The beauty industry runs on newness, and you’ve probably noticed a surge of new buzzwords taking over your social feeds and store shelves. Every year, “miracle” ingredients pop up, with brands positioning them as the Next Big Thing and promising dramatic transformations and overnight results. Navigating this space can get confusing fast, and let’s be real: not every hyped ingredient actually delivers on its claims.

One of those much-talked-about-ingredients? Polydeoxyribonucleotide, or PDRN for short. Beyond the viral social trends and flashy marketing, what is this buzzy ingredient really about? What are the actual benefits, and could it truly be the future of skincare? To help answer these questions about PDRN, and other ingredients, I reached out to Becca Perry, Dieux’s in-house cosmetic chemist and senior innovation manager.

What Is PDRN?

PDRN are small bioactive fragments of DNA, infamously sourced from salmon sperm. Why salmon sperm? Well, it shares a similar molecular weight and structure to human DNA, making it super biocompatible.

How Does It Work?

Before it was a trendy beauty ingredient, PDRN was injected near wounds, like diabetic ulcers, to speed up the healing process; it’s a medical approach that’s backed by scientific studies since the early 2000s.

When PDRN is injected, it works by binding and turning on the A2A adenosine pathway in the skin to calm inflammation, repair damaged cells, trigger cell growth, and stimulate collagen production. Word spread about PDRN’s regenerative and repairing benefits, and soon enough it became popular at med spas in Korea. Salmon sperm facials, PDRN serums applied after microneedling and laser treatments to support healing, and injectable PDRN skin boosters (which don’t go as deep into the skin as wound-healing injections) all helped spur the ingredient’s popularity around the world.

The skin longevity trend, which is focused on supporting the skin on a cellular level, also helped boost interest in PDRN.

Soon enough, thanks to K-Beauty’s popularity in the United States, we began to see an influx of topical products formulated with PDRN. Because of its standing as a regenerative injectable, skincare brands are betting that applying it topically can give you similar benefits—triggering tissue repair, soothing irritation, and helping your skin heal and function better to deliver smoother texture, deeper hydration, and a nice glow.

Is It Worth the Hype?

Basically, there’s very little to back up the claims that some skincare brands are making about PDRN. “There are very few studies on [the skincare benefits of] PDRN from an injectable standpoint and even fewer focus on topical application,” says Becca. “As a cosmetic chemist, one of the hardest parts of formulation is ensuring efficacious delivery of active ingredients,” she goes on to add. PDRN’s molecular weight is very large, which makes it difficult to penetrate the dermis, the layer of skin required to activate the required receptors. Sitting on the surface of your skin isn’t enough to trigger any benefits. Also, PDRN is notoriously very fragile and breaks down when it’s exposed to air, making it difficult to stabilize in packaging.

As interest in PDRN has grown in the US and other Western markets, more vegan PDRN options have also become available, but there’s even less data on those ingredients than there is on the original salmon sperm-derived PDRN, says Becca.

So, what’s the final verdict? “As a chemist, I personally feel that the marketing is moving faster than the science,” says Becca. “At InCosmetics Korea last summer, I did see some interesting developments in optimized molecule structure to improve delivery but I still think significantly more research needs to be done.”

P.S.: You’ll see PDRN in formulations alongside ceramides, niacinamide, and retinoids, just to name a few. Those ingredients have decades of clinical data supporting their skincare benefits, so brands get the best of both worlds—a buzzy new ingredient to tell a story around in marketing materials and ingredients proven to work and deliver visible results.

Exosomes

What They Are

Exosomes are tiny structures released by cells that act as “messengers.” Filled with molecules like proteins, lipids, and genetic material, they travel between cells to deliver instructions for repair and regeneration. They can be sourced from humans—think: stem cells, donor tissue, or cell cultures—and plants.

In the aesthetic and injectable space, because of their repairing and regenerating properties, exosomes are often combined with microneedling and laser treatments to enhance the healing process. Most topical products formulated with exosomes claim they address visible signs of aging, like fine lines, wrinkles, and skin elasticity, but there’s not a ton of science to back up these claims.

Worth the Hype?

Not yet. “The marketing is moving much faster than the science on this one. Most of the existing data out there focuses on human exosomes, but the vast majority of exosomes currently used and marketed in skincare products are plant-derived, which isn’t a 1:1 equivalent. In fact, I’ve seen many ingredient suppliers rebrand existing botanical extracts as exosomes to participate in the trend.” — Becca

Volufiline

What It Is

The ingredient comes from the root extract of the Asian plant Anemarrhena asphodeloides, which is then combined with hydrogenated polyisobutene (an oil). It works beneath the surface by encouraging local fat cells to expand, helping naturally plump up hollow under-eyes, thinning cheeks, and smile lines for a smoother, fuller appearance.

Worth the Hype?

Not yet. “The only clinical data that exists on this particular ingredient right now is on the bust, but I’ve been informed that they’re currently doing clinicals on the face which I’m curious to see!” — Becca

Ectoin

What It Is

Ectoin is a powerful, natural extremolyte molecule that protects skin cells from environmental stress, UV damage, and dehydration by creating a protective hydration shield.

Worth the Hype?

Not really. “I think there is some really compelling data behind ectoin, but it is pretty expensive compared to other options on the market. In my opinion, it has become a bit overhyped.” — Becca

—Ama Kwarteng

Welcome to Office Hours, where I—Charlotte Palermino—brain-dump my month: what I’ve read, what I’ve learned, and the conversations shaping our decisions at Dieux. I find mystique boring. My joy is in TMI. Alright, let’s dive in.

Thankfully, it’s been a shitty year for cancer.

In the past ten days, Merck and Moderna announced that a personalized mRNA cancer vaccine cleared a Phase 3 trial. On August 26th, the FDA approved a once-daily pill for advanced pancreatic cancer that nearly doubled median survival compared to chemo in its trial. Regulators cleared it more than six months early.

Both announcements are monumental. But I want to talk about the skin cancer vaccine. As someone who makes an inordinate amount of sunscreen content, it’s hard to see adoption stay relatively low in America. From my perspective, most people use sunscreen for vanity. Wrinkles are more motivating than cancer. Maybe it’s because everyone knows they’re going to age and wants to prevent it; the getting sick bit seems less plausible, despite the fact that melanoma cases are rising in America.

Some skin cancer stats. Skin cancer is the most common cancer in America, and treating it costs us about $8.9 billion a year. Melanoma is the rarest form (roughly 1% of skin cancer cases), but it causes the vast majority of skin cancer deaths. In 2026, melanoma is projected to be the fourth most commonly diagnosed cancer in men and the fifth in women. Not the fourth most common skin cancer, the fourth most common cancer. As I said, skin cancer is really, really bad!

Why do I care? UV exposure is a risk factor and easily avoided. It also runs in my family. I’m vain, but I also don’t want to die from something preventable. So, when I saw the news about a melanoma vaccine, I was elated, for myself and anyone else who’s predisposed to this disease.

The vaccine is called intismeran autogene and is being developed by Merck and Moderna. On August 19, they announced that their Phase 3 trial, which included 1,137 patients with melanoma, hit its primary endpoint. AKA, an important measurement in determining whether a treatment works.

This vaccine is special in that it uses your own immune system to identify and attack disease. I hate a war analogy, but when you read up on how the immune system works, it really does feel like your body deploys mercenaries. The problem with cancer is that the “enemies” are made of you, so your immune system tends to let them through. Immunotherapy helps stop cancer cells from proliferating undercover.

Each dose is custom-manufactured for one patient, using that patient’s own tumor. Researchers sequence it and encode it into mRNA. Yes, this is the same technology behind the COVID-19 vaccines. Your immune system gets taught to recognize the exact genetic “fingerprint” of your cancer, so if those cells come back, it recognizes them and, for lack of a better term, fucks them up.

The vaccine is given alongside Keytruda, an immunotherapy drug already approved for melanoma. In the trial, the combination beat Keytruda alone at keeping the cancer from coming back. It also showed far more promise than more general cancer vaccines.

Some doctors are calling this proof that personalized cancer vaccines work. The trial’s lead investigator called it a landmark moment for melanoma treatment. For anyone who has worked with scientists: nothing short of a miracle gets them excited. That’s strong language from a cautious profession, and it makes me hopeful.

Before we overreact, some caveats:

You need to have cancer to get the vaccine.

That’s a bummer. This isn’t the HPV vaccine, which targets a virus that can cause cancer. This takes an existing tumor and turns it into a treatment that keeps the cancer from returning.

So far, the results show a delay in recurrence, not proven extra years of life.

The vaccine slowed disease recurrence and slowed its spread to distant organs in patients who’d had melanoma removed. Overall survival is still being measured (the study is still happening), but, as we all learned, the primary endpoint was reached, which is very promising!

Cancer isn’t one disease.

Something working on melanoma doesn’t mean it works for everything. But there is real excitement that it extends to other tumors.​

Some more good news.

It points to a better way of handling remission, or the aftermath of treatment when a tiny microscopic cluster gets left behind. Long-term, this class of medicine could reduce how often people need to go through radiation and chemo.

They’re clearly onto something.

Moderna and Merck have nine trials running across melanoma, lung, bladder, and kidney cancers. You don’t fund that unless the data is telling you something. People love to hate on pharma, but if there’s one thing we do know, they’ll invest in drugs they think they can monetize.

Two things stand between this science and the people who need it. One is money. The other is the guy responsible for poop lettuce and measles coming back.

The first big issue is… how much will this cost? No one has priced the treatment yet, since it isn’t approved. It can take months to develop a custom vaccine, and current estimates put production alone at over $100,000 per patient (just production!). In America, everything is getting expensive. People can barely afford gas; a drug only saves lives if people can afford to take it.

The second issue is leadership. Our HHS secretary, a.k.a. the Walter White of wellness, canceled hundreds of millions of dollars in mRNA respiratory vaccine development last August. We shouldn’t be surprised that doctors worry mRNA research may be in jeopardy in America.

A reminder: this is the man who cut jobs that helped with food safety. The irony of RFK Jr.’s “expertise” making Haribo gummy bears more “clean” than lettuce never ceases to amaze me. I’m rightfully terrified for our future under his tenure.

Going to leave this post by Dr. on why this is a big deal here:

Even if America doesn’t develop the first cancer vaccine, as we learned with electric vehicles, other countries will fill the gap. Pharmaceutical companies worldwide are rushing toward personalized mRNA cancer vaccine programs, with well over a hundred cancer vaccine trials underway. Everyone wants to kill cancer; time will tell if America gets there first.

It’s been a rough year. The silver lining is that cancer will hopefully have a worse one.

Reminder: if you’re reading this outside, maybe reapply your sunscreen.

—Charlotte Palermino

In the TikTok video, a blonde woman with loose, long waves is sitting outdoors and wearing a white robe. She opens the video saying, “Non-toxic SPFs you should try if you want kids.” The caption reads, “Most conventional sunscreens are gross. They are often composed of dozens of toxic chemicals such as oxybenzone [and] octinoxate…These highly absorbable chemicals can saturate under the skin and enter the bloodstream, causing endocrine disruption…” She then goes on to recommend three “non-toxic” mineral sunscreens.

This video isn’t an anomaly—there are so many videos all over social media, saying that chemical sunscreen is “toxic.” Don’t be embarrassed if you’ve come across a video and it made you think twice about your sunscreen. Fear is a highly effective marketing tool, and online influencers are great at making their claims sound like facts to sell you products. But when you look at the actual science, things aren’t nearly as scary as social media makes it seem.

What’s the Difference Between Mineral and Chemical Sunscreens?

Let’s break down the two sunscreen categories: chemical and mineral. Both work to prevent UV rays from penetrating deeper into the skin and causing DNA mutations, sunburn, long-term damage, hyperpigmentation, and more.

Chemical sunscreens are formulated with organic, carbon-based UV filters like oxybenzone, octinoxate, homosalate, octosalate, octocrylene, and avobenzone. They protect the skin by absorbing UV radiation and converting that energy into heat. Chemical formulas, on the other hand, are usually lightweight, go on clear, and are easier to apply.

Also, FYI, just because it’s called “chemical” sunscreen doesn’t mean it’s inherently bad. Chemicals get a bad rap—something I’ve written about before—but keep in mind that everything in our world is made of chemicals: water, oxygen, even you. And all sunscreen ingredients are chemicals, including the ones in mineral formulas.

Mineral sunscreens are formulated with physical or inorganic UV filters like zinc oxide and titanium dioxide, and they work similarly to chemical sunscreens: they absorb 95% of UV radiation and reflect the remaining 5%. Mineral formulas often have a thicker, drier feel; they can be more difficult to rub in; and they can leave a white cast behind, especially on deeper skin tones.

