I wish more products would do this. It's super interesting.
Mildly Interesting
This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.
This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?
Just post some stuff and don't spam.
I would love if all companys did this
Can we start doing this with everything?
When I was a kid, in my country all machinery and electronics were accompanied with full mechanical and electrical schematics.
good luck getting the electrical scheme of a current CPU
not because they're secret, but because they're pointless. you wouldn't understand anything from such a schematic. it's way too complicated, and has to be broken down with lots of extra annotations to be comprehensible.
A lot of times it's because those things required maintenance, and it was possible to do with basic tools.
Most things these days aren't built with maintenance in mind, mostly because they're obsolete before they need to be fixed.
There are certainly things that doesn't apply to, but for a lot of consumer products, it is.
Also if a CPU breaks in any way, you can't fix it. Best to throw it away and get a new one.
Good thing is they basically never break, anyways.
"Obsolete"
ingredient lables can be pretty long. I think we need a QR code with this and much more information. it should be able to back track where you product came from and such.
Either that or it creates an incentive to use fewer, simpler ingredients.
The problem is a lot of nasty things come from less scary sounding things. For example:
Ingredient: Ricin, Where it comes from: Castor beans, What it's used for: Poison.
There's historical truth to this. In toothpaste, no less.
Ingredient: Asbestos
Comes from: naturally occurring mineral
Used for: mild abrasive
I assume there's a better example to make your point because at least here you're explicitly stating ricin is used for poison, an objectively good thing to know.
My point being that knowledge of where something comes from doesn't tell you if it's a good thing or a bad thing.
I could have rephrased "what it's used for" to be "laxative". A true statement which doesn't expose the fact that ricin is a pretty powerful poison.
People are biased to think "chemical name bad, common name good" and that's the problem I'm exposing. You can pull out a lot of toxic stuff from things that sound harmless.
I love it when companies do that. I have a couple of cosmetics products with such an explanation. I have very sensitive skin and this makes it easier to decide if I can use it.
Hey it's me!
Get back in the toothpaste!
Well unfortunately once they're out of the tube...
You're one of my favourite terpenes
I am still waking up, and read the title as "Toothpasta". 😰
Love me some open source hygiene products! Blueland, the company that makes the cleaning sprays I use, does the same thing.

JFC can we make this list obligatory on all products?
It's so amazing to finally just read in plain English what an ingredient is supposed to be doing.
Maybe even add a few columns?
In Europe it is necessary that all food products contain such a list of all ingredients.
Example: Coke ZERO. Ingredients: Water, carbonic acid, colorant E150d, souring agent phosphate acid, sweetening agent (sodium cyclamate, acesulfam K, aspartam), natural flavor, flavor coffeine, acid regulator sodium citrate.

I translated that by hand so it probably contains mistakes.
Peanut butter:
- ingredient: Peanut
- Where it comes from: Peanut
- What it does: Peanut?
What it does: adhesive (sticks to the roof of your mouth)
I would like to see this but for laws as well. Just cut down all that self-important job security and say what it is in plain english
There is actually a law for that (in the US)(apologies for linking to a currently fascist source)
This has to be a response to those idiot tictokers wandering grocery stores and badmouthing anything with an ingredient they can't pronounce. Usually shilling some sort of scam supplement while they're at it.
I'm definitely bad mouthing the goddamn palm oil.
Note that products derived from palm oil should be avoided if you can. https://www.wwf.org.uk/updates/8-things-know-about-palm-oil
That article you linked seems to be saying that palm oil is actually really good?
It says that it is a major driver of deforestation because people are tearing down trees to grow more of it because it's a very useful and versatile oil.
It later says that switching away from palm oil isn't a solution because palm oil is actually such an efficient crop that if you used something else the amount of land needed to produce enough oil would drive far more deforestation.
The article is a call for more regulation on deforestation, not a call to not use palm oil. It in fact almost argues the opposite.
It's not just deforestation, especially in Orangutan habitats that are endangered. They are also rife with forced labor, ie slave labor. They lure desperate foreigners with promises of good jobs, baiting and switching them with a life of slavery doing hard, very hard labor, including kids. The families can sometimes bail them out by paying several thousand dollars, a lot of money to these impoverished bangladeshis and Indians and the like.
Many of the desparate migrants that can speak english well are now sold to chinese gangs to run romance scams from slave compounds, a 40 billion dollar a year industry just in S. Asia they figure now, pig butchering and the like.
For sure. But the problem isn't palm oil itself, which seems like something of a miracle plant when compared to other sources of vegetable oil. It's that the supply chain for it is rife with abuse. Similar to coffee, or honestly, most things that are harvested predominantly in poorer countries with less oversight.
But, like coffee, it seems there are organizations that certify certain palm oil suppliers as "cruelty free," so it's probably better to try and hunt those out in favor of foregoing palm oil entirely, which seems like a pretty incredible product otherwise.
I hate to rain on a parade, but it's marketing bullshit. Aqua comes from water, isn't it? Purified one at that? "Vegetable"? Calcium fluoride is a source? "Natural ore" as opposed to an artificial lab grown ore?
It kinda looks nice unless you actually read it, or know what words mean. And if you do it's obvious ploy to capture very ignorant people.
I think you're reading it too pessimistically. There are so many people out there saying, "If you can't pronounce it or know where it's from, then it's straight POISON!"
There are artificial ores. There are people who will want to know the water they used was clean (the purified water). This looks like a great way to educate people on what they're using and to learn not to be afraid of big, complicated words.
It kinda looks nice unless you actually read it, or know what words mean.
Teaching children is pointless because it might look nice, but if you already know the stuff then you would recognize that it's all fairly trivial, well-known stuff. No reason to point it out.
You just demonstrated that you actually don't know what words mean.
You can find those things out. Natural ore means it comes from natural deposits (its not a lab-formulated compound).
Some people prefer natural ingredients. Thats it.
Otherwise its very common with synthetic or refined chemical ingredients in toothpaste, like:
-
Sodium fluoride / stannous fluoride (lab-produced, though based on natural elements)
-
Artificial abrasives (engineered silica)
-
Detergents like sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS)
-
Synthetic preservatives, flavors, or colorants
Same reason people want to grow their own food. They know whats in it and what they put in their body.
What, you don’t feel more informed to know that your glycerin comes from a miscellaneous vegetable?
Natural ore made me laugh. I mean, asbestos and beryllium are naturally occurring ores too…
I bet asbestos would make for a killer toothpaste, actually.
Sure, this is still a marketing strategy that could be exploited by bad corps, but it is a step in the right direction. This is where rules to define those terms accurately would be a good use of regulations.
Why did they feel the need to church up “water”
What brand of toothpaste is this?
It looks like kingfisher tube. They are well known for their toothpaste without flouride but also has with flouride.
Ingredients are probably listed like that because the target group cares about what they use.