environmental Health Perspectives. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9823182/ (Accessed: 05/03/25).
9. UK Government (2022) Acetone: General Information. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/acetone-properties-and-incident-management/acetone-general-information (Accessed: 04/02/25).
10. Fowler, J. F. Jr. (2006) ‘Acrylate allergy in nail cosmetics’, Dermatitis, 17(2), pp. 57-60. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16596768/ (Accessed: 28/02/25).
11. Department of Toxic Substances Control (2024) Methyl Methacrylate in Nail Products. Available at: https://dtsc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2024/10/Profile_Methyl-Methacrylate-in-Nail-Products_FINAL.pdf (Accessed: 05/03/25).
12. National Library of Medicine (2021) Acrylate allergy and occupational exposure. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8501444/ (Accessed: 09/03/25).
13. European Chemicals Agency (n.d.) Benzyl Methacrylate – Substance Information. Available at: https://echa.europa.eu/substance-information/-/substanceinfo/100.017.887#:~:text=Warning!,and%20may%20cause%20respiratory%20irritation.&text=This%20substance%20is%20registered%20under,industrial%20sites%20and%20in%20manufacturing (Accessed: 09/03/25).