Can Chemical Sunscreens Enter the Bloodstream?

In 2019, the FDA ran a study where 24 adult volunteers slathered 2 milligrams of chemical sunscreen per square centimeter of skin on 75% of their body, four times a day. How much sunscreen is this? A lot: “It’s equivalent to four shot glasses of sunscreen,” explains toxicologist Kwaku Agyekum. “Typically we’re applying sunscreen around two times a day, and it’s nowhere near the amount the FDA used in the study. Most people don’t even use the amount recommended!”

The FDA found that the active ingredients entered the bloodstream via systemic absorption. But they also concluded that this didn’t mean the ingredients were unsafe, just that more testing would be needed to determine if these findings actually mean anything. “The presence of the ingredients in the bloodstream means nothing to me,” Agyekum adds. “How much was found? Is the amount biologically meaningful? Were there adverse effects? Those are the questions that matter.”

Does Chemical Sunscreen Mess With Hormones and Cause Endocrine Disruption?

The endocrine system is made up of the body’s different hormones—like cortisol, estrogen, testosterone, and melatonin—which act as little messengers that tell your body what it’s supposed to do. Hormones control and regulate a lot of our biological processes like blood sugar control, body growth, and energy production.

Oxybenzone, octinoxate, and homosalate have shown endocrine activity in animal and lab studies. It’s important to remember the context of these studies. The animal studies show what happens to cells when rats are force-fed sunscreen at significantly high doses, not when humans apply it to their skin at normal levels. In fact, a study found that an average-sized American woman would need to apply sunscreen with oxybenzone to every inch of her body, twice a day, for almost 35 years to reach the same dose of the chemical as the rats did. And even then, the route of exposure wouldn’t be the same—ingesting an ingredient is very different from applying it on your skin.

Another study applied chemical sunscreens with 10% oxybenzone, octinoxate, and 4-MBC on 32 human volunteers for a week and measured the hormone levels before comparing them to a week where the volunteers didn’t use the sunscreen. They only found a small difference in hormone levels that looked like normal fluctuations. The scientists noted that they “observed no biologically significant effects on hormone levels” and that “these differences in hormone levels were not related to sunscreen exposure.”

Also, keep in mind that oxybenzone has been used in US sunscreens since 1978—there haven’t been any long-term harmful effects found in humans, and there isn’t any evidence that it causes reproductive issues in humans.

So, Which Type of Sunscreen Should I Use?

Bottom line: The safest sunscreen is the one you use daily. (Always choose one with SPF 30 or higher and broad-spectrum protection.) Sunscreen is proven to help reduce UV damage and decrease the risk of skin cancer. And the known dangers of sun damage far outweigh any unproven fears about chemical sunscreens.

If absorption weirds you out, mineral sunscreen is a great option; just make sure to apply—and reapply—it generously. If you want a formula that feels lightweight on your skin and is easy to apply, opt for a chemical one. And if you have any questions about what’s inside your sunscreen, go ahead and drop the ingredient list into our sunscreen checker.

Thankfully, in June, the FDA approved a new sunscreen active ingredient for the first time in more than 20 years, giving consumers more options: bemotrizinol (a.k.a. BEMT or Parsol Shield). BEMT protects against both UVA and UVB radiation, and it’s more photostable, which means it doesn’t become less effective when it’s exposed to light. Also, studies have shown that BEMT has low levels of absorption. P.S. You might see BEMT in Dieux’s sunscreen one day…

Why did it take the FDA over 20 years to approve a new filter? The biggest holdup is that the US regulates sunscreen filters as an OTC drug, which means they have to go through a lengthy review process before they’re approved. This has caused the US to fall far behind other places like the EU, Asia, and Australia with regard to the quality of available sunscreen filters. For example, all of those other places have used BEMT in their sunscreen products since 1999.

In November 2025, a bipartisan law called the SAFE Sunscreen Standards Act passed, streamlining the review process for sunscreen filters. Fingers crossed that this means we’ll catch up to the rest of the world and get access to better sunscreen filters in the coming years.

—Ama Kwarteng

Welcome to Close Up With… a series exploring one person's relationship with beauty, how that relationship has transformed over the years, and how they experience being seen. Today, we’re talking to Devyn Dalton, the stuntwoman who doubled for Matt Damon in The Odyssey.

After a period of body positivity, where it felt like there were more body types in fashion and beauty—in culture in general—the pendulum has swung the other way. The idea that an “ideal” body is an ultra-thin one is once again in vogue, thanks to the ease of access to GLP-1s for those with no medical need, celebrities appearing noticeably thinner on the red carpet, and the resurgence of online thinspo like “SkinnyTok.”

The pressure of the body image content we see online feels almost inescapable today. But there is another movement growing in fashion and beauty, one that rejects this limited beauty ideal. Recently, Oribe Hair Care highlighted bodybuilders Dianna Blanchard and Tjiki Sidibe in an ad campaign for a strengthening treatment. The fashion house Mugler featured bodybuilder Tatian Horslaville for in a handbag campaign. And our campaign for Firm Revival HyrdoRetinal Firming Serum featured models over the age of 45 with the tagline “This is what strong skin looks like,” pushing back against the idea that women need to be smaller and younger.

And then there’s Devyn Dalton, a stunt woman who was recently in this summer’s biggest film, The Odyssey. In the scene where Odysseus and his crew meet the Laestrygonians, a tribe of man-eating giants, 4-foot-6 Dalton was Matt Damon’s stunt double. According to Damon, she has the greatest arms he’s ever seen, and I have to agree.

Ahead, Dalton talks about feeling pressure to be thinner, what happened when she stopped chasing perfection, what it was like to trained for her role in The Odyssey, and more.

In Full Transparency: “What was your relationship to beauty like growing up?”

Devyn Dalton: “Growing up, I definitely felt different—I was so much smaller than everyone else. And for a long time, I thought that beauty meant fitting into someone else’s idea of what I should look like. But as I’ve gotten older, I’ve realized that beauty has so much to do with confidence, kindness, and authenticity, and that’s more important than [your] appearance. And then your appearance kind of follows the energy that you feel inside. With my career, it helped me to understand that, and it also helped me embrace my difference. I can’t say it was always accepted. I definitely was stereotyped and put in a box, but I think every role asked something different of me, so I kind of stopped chasing perfection or what I thought I should be and just started being me. I realized what my body was capable of.

“I’ve never felt more beautiful than I do now, with my muscles and embracing my athletic body, which took me a little time. I was a dancer first, so I always felt the pressure to be thinner. But once I started just leaning into who I actually was, it actually opened doors for me. So it’s been a journey for sure. But it is kind of a beautiful one, even though it can be chaotic at times.”

IFT: “When did you decide to lean into who you really were and stop trying to put yourself in this box? What did that look like for you?”

DD: “I always believed in myself and I saw myself outside of that box, but I often felt pushed into it. My mid-to-late twenties were when I fully had this awakening, and I stopped trying to change or alter myself and just felt really strong in who I was. It really opened so many other doors. And I was like, “Oh, all I had to do was just be me instead of trying to do all these other things.” We all think we have to be someone else, but really you don’t.

“I’m definitely excited to break boundaries a little bit, especially since this is being celebrated. It’s been so well received, especially by women, me being a strong woman and what that means. To represent that means a lot to me, personally.”

IFT: “Tell me more about that.”

DD: “It means a lot to me if it can help other people, specifically other women, embrace who they are. I’m always saying, if John Cena and The Rock can make a career out of their muscles, why can’t I? Why can’t I play cool characters like them? Just because I’m a tiny woman?

“People have been so excited to see it on screen that it definitely gives me hope that there’ll be future opportunities to keep representing [people like me]. Also, I’m such a fitness and health advocate, so if this inspires people to get out there and move, it means a lot to me.”

IFT: “How did you get into performing and acting?”

DD: “I started as a dancer, and I trained in all styles. Then I went into live theater. When I was a kid, I found a talent search in the newspaper, and I told my mom I wanted to go. From there, II got an agent and started doing commercials. But I would say I really started working in film after high school. I booked the Planet of the Apes trilogy, and I played the ape characters, doing what we call motion capture.

“It was movement mixed with acting. And through that, I met a massive group of stunt people andI just started training with them; I was always into anything athletic, and I love strength training. It feels great. Like I’ve said, I’ve never felt more feminine than when I feel strong.”

IFT: “Why do you think that is?”

DD: “I think muscles are so beautiful. And I don’t want other people to feel pressure to be muscular. But feeling strong, feeling confident, and knowing your own strength and power, I think that changes how you feel within. And it just pours outwards.

“Any kind of movement helps keep me in a healthy mindset. When you’re testing your own limits and when you push yourself to do hard things, which you often do when you’re doing some kind of physical exertion, it helps you so much mentally. It helps you in life. It helps you feel more confident with speaking your truth, answering questions, and making decisions.”

IFT: “How did training for this role look like compared to previous ones?”

DD: “I already was ready to go physically, but I wanted that extra bit. I really did want to impress when I showed up. I knew I had big shoes to fill. So for me, I upped my training a little bit more, bodybuilding style. I didn’t have much time; I only had a few weeks. So I tried to do a bit of a bulk phase, which just meant upping my macros and eating a bit higher protein, higher carbs, while also lifting heavy. I also made sure I was working out my arm muscles three times a week, so I could really get growth. Right before [filming,] I did a bit of a cut, so I brought my calories down—still within a healthy range, though, because it’s really important when it comes to recovery. You’re working long hours and you don’t get much sleep, so you want to make sure everything is at a healthy level, so your body can recover and perform.

“What was so amazing to me was seeing how quick your body reacts and seeing the results. It gives you this boost of confidence like, “Wow, I can do so many things when I just focus on it, and my body is so amazing.” I think that also helped me with my confidence.”

IFT: “Have you ever been a stunt double for a man before or is this your first time?”

DD: “I actually have once before. It was for an episode on a TV series called Twisted Metal. This was my first time doubling for a huge Hollywood star, which was just incredible. It’s one of the coolest things on my resume, and it was definitely a unique experience.”

IFT: “Given that it was such a unique experience for you, what do you want to take away from it moving forward? What did your experience teach you about yourself?”

DD: “It was a reminder that hard work does pay off. Sometimes, you can get a little beaten down in the industry. But if you just keep believing in yourself, it does work out. [This experience] has opened my mind even more to what boundaries I can break. I’m honored to have been part of this film and to work with people from all over the world who are masters at their craft. It brings me joy, and I’m very proud.”

—This conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

Even if you’re new to the skincare world, you’ve probably heard of retinoids. The family of vitamin A derivatives, which includes retinol, is considered the gold standard of skincare, thanks to decades of clinical research supporting their benefits. They speed up cell turnover, improving skin’s texture and tone, and they stimulate collagen production, which helps plump the skin and reduce the look of fine lines and wrinkles.

But if you’ve been scrolling on the Internet lately, you’ve probably come across some conflicting information. From claims that retinol thins your skin to rumors that it’s banned in Europe, misinformation about the ingredient is literally everywhere.

The misinformation isn’t just annoying. It leaves you unsure about what really works, perpetuates conspiracy theories, and reduces trust in science. So, let’s clear up some of the most common myths about retinoids.

Myth #1: Retinoids cause cancer.

Fact: No, topical retinoids do not cause cancer. The rumor is a misconception based on misinterpreted data. Back in 2010, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) ran a study where hairless, albino mice developed skin tumors after they were slathered with retinyl palmitate (a type of retinoid) then exposed to intense UV light. Even though people online continue to perpetuate this rumor, both the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology (JAAD) and the European Union’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) reviewed the data and neither found conclusive evidence linking the ingredient to human skin cancer.

In the NTP study, there were two groups of mice: one coated with retinyl palmitate, the other in a cream without the ingredient. Both groups of mice developed tumors, which means you can’t single out retinyl palmitate alone. The study exposed both groups to massive amounts of UV radiation that humans would never be exposed to. While mice studies can be helpful for early research, there are still massive lifestyle and biological differences between mice and humans.

Retinoids, like tretinoin and adapalene, have actually been shown to reduce precancerous lesions caused by sun exposure. Plus, derms have used retinoids for decades now. If people were getting skin cancer en masse from them, we’d probably have heard about it by now.

Myth #2: Retinoids aren’t pregnancy-safe. If you can’t use it while you’re pregnant, then it’s not safe to use it at all.

Fact: To state the obvious, a pregnant body is not the same as a non-pregnant body. Pregnancy changes a lot, and your skin and body behave differently than they normally would. That’s why an ingredient that’s safe and effective for most adults is on the no-fly list for pregnant people.

