Get $25 Off On Subscription Orders!

Nulastin Review: Are Revitalized Lashes Possible?

Nulastin Review: Are Revitalized Lashes Possible?


| |
Read our Editorial Guidelines to learn more about what makes our site the premier resource for online health information.
| |
Read our Editorial Guidelines to learn more about what makes our site the premier resource for online health information.


Read our Editorial Guidelines to learn more about what makes our site the premier resource for online health information.

Nulastin is a cosmetics company that sells products for improving the quality of eyebrows, lashes, hair and skin. Their most popular product is a serum applied to the eyebrows used to increase their thickness.

In this article we’ll review the ingredients in popular Nulastin products based on published medical research to determine if they’re likely to be effective. We’ll also highlight issues we have with the studies the company funded to test their products.

Questionable Clinical Studies

Nulastin clinical claims

 

Nulastin claims their products are “clinically proven” to work and features a Science page on their website with several studies. The studies test the effectiveness of their products. 

We do not consider research paid for by brands and conducted by for-profit research firms to be clinical research that’s valuable to consumers, because it’s so biased.

None of the studies funded by Nulastin are published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, like the ones we cite in our articles when we evaluate health claims made by brands. To publish research in a scientific journal means your research has met a third-party standard of quality and methodology. Any company can publish PDFs written by a paid doctor or researcher to their website.

The core issue with privately funded research that brands publish themselves is that there is so much bias in the process that it makes the results totally useless in our opinion.

If a brand gets poor results on a first trial, they can just refuse to publish those results on their site and try again until they achieve positive results. The consumer visiting their site would be unaware and only see the positive trial.

Additionally, there is bias affecting the research process, because a for-profit research firm benefits by publishing favorable results about a product, and that can affect the outcome of trials.

For these reasons, we only consider company-funded research to be clinical research and useful information if it reaches a medical journal, which none of Nulastin’s research has.

We advise brands to stop paying private research firms to test their products, because consumers are becoming more educated and this practice is pointless and a waste of money. 

As a consumer, ask yourself when the last time you saw a company publish “clinical research” on their website that they funded which suggested their products were not effective. We’ve never seen it, and we’ve reviewed hundreds of products. That alone proves the bias in the process of company-funded research.

In summary, we do not consider any of Nulastin’s research valid, and we find it to be ethically questionable when cosmetics companies publish PDF documents to their website and claim it’s valuable clinical research.

Nulastin Brow Serum Review

Nulastin Brow Serum ingredients

Nulastin’s most popular product is their brow serum, which claims to thicken and lengthen eyebrows. The serum costs $79 for 0.1 fluid ounces (oz), which equates to around $12,000 per pound. To provide context into how ridiculous that price is, Nulastin is charging nearly half of the price of gold per pound.

The first active ingredient in Nulastin Brow Serum is Myristoyl Pentapeptide-17. This term has zero results in PubMed, the largest medical database in the U.S. Never mind results about brow lengthening, there just aren’t any results on this compound at all. Thus we will conclude it’s ineffective.

The second active ingredient is Tropoelastin, which is a monomer of elastin that’s endogenously produced (produced by the body). While this compound has been studied in published medical trials, most of the research involves investigating its molecular structure. We can’t identify a single medical trial proving that this compound is effective for regrowing hair when applied topically, so we will consider it ineffective.

Keratin is the third ingredient in Nulastin. It’s the main structural protein in hair. There is some research suggesting that topically-applied keratin can improve hair quality, however the linked study used keratin-based particles formed by combining keratin and silk fibroin.

Another medical trial found that a recombinant keratin protein (chemically manipulated protein with modified gene sequences) was effective in treating damaged hair.

This ingredient may be effective for eyebrow thickening, but we find it unlikely to be effective for eyebrow lengthening because we can’t identify any studies proving that topically-applied keratin increases hair length. It’s also important to keep in mind that both of the keratin medical studies used alternate forms of keratin to the one used in Nulastin.

Nulastin Brow Serum also contains an active ingredient called Hepatocyte Growth Factor. While this compound has been studied for its effects on infectious diseases and cancer. This compound is a cytokine, which is a protein involved in immune system regulation, and seems to be a very strange choice for an eyebrow cream.

We can’t find a single medical study testing this ingredient for its effect on hair quality or growth, and will consider it ineffective.

Overall we find this to be a very poorly formulated product, especially considering Nulastin is charging around half the price of gold per ounce for it, which is absurd. We would not recommend Nulastin Brow Shape Altering Serum, as only identified one ingredient which is potentially effective.

Nulastin Lash Serum Review

Nulastin Lash Follicle Fortifying Serum contains the exact same ingredients, in the exact same order, at the exact same price of their brow serum.

We find it comically unscientific that Nulastin is using the exact same formulation to make different health claims. The same ingredients are “follicle fortifying” for the lashes, and “shape altering” for the eyebrows. We don’t understand how a peptide and a cytokine when applied topically would change the shape of the eyebrows.

Since we already examined the active ingredients based on medical research in the previous section, we will consider this product to be ineffective and would not recommend it. 

Nulastin claims their brow formulation is “concentrated” and does not list this descriptor on their lash formulation, but they don’t explain which ingredients are concentrated and to what concentration/dosage.

Better Alternative

We previously reviewed a hair supplement called Viviscal which has been shown in medical research to improve hair thickness and quality.

An extensive medical review published in the International Journal of Dermatology examined the clinical backing of popular hair growth oral supplements, and the only one the researchers found to be effective was an ingredient called AminoMar, which is the active ingredient in Viviscal.

We don’t believe that this supplement is likely to have an extremely strong impact on hair growth, but it should have some moderate impact on average, and has actually been tested in clinical trials unlike Nulastin. It’s also significantly cheaper.

Stay up-to-date on our research reviews

Conclusion

We find Nulastin products to be terribly formulated and terribly priced, and would strongly recommend avoiding this brand. 

There doesn’t appear to be any published clinical research demonstrating the efficacy of most of the active ingredients in Nulastin products for increasing hair growth and thickness when applied topically.

We would recommend Viviscal over Nulastin for research-backed natural hair growth, because the active ingredient in Viviscal supplements has been proven effective.

We recommend that consumers be wary of cosmetics brands claiming to be clinically proven to work because they paid a for-profit research firm to test their products, and we find the practice to be unethical because the average consumer can’t distinguish between company-funded, private research and legitimate medical research published in peer-reviewed journals.





Liquid error: Could not find asset snippets/search-bar.liquid