Here’s a list of a few things pregnant people are advised to avoid: sushi, deli meats, certain soft cheeses, and oysters. Does that mean we should demonize them and claim they aren’t safe for everyone else? Of course not. These things aren’t inherently “bad;” a growing fetus is just super vulnerable.

The same idea applies to retinoids. While oral retinoids are known to cause serious birth defects and should never be used during pregnancy, topical retinoids are generally discouraged. Even though only a very small amount is absorbed through the skin, experts agree it’s best to play if safe—the benefits don’t outweigh even a theoretical risk to a developing baby.

Myth #3: Retinoids thin and weaken your skin.

Fact: A common misconception about retinoids is that they make the skin thinner and weaker. Retinoids speed up cell turnover, causing dead skin cells on the skin’s outermost layer to shed more quickly, which is probably where this rumor comes from. But the truth is that overtime retinoids stimulate collagen and elastin production, boosting skin firmness, resilience, and thickening the dermis and skin overall. They also help protect existing collagen by slowing down the enzymes that naturally break it down with age. In other words, retinoids work to strengthen and reinforce your skin’s foundation, not weaken it.

Myth #4: It damages the skin barrier, making your skin chronically dry and super sensitive.

Fact: When you first start using a retinoid, it can speed up cell turnover faster than your skin can adjust. During this temporary adjustment period, you might notice dryness, flaking, redness, and increased sensitivity—a.k.a the “retinol uglies.” As your skin adapts to the faster pace, the retinoid will help strengthen the epidermis and support lipid production, leading to a more resilient skin barrier. The stronger barrier also helps skin hold onto moisture instead of letting it evaporate, so skin stays hydrated and plump.

There are also ways to try to make sure the adjustment period isn’t too rough.

• Start low and slow. There’s no need to start with the strongest retinoid, especially if you’re a beginner. Cosmetic retinoids like Firm Revival, which was developed with sensitive skin in mind, are a great place to start.

• Baby steps. Apply the retinoid one to two times a week for the first few weeks, working your way up until you get to nightly use.

• Don’t over-do it. More is not more when it comes to retinoids. Apply a pea-sized or whatever the recommended amount is on the packaging

• Find a great moisturizer. Using a lipid-rich moisturizer like Instant Angel or a recovery cream like Skin Mercy can help soothe and support the skin barrier.

When you use the right retinoid for your skin, you’re going to find your skin is smoother, more resilient and more even.

Myth #5: Retinoids are banned in the European Union.

Fact: Regardless of what your For You Page says, no, retinoids are not banned in the EU. Regulators simply capped retinol concentrations at 0.3% in face products and 0.05% in body products. These limits were introduced as a precaution for the small percentage of the European population—just 5%—who may be at risk of consuming too much vitamin A from multiple sources, not because retinol is unsafe for the general public.

At the end of the day, like any ingredient, retinoids aren’t one-size-fits-all, and that's okay. But that doesn’t mean it deserves the slander. For the right person, in the right formula, and used at the right frequency, retinoids can be one of the most effective, science-backed ingredients you can add to your routine. Hope this clears things up!

—Ama Kwarteng

Welcome to Office Hours, where I—Charlotte Palermino—brain-dump my month: what I've read, what I’ve learned, and the conversations shaping our decisions at Dieux. I find mystique boring. My joy is in TMI. Alright, let’s dive in.

For the last five weeks I’ve been everywhere but New York, namely: Puglia, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Berlin, Agen, Madrid, Mallorca and Arles. For the first time in a long time, I was able to detach from my manic New York routine. Sure, I was working, but it hits differently when you take your espresso overlooking the Copenhagen Harbor, or your lunch break is with mamie looking through photo albums. My favorite part about traveling isn’t simply breaking with routine, but finding new ways to live. This included a step beyond my beloved Brick, which locks me out of my social platforms, to an app called Opal, which I’ve now set to keep me off my phone’s most addictive and rage-inducing apps for ten hours a day. By locking myself out of social media, I felt the luxury of time. Aside from exploring and working, I read. More than I have in years.

In the first week, I started to sleep better. By week two, I was less reactive. By the end of five weeks, I felt like I’d gone to a silent retreat and rewired my brain. Turns out, the science of reading can heal your mind.

If you’ve ever felt like you could be doing “more productive” things than reading, Maryanne Wolf makes an excellent case for getting lost in a book. Reading feeds our capacity for insight and empathy and can aid attention spans. If you’re like me and berate yourself for the millennial sin of not optimizing every waking moment, the research points to reading being one of the better things you could do with your time. Deep reading can fortify your brain and make new neural pathways. Reading is probably making me better at my job, and, in turn, it’s making me a better person.

So, with that, the books I’ve read to expand my mind this month.

London Falling by Patrick Radden Keefe

If you like history, true crime, exceptional journalism, and insane plot twists, this book is for you. Don’t want to give any spoilers, as I went in blind, and I highly recommend reading as little as you can before diving in. Patrick Radden Keefe is the author behind another enthralling book, Say Nothing. If you need to be present, I recommend waiting to read this. It’s one of those page turners that you can’t put down. I was reading and walking to the coffee shop, which made crossing the street hazardous.

Girl on Girl: How Pop Culture Turned a Generation of Women Against Themselves by Sophie Gibert

By the time I finished the first chapter of Sophie Gilbert’s engrossing retrospective on my childhood, I knew I’d be re-reading it by the end of the year. Tracking the commodification and commercialization of “girl power,” Gilbert’s book asks what happened to feminism in the 21st century. It’s critical thinking 101 for anyone who is skeptical of how women are portrayed in popular culture, and how to avoid the trappings of misogyny. Don’t think I’ve ever highlighted a book so much; every paragraph was a bar.

Beloved by Toni Morrison

If you want to be a better writer, you need to read the greats. And is there any better master of prose than Toni Morrison? Not in my book. Beloved was the 1988 Pulitzer Prize winner for fiction, and it tells the haunting story of the ramifications and trauma that slavery has on generations. With Morrison, her books really are best read in print. Every word is so intentional; reading on a screen didn’t do it justice for me. Next up on my list is Jazz.

Flesh by David Szalay

This book won the 2025 Booker Prize and… while it wasn’t for me, if you like sparse prose and a man who is resigned to having life happen to him, you have a good option.

The Frozen River by Ariel Lawhon

If you want to show me a good time, take me to a beach and give me historical fiction. The Frozen River is based on the true story of Martha Ballard, an 18th-century midwife who kept a detailed diary for over three decades. Ballard’s insights into colonial women’s lives helped historians better understand the period, particularly for women. Ballard was also remarkable for her skill as a healer and midwife; in her lifetime, she helped deliver hundreds of children. At a time when the live birth rate (and the survival of the mother) was extraordinarily poor, Ballard famously never lost a mother and had low infant mortality rates. The book was at times repetitive, and parts weren’t exactly realistic, but it was a good story, which I can always suspend my belief for.

Shuggie Bain by Douglas Stuart

A book that will absolutely wreck you. When I think about books that give me more empathy, this is one of them. Shuggie Bain is the story of a young, sweet, lonely boy and his beautiful alcoholic mother. It charts the brutality of growing up and living in working-class Scotland during “Thatcherism,” and the many shapes familial love takes, and what we do to save ourselves. Breaking your heart can help it open, and this was a necessary reminder of how devastating poor policy can be for people who are already struggling.

Currently Reading: The Invisible Hand of Maria Edgeworth by Jeanna Smialek

One of my favorite subjects in business school was economics, and this book is reminding me why I found it so delightful. I like philosophy and psychology. This book tells the forgotten history of the nineteenth-century novelist who taught society economics through her entertaining books. Gave me so many ideas for sharing new (and at times subversive) ideas in popular culture.

—Charlotte Palermino

Welcome to Close Up With… a series exploring one person's relationship with beauty, how that relationship has transformed over the years, and how they experience being seen. This week, we’re talking to Val Monroe, the writer and former magazine editor behind the newsletter “How Not to F*ck Up Your Face.”

In Full Transparency: “You’ve worked in beauty editorial for such a long time. Did you have a relationship with beauty before you entered the industry?”

Val Monroe: “Zero. The reason I was hired at Oprah [Magazine] was because I had been writing for the new editor, Amy Gross. Occasionally, she would assign me a piece about beauty, which was fine, but I didn’t know anything about it.

“When she got to Oprah, I wrote to her right away, and I said, ‘I want to work for you.’ I wound up doing a lot of beauty writing for them. And when it came time to hire a beauty director, Amy wanted someone who didn’t know anything about the industry because she didn’t like the way beauty had historically been handled at women’s magazines, which was to make readers feel shitty about themselves, so they would come back month after month to figure out how they’re going to be fixed. She wanted a different, fresh perspective. No other place would have hired me because I had no background.

“I was at least 14 to 15 years older than most of the other beauty editors, so I was at what felt like an aesthetic disadvantage because I was suddenly among all these beautiful, elegant young women. I wasn’t as sophisticated as many of them were about the beauty industry, and I wasn’t that interested in it. I could say I was less well-groomed, but that’s not quite right. I was less aesthetically fixated, I guess. And so to be thrown in with a bunch of women who were—and then also being significantly older than most of them—often made me feel like I wasn’t living up to a certain standard.

“I think that’s actually an experience many women share because of our beauty culture. But I got over that when I learned how to see myself through mirror meditation, that is, learning to see my face without objectification.”

IFT: “That’s so fascinating—how did you get into mirror meditation?”

VM: “When I started working at Oprah, they threw a party for me to introduce me to the advertising community, and Iman was there. After the party, someone sent me a photo of me talking with Iman in side-profile. I looked at the photo, and I had this feeling, a terrible, disappointed feeling when I looked at her because she looked like a house orchid in full gorgeous bloom, and next to her, I looked like a parking lot daisy at the end of a hot day.

“I was so disappointed. I went over to the mirror in my office, and I just looked at myself. I had been doing a lot of deep therapy at the time. I was looking into my own eyes, then all of a sudden, I saw myself. I saw who I am without the expectations of unrealistic beauty ideals, and I just went, ‘Oh, hi, sweetie.’ It was as if I were recognizing a friend. I felt enormously better about myself.

“Then I discovered that there is such a thing as mirror meditation, which is looking into your own eyes in the mirror and allowing feelings to rise up. As you’re looking at your face, I believe it changes something about the way you see yourself.

“There’s a professor at Barnard, her name is Tara Well, and she’s shown through her research that people who regularly do mirror meditation have higher self-esteem, feel better about themselves in general, and are generally happier.

“I think that it allows you to see your own face the way you see the faces of other people you love, which is without scanning them for flaws, which is what we typically do. From the time we can recognize ourselves in the mirror, especially young women, we’re taught to adjust our faces to be pleasing, whether it’s to smile or later, to wear makeup and conform to Western beauty ideals. When you can learn how to avoid doing that when you see yourself, you can see your face with love and kindness.

“I think it’s really important, and I don’t think enough people understand how valuable it can be, especially when we are constantly being bombarded with unrealistic images of people on social media.”

IFT: “Do you think social media has also amplified the fear of aging, and placed even more unrealistic expectations on women?”

VM: “The fear of aging has definitely gotten worse in the last 20 years, as social media has taken hold, as AI has increasingly been propagating photos of humans that look less and less human.

“As I’ve gotten older, I’ve realized that it definitely requires a lot of adjustment when we begin to see more evidence of aging in our faces. I wrote about this recently, but one day, I caught a glimpse of myself and my expression was one of disdain, and for me, disdain is the last thing I want to project, so it really, really bothered me. I get neurotoxin injections twice a year, which I think helps reduce that, but I also made the decision to add a little filler to my lip, which I hoped would reduce that. They were conscious choices I made because I saw something that made me unhappy."

“I do understand how frightening it can be when we begin to see the aging process in our face, not only because, as women, we’re told our currency is tied up in our looks, but because it reminds us that we are organic and have an expiration date. I think the whole idea of not accepting our impermanence is one of the things that drives the beauty and plastic surgery industries. A lot of it is based on our refusal to admit that we’re not going to be here forever.”

IFT: “I think a lot about the Susan Sontag essay where she writes that men are allowed to age but the only form a woman can take in society is that of a girl. I remember reading a piece of yours where you mentioned becoming invisible after a certain age. How did you feel about it? Was that liberating? Sad?”

VM: “All of it. Liberating, sad, difficult, challenging, and freeing. I think I began to focus on experiencing the world as a looker rather than someone being looked at. In other words, rather than spending a lot of my time thinking about how I was presenting myself to the world, though I still care about that, it isn’t the primary thing I think about. I began to think about appreciating what I was looking at; I think more in the way that a man might. I felt as if the whole world had opened up to me when I became less focused on the part of me that was always thinking about how I look.”

IFT: “In another piece you wrote for Allure, I remember there was a line where you said that you don’t see the word ‘old’ as an insult or a slur. I was wondering if you could expand on that a bit.”

VM: “Because our culture is deeply ageist, we’ve come to believe that being old is something bad; that you’re past your expiration date, you’re frail, you’re weak. So it carries all these negative connotations that don’t necessarily fit us. I’m 75, and many people my age are vital, energetic, interested, curious, and active. So, what I was trying to do in that story was shift our expectations about what old means to something that was more, not just realistic, but also positive.

“The difficult thing is that our ageist ideas are rooted somewhat in truth. There’s a lot of loss in aging, and our bodies do get weaker. We need to work harder to not be frail, we need to keep our brains active. We have to put more energy into doing those things, but it doesn’t mean that it’s not possible.”

—This conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

On April 1, 2025, 3,500 people were laid off at the FDA, including employees in the Human Foods Program, who worked on food safety, and scientists at a San Francisco lab that tests foods for bacteria. The communications team at both the FDA and CDC, who helped coordinate government response to outbreaks, were also let go. Workers at the CDC’s Division of Environmental Health Science and Practice lost their jobs too, and they also performed food safety research.

Prior to the layoffs, the Trump Administration cut the National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for Foods and the National Advisory Committee on Meat and Poultry Inspection, two committees focused on food safety.

In September of the same year, the CDC scaled back the Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (a.k.a. FoodNet). It now tracks two pathogens that cause foodborne illnesses. It previously tracked eight pathogens, including the parasite Cyclospora.

Cyclospora is challenging to investigate and trace even under the best circumstances because of its biology, and these are not the best of circumstances. As of Tuesday, July 15, the CDC reported 1,645 confirmed cases of cyclosporiasis—the intestinal illness caused by Cyclospora—across 34 states. 249 cases had been reported at this time last year. We still don’t know the source of the outbreak. Is it lettuce? Salad greens? Our Taco Bell orders? The public would benefit from clear, direct messaging from the government on what we do know and what we don’t know, but most of the people who would be in charge of that task have been fired. Millions of Americans, including myself, are left in the dark, turning to social media to try to fill in the gaps and figure out how to remain healthy.

Elon Musk and his DOGE team promised to make the federal government more efficient while making the United States more prosperous in the process. Instead, what we got were sweeping job cuts to critical roles that help keep Americans safe.

In 2024, about 26.7 million people in America lacked health insurance. With Trump’s 2025 “Big Beautiful Bill”—which included significant funding cuts and policy changes to Medicaid and the Health Insurance Marketplaces—this number is expected to rise, which makes the gutting of the CDC and FDA even more alarming.

A lot of the concern isn’t just about this particular illness. The CDC has been significantly weakened, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services is completely unqualified and unequipped for the role. At this moment, there is no confirmed head of the CDC or the FDA. There is no confirmed head at the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, the organization that regulates vaccines, nor one at the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. There is no Surgeon General and no head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Even if this outbreak ends up being relatively limited and low-risk, it’s a reminder of how vulnerable things can feel. It’s not difficult to imagine how much more serious the consequences could be if we were facing another pandemic.

When the systems that protect our food supply are weakened, people don’t just lose confidence in food safety; they start losing trust in the institutions that are supposed to protect public health. That growing skepticism creates space for misinformation to spread, making it harder for people to know what to believe and easier for more extreme ideologies to take root.

At Dieux, science and education are at the heart of everything we do. Supporting rigorous science means advocating for the strong, well-funded public health infrastructure that helps keep our food safe, our communities healthy, and trust in evidence-based decision-making strong.

We believe that investing in these systems is an investment in all of us.

—Ama Kwarteng

Welcome to Close Up With… a series exploring one person's relationship with beauty, how that relationship has transformed over the years, and how they experience being seen. This week, we’re talking to Glynnis MacNicol, writer and author of the memoir I’m Mostly Here to Enjoy Myself: One Woman’s Pursuit of Pleasure in Paris.

IFT: How did you learn to take pleasure and beauty seriously?

GM: “I have a real devotion to red lipstick. That definitely comes from my mother, who would not leave the house without red lipstick, even to take out the garbage. And I remember really rebelling against that when I was a teenager. Then I moved to New York in my early 20s in the late ‘90s, when Carolyn Bassette would appear in these red lipsticks. I decided to reacquaint myself with red lipsticks and went out and got myself a MAC Russian Red, and that was the gateway drug to my lipstick obsession.

“But if we’re talking [about] beauty in a feeling beautiful or caretaking way, then I think it started out of necessity. I was a serious swimmer from the age of 10. I was competing at a fairly high level, and because the chlorine was quite painful on my skin afterwards, I got very accustomed early on to washing and moisturizing my face daily.

“I associated skincare with comfort, and it was almost a necessity to feel good in my body. That really stuck with me. And my mother was very strict about sunblock—I have very clear memories of being at the beach, so irritated with her because she was slathering us in it. But those routines really stuck with me and made me think about beauty and skincare in terms of physical caretaking, rather than solely appearance-based.”

IFT: What was your relationship to beauty and appearance like when you were younger? How has that relationship changed during this stage of your life?

GM: “I have very naturally curly hair, and I think culturally, we’ve embraced it in different ways, especially when it comes to providing more hair care options for it. But when I was a teenager,

“I really did battle with my hair. I never straightened it for whatever reason—and I imagine that was partly because I was always in a swimming pool, and I didn’t have the time or patience for that level of maintenance—but it always felt like it set me apart.

“When you have quite curly hair, people think it’s public property. Many people in the Black community have written about this, and I’m obviously not Black, but I did share the experience of having people pulling my curls or asking if they could cut them off. It always made me feel separate in a way, especially at that time, when all I wanted was to fit in and when I was confronted, culturally, with straight hair all the time.

“When I moved to New York, I think that shifted how I thought about almost everything. I was suddenly in an environment where there’s so much more variety, and it was so much more exciting to be original, or just your own self to some degree. At that point, I came to terms with my curls and started to experience them differently.

“I think so much of beauty and style is aligning your outer self with your inner self, the idea that coming to terms with your inner self is the first step of any beauty, wellness, or style pursuit.”

IFT: There’s this societal attitude towards aging and aging women that perpetuates this idea that you become invisible after a certain age and that there’s no pursuit of pleasure in midlife, aesthetic or otherwise. Or rather, that you shouldn’t pursue pleasure after a certain age. How did you unlearn that?

GM: “I was very alone during COVID, as [I write in] the opening of I’m Mostly Here to Enjoy Myself, and after a year and a half, when I landed in Paris, I was in a frenzy. There was so little thought going into my behavior because I had reached that point where I thought, ‘If I don’t see people or take my clothes off or have some sort of connection in the very physical sense of the word, I’m going to go crazy.’

“It just so happened that I was 45 when COVID started and about to turn 47 when I landed in Paris. So quite literally, I was in my mid-40s, which I think, culturally, we associate with the beginning of middle age. I came away from that trip realizing that everything we’ve been told about age is a lie. My experience is so different from what you’re prepared for.

“I’ve never felt invisible. I’ve never felt more visible than I am right now. Part of that is confidence and feeling great about yourself. But I’m also surrounded by women whose experiences are so similar to mine that it’s much easier for me to see those assumptions [about women and aging] as a failure of culture and gatekeepers of who’s telling the stories than it is a reflection of anyone’s experience.

“That’s not to say there aren’t women experiencing those things, but it’s so far from my own experience that at some point. Maybe at some point people—or men, more specifically—will stop seeing me, but right now, men should be worried whether or not I’m seeing them.”

“One of the reasons I try to be vocal about my experience is to, in the smallest way, try and shift the conversation. I remember the anxiety I felt in my mid-to-late 30s about that being the future, and it makes me want to say, ‘This isn’t true.’ It doesn’t have to be true, and it’s not the experience of the world I live in.

“Let’s reframe and really question where these narratives are coming from. I feel so powerful at this stage of my life, and it makes sense that the main narratives try to diminish women as they get older. I feel like we are so powerful that it threatens to upend certain power structures.”

IFT: What do you mean when you say that this is the most visible stage of your life?

GM: “When I hear people say they’re invisible, I think of not being seen at the grocery store counter, having their experiences dismissed by the people around them, or feeling like they don’t have a voice. Of course I’m a writer, but I feel like my work is more widely read now. I think I’ve become increasingly central in the lives of all the people around me, for whatever reason—because they need support systems or because they want exposure to the kind of life I’m leading.”

“At 40, I felt like I was 10 years behind, and at 50, I feel 10 years ahead. I’m able to live an adventure in a way that, had I partnered and more particularly had children, would not be something I necessarily would have access to for another 10 years.

“I just feel more and more vibrant, and I’m fortunate to have people in my life who really celebrate me and whom I really celebrate in turn. I think that friendships can start to rest in nostalgia, and mine are very active and not reliant solely on memories; most of them are decades old at this point.

“Sometimes I’m like, ‘I’m going to go into my apartment and not talk to anybody for 24 hours.’ And that feels like a really wonderful option to have. But beyond that, I feel extremely visible.”

—This conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

If you spend any time online, you’re probably bombarded with advice about love, work, confidence, friendships, pretty much everything. And correct me if I’m wrong, but a lot of it comes from women in their 20s.

No shade to women in their 20s—I used to be one, too, and there’s so much knowledge gained during that decade. And while it’s wonderful to get advice from people in your own cohort, there are some important lessons that only become clear with time and distance. One grows more certain of what matters and more grounded in their values.

With that in mind, I asked women who have the benefit of life experience what they wish they’d known earlier. Take notes.

—Ama Kwarteng

ON RELATIONSHIPS

“Never inherit enemies. Your friend’s enemies shouldn’t automatically be yours.” — Linda, 55

“Have a lot of sex. Be sure to use protection.” — Flo, 47

“Don’t stay married to someone who sucks.” — Hope, 50

“Find some elders that you admire and listen to them.” — Annie, 50

“Do not spend one second of your life doing the ‘pick me’ dance with some douchebag.” — Justina, 62

“Don’t date that loser who’s 10 years older and trying to convince you you’re so mature for your age.” — Carli, 51

“There are always other people. If someone walks out of your life, it hurts so much, but there are always other connections waiting to happen.” — Jan, 68

“If your partner makes you feel bad about yourself, drop them and get a cat.” — Olivia, 56

“Pursue pleasure. Understand your needs and desires, and learn how to communicate them to other people.” — Kerri, 60

ON MONEY

“I have been telling my kids they need to have ‘fuck you money.’ Make sure you have enough money so that you aren’t trapped in a bad job, marriage or living situation.” — Lisa, 63

ON WELLNESS

“Please floss. Floss, I’m begging you. Every single day. I am the Ghost of Dentist Visits Future and I’m here to tell you what your bills are gonna be like if you don’t.” — Jay, 58

“I’d lift heavy things and stop eating like a 12-year-old.” — Leanne, 68

“As much as it seems now, your body cannot stay healthy on chicken nuggets.” — Shelley, 64

“Wear earplugs at loud concerts.” — Charlotte, 58

“Educate yourself on perimenopause because it hits you out of nowhere.” — Deb, 57

“Take care of your hips—do mobility, strengthen supporting muscles, and address any imbalances. Hip replacements are expensive.” — Steph, 64

“Never pass up an opportunity to pee.” — Kel, 48

“Sunscreen, sunscreen, and more sunscreen. Don’t forget your chest.” — Josephine, 53

ON CONFIDENCE

“90% of people don’t know what they’re talking about—even those who act like they do and seem to have good credentials.” — Lisette, 59

“A lot of people underestimate how necessary their existence is to the world, and as a result, they assume a posture of resignation that leaves the world less than it could be. Don’t be this person.” — Mary, 48

“Regardless of your insecurities, your body looks amazing. Walk around as naked as possible and show it off as much as you want.” — Jess, 67

ON PEOPLE PLEASING

“Be the evil person in their story, talk back, be okay with people not liking you, and stop waiting for everyone’s approval.” — Estelle, 62

“Either be a bitch or get an autoimmune disease. Being a people pleaser and not speaking your mind can mess you up so many more ways than just mentally.’” — Sarah, 55

Growing up, I never knew my Grammy was an activist.

In retrospect, she didn't think of herself that way, but from where I stand, she advocated for gay rights at a time when "gay panic" was at an all-time high. She once wrote to her congressman, urging him to vote for AIDS funding because homosexuals should not "be discriminated against for something in their jeans." Genes and malapropism aside, in 1987, she was arrested in D.C. protesting the Reagan administration's policies, policies that went on to kill thousands of Americans. My elegant, traditional, composed, four-foot-eleven Italian-American grandmother became vocal about the AIDS epidemic in the early '80s because it hit close to home: her son, my uncle Tristano Palermino, was diagnosed with AIDS and died on November 22nd, 1989.

At 35, he passed away. I was two. But, in a way, I got to know my father's brother through family lore.

Tristano was legendary among the Palerminos, especially with the coolest contingent of any family: the older cousins. I grew up on stories of his wit, charm, epic babysitting, and endless generosity. Even in his final days, my cousins spoke about him with an air of wonder. The man they handed down to me loved, was loved, took care of his community, and, above all, was honest. My American family is largely conservative. Anyone who shares the trifecta of Italian, Republican, and East Coast knows what that means: being gay wasn't exactly shunned, nor was it exactly accepted, which makes my grandmother's activism all the more remarkable. When I think about who inspires me, it turns out to be a man I never met, someone brave enough to be himself and to fight for the life and dignity of his community.

I'm not sure why a family member gave me a box of Tristano's things. Maybe it was because we were at one of those cool cousins' weddings, where I finally learned which family members would give me an accurate accounting of our history, and I asked about him. Maybe it was because I'd launched a company called Dieux — French for gods — and he asked how I felt about religion, Tristano having been deeply religious himself. Maybe it was because I'd asked about a photograph I'd seen of him with Pope John Paul II. Either way, I got a box: an archive that helped me understand I was related to a real-life hero.

Through his effects, I came to know my uncle. He wrote a manuscript (I've tried to transcribe it; if anyone has a good platform or person, PLEASE let me know, as the ink has faded). He journaled and collaged. And he was a loud voice for justice throughout the AIDS epidemic. My uncle Tristano was the president of People With AIDS in San Francisco and a member of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. He protested the Reagan administration's inaction by crawling in front of the White House in a shirt that read "Reagan Is Killing Me." He got arrested with his mother, my Grammy. He edited the PWA Voice — a quarterly newsletter circulated among the Bay Area's AIDS care providers and people living with AIDS — and he was one of the San Francisco AIDS Foundation's first social workers, eventually becoming a director. Well before his untimely death at 35, Tristano had done more for people than many of us manage in a long lifetime.

One month after I was born, in June 1987, Tristano and his husband were arrested in D.C. In his obituary, my uncle recounted how the arresting officers wore thick yellow gloves, afraid of being "in casual company" with people who had AIDS. When he was frisked and his AIDS medication was discovered, the officer was "terrified." During the epidemic, stigma killed as surely as the virus. When Tristano passed, his obituary in the San Francisco Chronicle called his partner, David Glassberg, his "lover" — even though they had married in July 1988 at Congregation Sha'ar Zahav, in a ceremony of love. So I'll call David Glassberg what he was: his husband. My uncle by marriage. It took 27 years — until 2015 — for marriage equality to become the law of the land, and far less time for it to come under attack.

I've only been alive for 39 years, but in that time I've watched the AIDS epidemic ravage the queer community; watched gay rights be fought for and won, enshrined in the federal right to marry in 2015; and now, just over a decade later, I'm watching this administration try to drag us back toward the dehumanization and punishment of queer people. The Reagan administration held power from 1981 to 1989, and for much of it, it ignored the AIDS epidemic despite the CDC's pleading. More than ninety-five percent of people diagnosed with AIDS between 1981 and 1987 died. Viruses don't discriminate, but silence does, and the deeply conservative Reagan administration helped build a culture that contributed to the more than 700,000 Americans who have died of the virus since 1981. What finally slowed the death and destruction? Research, funding, and public awareness, all of which came from saying something and following up with action. When combination antiretroviral therapy arrived in 1996, AIDS-related deaths dropped by over half in a single year.

The Reagan administration's silence didn't just kill my uncle; it murdered a generation of elders whose guidance, strength, and love this country could use right now. It killed some of the best Americans we had, my uncle among them. When Pope John Paul II visited San Francisco, my uncle and his husband were invited to be introduced to him. My uncle didn't just shake his hand; he handed him a letter, urging the pope toward "moral leadership in the face of the AIDS epidemic."

When Donald Trump first ran for office, I was horrified by what I read in Project 2025, which is now being systematically implemented. Part of its doctrine is to gut LGBTQ+ workplace protections, marginalize same-sex marriages, and redirect federal funding and priorities toward what it calls the "ideal, natural family structure" of a married man and woman, while cutting educational opportunities and transgender rights. To date, there have been more than 605 attacks on LGBTQ+ people, and we aren't even two years into this term. As I watch America's leaders and businesses bow before an administration that is attacking its own people, I'm embarrassed by the moral failure on display, and by the brutal policies that silence makes possible.

As a beauty founder, I feel doubly responsible to speak up. Mine is an industry that has monetized self-love and acceptance for decades — much of the language borrowed directly from activist and queer culture — while too often declining to fight for a country where people can actually be safe. I'm also the niece of an AIDS activist; if my uncle could be brave in the face of death, can't I be brave in the face of making some people uncomfortable pointing out the evidence of our eyes and ears?

So this is me calling my own industry in. If we built our brands on diversity and self-expression, we don't get to go quiet the moment it becomes dangerous. The lesson of the 1980s is not subtle: silence is not neutrality. Silence is a policy position. It was a position then, and the people I came from died of it. A brand that celebrates Pride in June and says nothing while queer rights are stripped away the other eleven months hasn't stayed out of the fight; it has chosen a side.

I love moisturizers and retinols and, most of all, the science of how skin actually works, because I'm fascinated by evidence and by our unwillingness to set aside belief for reality. Beauty shapes culture, and it shapes how people — and entire groups — are treated. It has always been worth dissecting, especially because it has always been a tool of politics.

To me, a truly beautiful world acknowledges and celebrates everyone's humanity. I'll leave you with what my uncle's husband, so my other uncle, said about Tristano's legacy, which is helping guide me as I navigate operating a company:

"If you have a dream or an idea, you can make it happen. Don't let things block you, do it… and do it with style. Tristano believed that if you did it with style, more people would listen."

—Charlotte Palermino

Open up any social media app and within a few minutes someone will tell you that a $10 serum is “literally the same” as a $70 one. Same ingredients, same results—why would you ever pay more? Okay, sure: If two products use the same exact ingredients, in the same exact amounts, formulated in the same way, and sold in the same size, then yes, that’s a dupe.

But that’s not usually not the case. Usually, two products share a handful of ingredients, and someone decides that’s close enough to call it a dupe. I’ll be honest—I’ve tried out these so-called “dupes” in the past, and time and time again, I always find myself disappointed with everything from the results—or lack thereof—to the texture of the formula. I’ve never found a “dupe” that was as good as the original I was chasing.

I have nothing against a less expensive alternative. Great skincare is available at all price points. What’s less cool is being sold a fantasy: being told I’m getting Product A when what I’m actually getting is Product B, dressed up in Product A’s marketing.

Here’s why skincare “dupes” don’t always live up to the hype.

Ingredients Don’t Tell the Full Story

When talking about a product, especially from a toxicology POV, it’s never just about the ingredients. You also have to consider how much of each ingredient is included in the formula, the delivery systems (how the product carries active ingredients into the skin), whether penetration enhancers are present, and the formulation process, explains toxicologist Kwaku Agyeman.

“The public might see the same ingredients and jump to the conclusion that the products are identical, but that isn’t the case,” he adds. “Different processing methods and different formulation decisions create different products.” Unless a formula is literally stolen, no two formulas are exactly the same.

Also, just because a serum includes an ingredient doesn’t mean that it’s at a concentration that actually works. There’s a practice called “ingredient dusting,” which is when a tiny, basically meaningless amount of an active ingredient is added to a formula so it can be used in marketing materials.

Unless a brand shares the percentage of the active ingredient, it can be hard to figure out how much is actually in there. In the U.S. the FDA only requires brands to list ingredients in order of potency up to 1%. Anything under this amount can be reordered and moved higher in the ingredient list, making it confusing for shoppers.

And Not All Ingredients Are Created Equal

Two products might have the same ingredient listed on their label, but that doesn’t mean they’re the same quality. “You can have different grades of the same ingredient—cosmetic grade versus pharmaceutical grade, for example—and that directly impacts the effectiveness of a product,” Agyeman adds.

“Ingredient sourcing adds another layer to all of this,” says Agyeman. “That’s where sustainability, circularity, and safety come into the conversation: Where was this ingredient sourced? How was it tested? Does it carry a high heavy metal count? What’s the risk? How stable is the formula?”

You Might End Up Spending More

Dupe culture is fueled by overconsumption and the need to “keep up” with the trend cycle. Just because a product or ingredient is trendy, doesn’t mean you need to add it to your cart. Plus, you might buy a dupe because of the price, but it might cost you more in the long run. Let’s say you buy a dupe serum that doesn’t deliver for you; you end up buying more serums, chasing results. Also, a cheaper alternative can sometimes translate to lower quality packaging or formula, so you end up replacing it more often. Add it all up, and those “deals” can end up costing more than the real thing would have.

Buy Less, Buy Better

This philosophy doesn’t just apply to skincare; it’s actually the ethos behind Dieux’s latest collaboration with Gill Mechanical.

You’ve probably seen videos of tube wringers online: tools used to squeeze every last drop of product from a tube. They work on paint tubes, toothpaste, and yes, skincare too.

Dieux wanted to make a Tube-Wringer, but TBH, our early attempts weren’t great. So we did some research and discovered that the Tube-Wringer was invented in the US, in Eugene, Oregon. Gill Mechanical has been hand-making them since the 1970s, and they last a lifetime.

Sure, you can probably find a cheaper version on Amazon, one that’ll break faster. Or you can buy well once. This collab is our way of honoring quality.

—Ama Kwarteng

Becca Perry wanted to be a cosmetic chemist before most people had ever heard of the job. She knew she wanted to work in science, but she didn’t want to be a doctor or work in an uptight, sterile environment. During her freshman year of high school, she had a lightbulb moment where she realized that she could pair her love of makeup and skincare with her love of science.

Science, with its emphasis on rationality and methodology, might appear to be in opposition to art. But, at least when it comes to cosmetic science, the act is actually one of creation. “I feel like formulation is one of the only fields that’s a true balance between art and science,” shares Becca. “I could be a purely scientific formulator—very robotic, I’m going to do this, this, and this because these are the results it will produce. But there’s an artistry to it because you have to have the know-how and understanding to create something with a beautiful texture and an enjoyable sensory experience, while also being efficacious.”

Today, Becca is Dieux’s senior innovation manager where she oversees everything from clinical studies to ingredient sourcing. Ahead, she shares how she broke into one of the beauty industry’s more under-the-radar career paths, what her day-to-day looks like, and more.

On Her Lifelong Love of Science

“I’ve always been drawn to science. It was my favorite class in elementary school, and I was always doing random experiments in my backyard, like mixing rainwater with different flowers and leaves. In high school and beyond, I loved algebra and calculus. And chemistry was my favorite class.

“I knew I wanted to go into science and I didn’t want to do something very sterile and boring. I had this moment where I was like, wait, I love makeup. There are people who make makeup, and I could do that.

“I was like, there has to be someone who does this, there has to be a scientist who makes makeup. Then I looked into it more, and there was literally one guy from the Chicago area, which is where I grew up, who’d been doing it for years and everyone in the industry knew him. He had a website called Chemist Corner. That was the only resource I had at the time. I knew it was a job and went into college with that knowledge.”

On What Sparked Her Interest in Skincare

“I’ve always had eczema, and I was always looking for solutions. But during my sophomore year of college, I had a horrible bout of hormonal acne. I’d never had acne before, but then I had this awful breakout and had to go to a derm, and was prescribed an oral and a topical. After that experience, I got really into skincare. That’s when I started researching what certain ingredients do, what helps with what skin condition, things like that.”

On How She Got Her Foot in the Door

“When I graduated college, I tried to get internships in cosmetics. I applied to L’Oréal and Estée Lauder and all those other internships, which was never going to happen for me because I didn’t have the contacts. A lot of people who get those jobs end up staying for years—they become lifers—and a lot of them, their parents knew someone.

“When I graduated, I was literally cold calling contract manufacturers and ingredient suppliers. I messaged a senior vice president of research and development at a manufacturer on LinkedIn. He gave me a chance, I got an interview, and I went through the same process with a few other contract manufacturers. I ended up getting a job at a contract manufacturer in Long Island City.

“I worked on so many different brands: Glossier, Fenty Beauty, Bobbi Brown, Nars. I started in color, so I did color for about a year and did everything under the sun in that realm, which was a really good experience. Then I switched to skincare and sun care.”

On Formulating Makeup Products

“Skincare was always what I wanted, but they had just hired someone for the skincare lab. They didn’t need anyone else; skincare was a smaller portion of their business, and they really needed people to work in color. So I was kind of forced into color, which was a really, really good experience. Color is way harder in most ways; a foundation is actually similar to a cream or lotion, they’re both in a class of formulas called emulsions, but you have to add and stabilize a high level of pigments on top of that. I also got to learn [about] hot-pour products like lipsticks, blushes, and bronzer sticks, which you don’t do much in skincare. I think that actually gives me a huge edge. I understand harder formulations because of that experience.”

On Working at an Ingredient Supplier

“I was at the contract manufacturer for about two years before I got a job at an ingredient supplier. They’re the ones who produce active ingredients or functional ingredients, like an emollient, sell them, and do all the testing. When I’m selecting ingredients, I start with the supplier data to make my baseline decision on whether or not to include something in a formula before we do our own testing to confirm delivery and efficacy.

“The job of a chemist at a supplier is to create what are called prototypes—sample formulations with the ingredients—to sell the concept to other chemists.

“It was much slower paced, which coming from a contract manufacturer was a relief. That environment is the most stressful, high-paced experience you can possibly have because you’re working for every brand. I would be working on 10 projects a week at my first job. There’s no work-life balance.”

“At an ingredient supplier, you’re not in that situation at all because you’re not creating products that are going to be sold direct-to-consumer. It was very nice to have something much slower paced. At the supplier, I got extensive training on specific things related to the ingredients, and that’s when I really developed an in-depth understanding of emulsions. And they had the funds to send me to events, conferences, things like that.”

On Why She Wanted to Work at Dieux

“I’d always loved the brand and followed Charlotte [Palermino, Dieux’s co-founder] for years. What excited me most was that they had a chemist, co-founder Joyce de Lemos, involved in-house. At the time, Dieux was really the only brand that had a chemist at the company, which was really important to me. I had also tried Instant Angel and Deliverance, and Deliverance completely changed my skin. The entire ethos of the brand meant a lot to me.”

On What Her Day-To-Day Looks Like

“It depends on the day. Once a formula is out of the lab and moving into production, there are a lot of moving pieces to manage. I also run all of our safety and efficacy testing, oversee stability samples, and check compatibility in our own lab. And then packaging—I do a lot of the sourcing and testing for packaging. I usually do competitive benchmarking and research on ingredients too, meeting with suppliers who come in to pitch new active ingredients.

“I also go to probably seven to ten trade shows a year, traveling domestically and internationally to see new ingredients and meet contract manufacturers and packaging vendors. And I work with marketing on technical copy. Three days a week I’m probably formulating, whether that’s batching something for testing or actually developing the formula.”

On Her Favorite Part of Being a Cosmetic Chemist

“Definitely the actual formulation. It’s so fun and really rewarding to get messages [from people] about your products, and see that they can actually impact people’s lives in some way. But also the artistry, the act of just creating something. I really do love formulating, trying weird combinations sometimes, and seeing what can happen.”

On What Excites Her About the Beauty Industry Right Now

“There are a lot of cool ingredients that I find really interesting. There’s an mRNA active that’s really exciting for boosting collagen and elastin, and reducing fine lines. It’s a totally new technology and already has way more data behind it than PDRN. I’m also very excited about the new UV filter, and I hope it opens doors for more to come. I’ll be honest—this UV filter was created before I was even born, so it’s about 27 years outdated. But it is progress, and I really hope it’s just the beginning.”

On What Advice She Has for Aspiring Cosmetic Chemists

“You can always reach out to me. And I’d say look into your local chapter of the Society of Cosmetic Chemists (SCC). You can find different committees near you hosting events where you can network and meet other chemists.

“The SCC also has this chapter called NextGen, a committee that helps aspiring chemists. They host events for prospective students and people interested in the industry. There’s a huge trade show in New York every year called Suppliers Day, and NextGen pays for certain members to come so they can meet different chemists and suppliers. They also help students participate in the Future Chemist Workshop, an educational workshop where students get to come in and formulate for a day.

“I’m very involved with the SCC—I used to be a co-chair of the NextGen chapter—and it’s something that’s very important to me. Because I didn’t go to the one school that has an undergrad cosmetic science program, and I initially didn’t live on either of the coasts, it was hard for me to break into the industry. I want to make it easier for others.”

—As told to Ama Kwarteng

I hate to state the obvious, but there are so many skincare products. And they are all calling out to you from inside your phone. It’s overwhelming—open any social media app and you’ll find them: in-feed posts, stories, and the ads that appear in-between. You don’t even have to follow influencers to see them; it feels like everyone, from your favorite celebrity to your former coworker, is posting about a new must-have product. And that “it” product of the moment isn’t in the spotlight for long, either. What used to be a monthly discovery is now a weekly, sometimes even daily, one, and with new brands launching all the time, the options keep multiplying.

So, naturally, you buy. And you add, and you layer. Your skincare routine grows so elaborate that it lowkey feels like a part-time job. And honestly? It’s actually pretty fun, trying new things. But even after investing so much time and money into a routine, you might come to realize that your skin still isn’t where you want it to be.

I’m going to hold your hand while I say this: Your routine might actually be working against you. I know, it’s terrible news. But using too many active ingredients can weaken your skin barrier, causing irritation, redness, flaking, and inflammation. The other thing? It takes time to see real results from a product. Like, months. Constantly swapping out and testing a new serum every time something goes viral resets the clock, so you’re never really giving anything a chance to work.

Back to the Basics

Okay, so what should you do? Hit reset. There are very few hard rules in skincare—it’s all so individual—but, in general, you should be cleansing, moisturizing, and applying sunscreen every day. This is the foundation of your routine.

Gentle Cleanser: Wash your face and clear out any oil, dirt, and grime before applying any products on top.

Moisturizer: Not only does a moisturizer infuse your skin with hydration, but it also keeps your skin barrier—a.k.a. the outermost layer of your face—strong and healthy.

Sunscreen: Apply a layer of sunscreen every single day. (Yes, even when it’s cold or cloudy outside.) Make sure it’s at least SPF 30.

If that works fine for you, great! You don’t need anything else. But if you have a specific skin concern you want to focus on, you want to introduce new products into your routine slowly, giving your skin a chance to get used to the active ingredient before adding another one into the mix.

Before You Add a Product to Your Cart…

…ask yourself a few questions:

What’s my skin type, really? Oily, dry, combination, normal, or sensitive. Knowing your skin type is important because it can help determine the kinds of products you should use. For example, you might opt for a lightweight moisturizer if you have oily skin, but if you have dry skin, you might want a richer formula.

What’s my main skin concern? Dark spots, breakouts, uneven texture, fine lines—get specific. Each concern requires targeted ingredients. For example, niacinamide is great for evening out skin tone and texture, while retinol and peptides work well for anti-aging. Once you know what you want to treat, you can focus on finding products with those active ingredients.

Think of your skincare routine as a sports team—each product has a role to play. Aim for a routine that is targeted, concise, and includes ingredients that play well together.

Patience is a Virtue

So how long until you actually notice a difference? Well, it depends. “You can see very quick results with a lot of humectants as they can quickly draw water to your skin to plump it out,” explains Becca Perry, cosmetic chemist and Dieux Skin’s senior innovation manager. “Actives like peptides, retinoids, and dark spot hard hitters—think kojic acid or alpha arbutin—take at least eight weeks on average to see results.”

Basically, it can take two to three months, minimum, to see a real change in your skin, so give products time to work. When you’re constantly rotating products or piling on too many actives, you’re not letting the ingredient do its job, and you’re not letting your skin figure out how to respond to it.

Listen to Your Skin

Your skin isn't static; it shifts with your hormones, the seasons, and your stress levels, just to name a few factors. A routine that worked perfectly in winter might not cut it come summer, and that's completely normal. Skin changes, and your routine should be able to adapt with it. The most useful habit you can build is simply checking in with your skin regularly and adjusting when something feels off.

What actually works for your skin is simpler and a lot less glamorous than social media would make it seem: a targeted routine, consistent habits, and a lot of patience. Give your routine a few months, and you’ll have a much better sense of what’s working, what isn’t, and whether it’s time to tweak things or loop in a derm.

—Ama Kwarteng

Maybe it’s just my corner of the internet, but as Dean Stattmann put it, we’re barreling towards a “Hot Peptide Summer.”

And I hate it.

As a skincare founder, I’ve discussed peptides for years with little interest from friends. Now, my group chats are buzzing—not about moisturizers, but peptide injections, which surprised me.

A quick primer on peptides in skincare: peptides are short chains of amino acids and can do a whole host of things when it comes to your routine. First introduced commercially in the ‘90s, ingredients like copper peptides and the famed Matrixyl have been used topically in skincare for decades. Some topical peptides can signal the skin to do different things, such as supporting collagen, while others are carrier peptides that deliver ingredients more efficiently. Some peptides help with dark spots or basic barrier function. It all depends on which peptide is being used; not all perform the same functions or are suitable for every application. While there is a lot of potential in topical skincare, the current trend is about self-injecting unregulated peptide liquids—something very different from using them in serums or creams.

Disclosure: My skincare brand Dieux uses peptides in our (award-winning) moisturizers Instant Angel and Air Angel, our eye serum Auracle, and our 3-in-1 serum Deliverance.

You see, with skincare, the biggest risk you’re taking with most commercial brands is that they don’t work. But when you inject peptides? The stakes change fast. There are numerous reports that these injections have “unidentified chemicals,” but on top of that? Even the ingredients that you “want” in your shot may be wildly dangerous. Potential consequences include allergic reactions, accelerating cancer, muscle paralysis, scarring, sepsis… the list goes on.

As a reminder, last year in Vegas, two women were injected by a longevity practitioner on stage with peptides. They were rushed to the hospital.

Before we dive into scary stuff, I want to be clear: I’m not talking about FDA-approved injectable peptides like insulin and GLP-1s. These are incredible, life-saving medications that should be taken under a doctor’s supervision. There is a massive difference between medical peptides such as C-peptide (insulin), which are prescribed and regulated, and other peptides currently trending, like so-called “Barbie peptides,” that are being injected or snorted, without oversight, in order to make yourself tan.

It’s important to note that many trending peptides currently on the market, often used without medical supervision, have been reviewed by the FDA. While the Walter White of the wellness world, RFK Jr., insists there were no reviews or safety signals that worried the FDA, he is, per usual, wrong. The peptides in question were not “pulled illegally”; they were withdrawn due to little redeeming data and safety issues. This distinction is especially important when differentiating between prescription peptides and those being used recreationally. A ProPublica piece reported that “the agency’s 2023 decision to ban certain peptides was supported by numerous documented safety concerns…FDA regulations also require the agency to assess both safety and effectiveness before approving a substance for compounding.”

In sum, experts at the FDA went on record stating that these peptides were banned due to the danger they posed. While I understand people’s ire with the FDA—it’s hard to forgive an agency that told millions of people opioids were safe—I trust the FDA far more than unregulated corporations. Especially “longevity wellness clinics” that charge obscene rates for injections that have thin, and at times, dangerous data.

Subscribe now

So, on that note, let’s rank peptides from worst to most likely to kill you:

Epitalon

This is an “anti-aging” and “regenerative” peptide, but there isn’t much data to back up these claims (though its Russian origins are often touted in wellness articles). Considering practices like sleeping, eating well, and eating antioxidants are also “regenerative,” you can skip this peptide that was flagged by Health Canada because there’s a high risk of contaminants, which can be extremely dangerous when you inject it. Put it this way: mercury is dangerous on your skin; it’s infinitely worse when you inject it into your body.

GHK-Cu a.k.a. Copper Peptides

I was surprised to see one of my favorite skincare ingredients in the injectable category. The FDA restricts injectable GHK-Cu for good reason. Apparently, the peptide can aggregate or degrade, posing risks of severe immune reactions or toxicity when injected. When it comes to this ingredient, applying it to your face works just fine.

Barbie Peptide a.k.a. Melanotan

This is a peptide that claims to help you get “tan” skin and “increase your sexual libido.” Unlike the other peptides on this list, not only can you inject it, but snorting it is also a “mode of delivery.” It’s also capable of giving you skin cancer. It’s funny to me that the wellness influencers who peddle this are also the same people extolling the benefits of going “all natural.” The most “organic” option is to just stay pale. Embrace the pallor, invest in some great UPF and sunscreen, and call it a day.

Wolverine Peptide a.k.a. BPC-157

This one has a fun name associated with a cartoon and claims to help with muscle repair, neuroprotection, and gut health. It’s usually injected, which… y’all… we are aware that injecting things is very dangerous? Your skin is a barrier; shooting stuff into your body should only be done by your doctor, not by someone raking in thousands of dollars selling you longevity programs. The risks on this one are nausea, vomiting, and helping your tumors “wolf out,” a.k.a. grow rapidly. Listen to Hugh Jackman, our patron saint of vaccines, on which jabs to get.

CJC-1295

There isn’t a catchy name to go alongside this peptide that purports to mess with your hormones. It’s funny, lots of the illegal sites that sell this peptide talk a big game on “naturally stimulating hormone growth,” which is the literal definition of hormone disruption, but … hey… you’re swole now! The claims are around muscle strength, improved sleep, and cognition. This peptide carries quite a few risks, including a negative immune reaction and cardiovascular concerns like transient hypotension.

While peptides are powerful (hi, GLP-1s!), you need research, human trials, and vetting to back up the claims. We aren’t there yet. At all. The peptides being hyped by supplement companies may work, but with the information we have now, they don’t live up to the hype. Considering the risks are illness and death, I can’t say I recommend it. A reminder: the only way to fix corporate greed is to regulate industries. Deregulating an entire industry, sadly, is how we guarantee another public health crisis. I can’t believe I’m typing this, but please, please, please don’t inject yourself with things you buy on the internet and be wary of doctors peddling miracle cures that might grow your muscles, alongside tumors.

Now that I’ve ranted sufficiently about peptides (for now), here are some things I’ve enjoyed over the last month:

Favorite Read

Naomi Klein’s Doppelganger has me twisted in the best possible shapes. As a creator on the internet, I’m all too familiar with the “mirror” world that spawns so many conspiracy theories which distort reality. A reminder: one of the reasons I started Dieux was that I watched family members get radicalized by the beauty industry selling “non-toxic” skincare. I highly recommend this book to every American citizen; it has given me even more reason to rail against AI.

Do I Have a Thing for Pope Leo?

Speaking of railing against AI, Pope Leo has issued an encyclical warning world leaders to put humanity, not robots, first. Take me to church, Leo!

First Moo Dang, Now Bumpy

I have a complicated relationship with hippos. On the one hand, they’re adorable; on the other, they’re the animal most likely to kill me. I can think of worse ways to go than in the hooves (paws? What do we call hippo appendages?) of Bumpy.

Subscribe now

Articles I Won’t Stop Talking About

• Longevity Science Is Overhyped. But This Research Really Could Change Humanity — I feel like a wet blanket when I talk about skincare. I’m always telling my friends, family, and team that Santa isn’t real and that ingredients and formulas are glorified water. And when it comes to longevity? There is promise; there may be some real science there, but until then, remember the actual scientists doing the work are so mortified by the “longevity” wellness and beauty space that they’re rebranding to gerosciences. Seeing “longevity” in marketing language is a red flag.

• The End of The Refugee Resettlement by Annie Hylton — I won’t say this was an enjoyable read, but it is a necessary one. It’s a reminder as to why being American is to welcome with open and eager arms the tired, the poor, and the huddled masses yearning to breathe free.

• Whenever I see Jill Lepore’s name, I stop scrolling. The prolific historian who wrote We the People recently wrote a great piece about the editing process of the Declaration of Independence and what was lost in it.

Strangers Book Club

• I was on Chelsea Fagan’s podcast this month (release date TBD), but our literary queen did the financial deep dive on Strangers by Belle Burden that I’ve been WAITING for. Highly recommend watching her YouTube videos — Part 1 and Part 2.

Say It With Me: There’s No Such Thing as a Healthy Tan

The AAD's annual sun safety survey is out, and the numbers are humbling: only 57% of Americans say they "regularly" wear sunscreen, and most still believe harmful tanning myths. This is my PSA to PLEASE wear sunscreen. I was recently accused of “profiting” off sunscreen, so another reminder: I’d make way more money if you destroyed your face with UV rays and then sold you the “solution” with my skincare.

Thanks for letting me show you my brain. See you next month!

—Charlotte Palermino

Welcome to We’re Obsessed With…a series introducing you to members of our team through the lens of their obsessions.

If you stepped into Alena King’s home, one of the first things you would notice would be her sizable collection of vinyl records. Alena, Dieux’s creative director, began collecting in earnest around a decade ago, and in the years since, she has amassed over 150 records, including albums from Duke Ellington’s All Star Road Band Volume 2 to Carmen Miranda’s Brazilian Bombshell.

There are several reasons people are drawn to vinyl: the tactile, intentional listening experience; the ritual of pulling the record from its sleeve and setting the needle down; the dynamic sound. Below, Alena shares her reasons for preferring vinyl and offers tips for anyone looking to start a collection.

On How She Built Her Record Collection

“I bought my own record player about 10 years ago. I was dating someone who was really into records and had their own collection as well; it felt like a nice way to do something together. Then, I got more into it. It was a nice way to slow down.

“I built my collection through my parents’ records. I would go home [to their house,] pick out records, and ask my dad if I could take them. My mom was a huge Joni Mitchell and Fleetwood Mac fan, and she introduced me to them. My dad was definitely more into jazz, and he introduced me to Duke Ellington and Nina Simone. That was how I formed the basis of my collection.”

Subscribe now

On Being Anti-Shuffle

“I’m a person who loves listening to albums from start to finish, whether it’s an actual record or on Apple Music. Playlists can be hard for me; it’s hard for me to jump from mood to mood. I like having to commit to an album, and I feel like I understand the story, or the intention, behind the album even more. It creates this memory in my mind of how the songs string together, which I really like.”

On Experiencing Music With Other People

“I use my record player the most when I have people over. I’ll tell people to go and pick a record—I like seeing what they choose from my collection, and I love experiencing music with other people. Most of the time I’m in silence, whether I’m at home, on the subway, or in my car. Occasionally, I’ll listen to music but more often than not, I’m in silence with my own thoughts.

“I also love going to record stores with other people and having them choose a record for you. Every time my girlfriend and I are in a record store together, I’ll be like, ‘You’ll pick one for me, and I’ll pick one for you.’ I think, sometimes, you just wouldn’t pick out the album that someone else would for you.”

On The First Record She Bought

“The first record I got on my own was Back to Black by Amy Winehouse. I think she’s one of the best artists of all time. It was through that album that I really discovered her. But I would say that Frank is my more preferred Amy Winehouse album. It just feels less for someone else. I feel like she made it for herself.”

Alena’s Advice for Building Out Your Vinyl Collection

Buy From Your Local Record Store

“I don’t buy records online; I really like buying records in person. I feel like that’s the best way to do it. I have a local record store, it’s called Record Shop. I know the owner, and he has a really great curation of records. I trust his taste a lot. Also, because I’ve been going there for so long, I can go in and say, ‘Hey, Benny, what should I listen to? Give me something that you think I would like.’ More often than not, he’s right. It’s a great place to go and spend 10 minutes or an hour.”

Go Through the $5 Bin

“I think being open to new music is really important. Sometimes, I’ll go buy records straight off vibes. I love buying $5 records, and I think it’s the best way to discover new things—it’s so cheap. If I see an album that looks like it could be interesting, I’ll take it home. I just bought Born in the City of Tanta, which is an Egyptian folklore record. I thought, ‘Oh, that feels like something that could be interesting,’ so I went ahead and bought it.”

Always Read the Album Copy

“I always take time to look at the inserts and photos, and read all of the copy on the cover, and I feel like there’s always so much cool information that you’d never get with a music streaming app. It brings a new world to the entire experience.”

Create a Ritual Around Listening

“If I’m waking up with [my daughter] Dom, I don’t want it to feel too chaotic of a morning, so I’ll pick a record and try to mellow us out. The last record I played in the morning was Stormy Blues, a Billie Holiday album. It’s a calm yet upbeat album.

“I’m a big fan of Joni Mitchell’s Court and Spark. It’s a great album—we listen to that a lot in the morning. Sometimes I do a Duke Ellington or Nina Simone album. If I want more of an upbeat morning, I’ll do a Cat Stevens or Fleetwood Mac.

“Having a routine or time of day when you listen to your records is nice. It makes it feel that much more intentional.”

Some people have religion; others have Yuka. The app has a devoted following who use it to shepherd them through the dizzying world of consumer packaged goods. For them, the color-coded system helps them determine which products are good, and which are committing the cardinal sin of being “dirty.”

The Yuka app launched in 2017 in France. It markets itself as a tool to help people understand what’s in their food and beauty products. Today, it has over 55 million users across 12 countries. According to their website, the United States is their fastest growing market, with around 600,000 new users joining the platform every month.

On the surface, Yuka is straightforward. After scanning a product’s barcode, the app gives the product a score out of 100—a zero score indicates the presence of several “harmful” ingredients and a 100 suggests there are no “high-risk” ingredients in the formula—and a corresponding color score: green (risk-free), yellow (limited risk), orange (moderate risk), and red (high-risk).

The app’s popularity makes sense. People want transparency, they want to make informed choices about the products they’re buying. And, because science isn’t black and white, it’s comforting to get simplistic “yes no” answers. But in reality, when it comes to toxicology and product formulations, things aren’t as simple as Yuka’s traffic-light system makes it out to be. “Its approach is really incomplete, and doesn’t tell the full story about a product,” says toxicologist Kwaku Agyeman.

The truth is Yuka, and other similar health apps, don’t do a great job at helping people make “safer” choices when it comes to their beauty products. Here’s why.

Subscribe now

No Nuance = No Accuracy, Which = Not Useful

How can you say an ingredient is harmful when you don’t know how much is being used? I think we can all agree a thimble of wine is different than two bottles, but the Yuka app treats both scenarios as equally dangerous. This is how the Yuka app works, it rates beauty products based solely on their ingredient list. This creates a flawed scoring system. It doesn’t take into consideration how a product was formulated, or how a product is supposed to be used, all incredibly important context. Per our previous example, rubbing a thimble of wine onto your face has a different safety profile than downing two bottles. Again, the Yuka app treats that scenario as the same. If you think it sounds silly, that’s because it is. The app makes perfectly safe, well-formulated products seem harmful, all because they don’t have enough information.

An ingredient’s ability to cause harm depends on how much you’re exposed to and for how long. In toxicology, there’s hazard and there’s risk. Hazard describes what could happen under the worst case scenario, or at extremely high doses. Risk is different; it describes the likelihood that harm will occur under real world conditions.

Take sharks as an example. “A shark is certainly a hazard, but if I’m standing on a beach and I see a shark out in the water, my risk of being attacked is very low,” explains cosmetic chemist Kelly Dobos. “If I’m swimming next to a shark, my risk is very high. Sometimes the European Union might take a strictly hazard-based approach: the shark is dangerous, we’re banning all sharks.”

Yuka claims that they’re assessing risk, but it’s more likely that they’re taking a hazard-based approach. A true risk assessment takes so many factors into account: the percentage of the ingredient, how often a product is applied, how long it remains on the skin, how much is absorbed, and which exposure routes are relevant—like skin contact, incidental ingestion, or inhalation—during normal use. And these assessments take into account the fact that you might be exposed to this ingredient across several beauty products.

Yuka also references studies that aren’t relevant to how beauty products are actually used. “If you look at the toxicity studies they’re citing, they are feeding things to animals, and that doesn’t correlate at all with putting a much lower concentration on your skin,” says cosmetic chemist Julian Sass. “We’re not rats. You’re not being fed this [ingredient] for two weeks non-stop at one percent of your body weight.”

“If you’re referencing a study where they injected these ingredients into rats, that’s obviously not indicative of how we as humans would normally consume these types of products,” adds developmental chemist Amanda Lam.

It Relies on Fear-Based Marketing

The Yuka app would have you believe that there is potential danger lurking inside every serum; if you aren’t vigilant enough, you might end up hurt. It requires a constant surveillance that isn’t just exhausting, but it’s unnecessary.

Contrary to popular belief, skincare is regulated in the US. “The rules for the United States FDA have always said that cosmetic products need to be proven to be safe before they’re placed on the market,” explains Dobos. “That has been in the rules since the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938.” And thanks to the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act (MoCRA), which was passed in 2022, beauty products face stricter federal oversight to help ensure their safety. “Now companies have to register their formulas with the FDA. They also have to register their facilities with the FDA,” adds Dobos.

So much rigorous testing goes into launching a product—there’s stability, microbial, and clinical safety testing, just to name a few examples. “You never see someone just develop a product and send it off,” says Lam. That doesn’t mean that mistakes don’t happen or that things don’t slip through the cracks, but the idea that brands are knowingly formulating products with harmful ingredients just doesn’t make sense. As a beauty brand, you want your customer to come back and keep buying products—why would you intentionally try to poison them?

“It’s just making you more stressed about things you don’t need to be stressed about,” shares Sass. “There are so many regulations in place already. The idea that you need this extra nonprofit organization saying, ‘We’re the ones who are actually looking out for you, the government won’t do it,’ is concerning.”

Not only are there regulations in place, but our skin is a strong barrier, protecting us from the outside world. “Our skin is extremely resilient. It is not a sponge that is soaking the product up,” says Lam. “It is actually quite difficult to get a formula to really sink into your skin. It can handle a lot because that’s what it’s supposed to do. As long as you’re not injecting yourself with questionable items and removing the skin’s protection, we’re really not absorbing as much toxic material as a lot of people think.”

It Demonizes Safe Ingredients

Yuka also penalizes brands for using ingredients that have been proven to be safe and effective. Like, phenoxyethanol. The preservative has been repeatedly and extensively evaluated and is considered safe for use in cosmetics at concentrations up to one percent by several regulatory bodies, but the Yuka app marks the ingredient a “moderate risk.”

Demonizing these ingredients creates a vacuum and into that vacuum comes a slew of other, “cleaner” ingredients that have been less extensively studied. “Lack of data does not mean it’s safe,” explains Agyeman. People might think they’re picking safer options, but they may actually be signing up for more unknowns. Take this sunscreen that got recalled for mold. Guess its Yuka app score. (It was a perfect 100 despite being removed from shelves for being dangerous.)

Also, any ingredient can be found to be dangerous: drink enough of anything and you probably can die from it. Yes, that includes water. This means that no ingredient is safe and brands will continue to reformulate if they follow the advice of these apps.

Subscribe now

Even Toxicologists Don’t Like It

Another problem with Yuka’s rating system? It doesn’t take a weight of evidence based approach, says Agyeman. A weight of evidence approach in toxicology is like being a detective who gathers many different clues before reaching a verdict. “Instead of relying on just one study, scientists pull evidence from all kinds of places—lab experiments on cells, animal studies, real-world observations of people, comparisons with similar chemicals—and weigh it all together,” explains Agyeman. Some clues carry more weight than others depending on how well a study was designed, but the big idea is this: when many different types of evidence point in the same direction, confidence in that conclusion grows. The Yuka app throws that out the window, ignoring scientific consensus on the risk level of so many ingredients.

Yes, Dieux Has Been a Victim of the Yuka App

If you’re wondering why we are salty, it’s because Dieux has been the target of Yuka’s misinformation. One ingredient we use in our formulas, phenoxyethanol, is listed as a “moderate risk,” and we have received panicked comments about why we would use such a dangerous ingredient. But the fact of the matter is what toxicologists, chemists, and many in the industry know: Phenoxyethanol is safe, especially at the percentage we use (under 0.4%).

Reliable Sources

So, where’s a curious beauty consumer to go if they want more ingredient intel?

There’s the Cosmetic Ingredient Review, where you can find comprehensive toxicology reports on cosmetic ingredients. It’s on the more technical side; that’s because they look at relevant exposure rather than just flagging an ingredient as harmful without looking at the context around it. There’s also INCIDecoder, which Lam recommends. It breaks down cosmetic ingredients in consumer-friendly language.

People want more transparency and accountability in beauty, and that’s important to recognize. But it’s also important to remember that formulations are complex and can’t be distilled down to a score. What really determines if a product is safe and effective is how it’s formulated, ingredient quality, and rigorous testing. There’s no app that can honestly claim to replace evidence-based assessments by toxicologists or the regulators overseeing cosmetic safety, so go ahead and delete it. It’s taking up storage space, anyway.

—Ama Kwarteng

On Monday May 4th, we hosted a talk at the Marlton Hotel between Dieux co-founder Charlotte Palermino and author Caro Claire Burke about Burke’s debut novel Yesteryear. In the book, Natalie, a trad wife influencer, wakes up one day and finds herself trapped in 1855. The conversation was wide-ranging—Charlotte and Caro discussed surveillance culture, religion, the performance of femininity, and more.

The event sold out in three minutes, so we wanted to share their conversation with anyone who couldn’t be there.

Charlotte Palermino: Caro, thank you for being here. Yesteryear is now a New York Times bestseller. You are the co-host of my favorite podcast, Diabolical Lies, and you’re even revered in the trad wife subreddit.

You are truly a Renaissance woman, and I’m so excited to talk to you about a book that has lit up every single group chat that I have. So I did structure these questions to not have spoilers, but I apologize if I get excited and let something slip.

I want to start with the origins of the book because, as we all know, especially people who fight for science in beauty, beauty can be a pipeline to some interesting thoughts. I would love for you to talk a little bit about how TikTok and social media algorithms informed the book.

Caro Claire Burke: I downloaded TikTok in the winter of 2024, and it was to distract myself—I wasn’t writing at the time. That’s how I found trad wives. I was served these aesthetic videos, the Get Ready With Me [videos.] I don’t know who’s on TikTok, but it’s a different beast than any other social media platform.

CP: So before your algorithm was even formed, you were getting trad wife content.

CCB: Immediately. I’ve also heard from people who read Yesteryear then got served trad wife content, which is pretty funny.

CP: Aside from TikTok, I’m assuming trad wife research [for the novel] included some documentaries, things like that. Where did you actually get the historical research from?

CCB: Well, a lot of this novel was about taking historical information about America and deciding when to render it correctly and when to use it incorrectly. So there are things that are factually correct, and there are things that are factually incorrect, and that is intentional.

A lot of this book is about misinformation. I studied homesteading; I studied fundamentalist power dynamics and what it’s like to be in a high control religious group. I also went deep on influencer bootcamps where you pay $5,000, $10,000, $15,000 [to attend.]

CP: Did you take a course?

CCB: I will not comment, but if I didn’t sell the book, I would’ve been in the hole. So that was interesting to me as well. A lot of influencers come from evangelical backgrounds, Mormon backgrounds, really intense Christian backgrounds that have you prioritize beauty and aesthetics. You’re taught to optimize for femininity at such an early age that the pipeline to becoming an influencer is very easy, and it’s work you can do from home.

Subscribe now

CP: Exactly. And when you think about Christianity, too, it’s always about conversion, which I think is really interesting.

Now that we’re talking about these high control religions, I would love for you to explain who this book is for.

CCB: So there’s this term that people who grew up in a high control group talk about quite a bit in the world of growing up in a high control group, and it’s scrupulosity. It’s when you’ve ingrained surveillance culture so much that you learn to surveil yourself. Even if you’re alone in a room, you’re censoring yourself and serving as both the performance and the surveillance of your own autonomy, which is a deeply claustrophobic feeling that is very, very difficult to deconstruct, even after you leave the community.

It’s a relationship that is so deeply connected to your self-esteem. It’s very hard to pull apart. I grew up Catholic, but I view myself as secular, and I didn’t know anything about this until I started researching and listening to women who go through this.

CP: I grew up very Catholic, and I went to a Catholic school [where there were] ‘God is watching you’ signs everywhere—in every bathroom stall, over every locker. Do you also feel like we’re in an era of self surveillance with social media?

CCB: Yeah. Natalie does not have a specific Christianity in the book, and that was very intentional. It was important to me that [the story] was not about one set of doctrine. It is about a type of surveillance that I think has become very American.

I also think we’re living through a time period where Christianity has become so bastardized by people in power. Catholicism looks totally different to me now than when I was growing up. Evangelicalism has changed radically. So I really wanted to have a character whose religion was engaging in this weird dance with social media at all times. I think social media is now the place where we are all performing and surveilling one another at all times. When we do this, we are doing the work for other institutions and politicians by constantly patrolling and censoring one another in a way that I don’t think we fully understand. I do it all the time, and I have to catch myself, and I’ve been thinking about it for years. It’s a really interesting dance that we’re participating in.

CP: You have to catch your own censorship all the time. I read Technofeudalism, and it was so important for me in understanding that I am not only helping billionaires make money, which is one of my main gripes with AI, but that I’m also contributing to these surveillance systems.

But I’m curious because it is a uniquely American problem. But this book is sold in 30 countries. What is the universal appeal? Are there trad wives everywhere? Is this an American export?

CCB: I think there are themes of femininity, womanhood, power, and subservience that are true in other countries, too, and aren’t exclusively American.

CP: I want to pivot to beauty because I noticed that a lot of the beauty scenes [in the novel] revolve around performing for a particular person. I’d love to understand why it was really important to have these scenes depicting an aggressive performance of beauty, almost like Cassie in ‘Euphoria’ — ‘I’ve never been happier.’

CCB: Natalie has, in many ways, very masculine characteristics, or at least that’s something she sees in herself. So I don’t think her relationship to beauty is one of self-identification. It’s not like she finds a lipstick that makes her feel like herself. I think that she associates it with control. Something I thought about a lot with Natalie is that she’s really not a sensory person. The descriptions of motherhood in Yesteryear are not sensory. It’s not about the body. It’s not about leaking fluids or connection or disconnection. She’s not in her body at all, and she’s very much in her head. Beauty is just something she can optimize.

Beauty is something that we can use to communicate to other people that we’re opting into a certain culture. [Natalie’s] mom educates her in not only getting used to performing for people, but even if there’s no one watching, just imagine there’s an audience, so that way you’re always on. It’s also a way of signaling that she consents to this idea of femininity. I consent to the idea of behaving in a certain way even inside of my house. I think that she learns to do that through makeup.

Subscribe now

Rena is very much the person that [Natalie] projects all of her insecurities onto. She wants Rena to believe her performance the most. Same with Shannon later on. She wants certain women to believe her act because she knows that they don’t. These are the toughest critics, and I think they’re the ones that she wants to win over, and they’re the ones that she feels the most seen by.

CP: Why is she always performing for women?

CCB: I think women are more often than not performing for one another. I don’t think it’s that simple—there are a lot of expectations that men put upon us, but when I think about my own life, the moments when I have felt most beautiful or when I have felt the ugliest have been in relation to how other women see me.

CP: So on performance, there’s an interaction where Natalie meets a follower at a grocery store. It doesn’t go the way that she wants it to, and I won’t give any spoilers, but it was a really great scene. Why was it important to have that moment in the book, something that anyone who’s had a modicum of fame on the Internet has experienced.

CCB: I’ve experienced just a fraction of that, and it always kind of destabilizes me honestly, when someone recognizes me and I’m like, ‘Oh, I have to be what you want.’ For Natalie, who does not have a sense of self or self conception, I knew that there would be moments where the idea she had of herself had to come into conflict with reality. So much of this book is about the world she lives in and the world she wants to strive to enter, so those two worlds had to collide.

CP: In the parts of the book that take place in the 1800s, there are no mirrors, there are no reflections. Is that just because of the time period or was there a deeper meaning behind that decision?

CCB: I would say both. I thought a lot. I was actually on a podcast the other day, and they were talking about how in the 1800s and 1900s, people were worried about their appearance, but you weren’t seeing yourself so clearly all the time. You were looking at your reflection in a puddle or in a warped piece of glass. The fact that we now have such pixelated reflections of ourselves is maddening. With Natalie, I had the idea of what it would feel like for her to not have access to be able to constantly check in on what she looks like to other people.

CP: I want to talk about the role of ‘the Angry Woman,’ because I feel like that was its own character. Natalie is acidic, in terms of [her] character. I would love to understand the inspiration behind that.

CCB: I think obviously every character in this book comes from me. The relationship between Natalie and her followers was me exploring both ends of that dynamic. I have been the influencer, but I also am very much and very frequently the angry woman.

It is such an obvious thing that if you don’t support an influencer, an account, or a company, you don’t buy their wares, which is to say you don’t comment on their posts, you don’t spend your time on their feed. You don’t give your money or time, your more valuable currency, and that will directly impact their bottom line. But instead, we try to hold people accountable and we think that it’s productive or that you are achieving some kind of redemption when in reality it’s just a symbiotic relationship.

I think Natalie clocks that very quickly, and she obsesses over [her followers] as much as they obsess over her. They are like her Greek chorus in that way, because they matter to her. If they were to go away, she would be screwed. And she often does stuff to lure them in, but she also wants them to love her. There’s a tug and pull where you can’t really ever win. She also doesn’t know them.

CP: Because I’m somebody who’s very loud on the Internet, I always get feedback loops. How did Natalie’s social media feedback loop shape her character and her arc?

CCB: I think there are a few feedback loops for her. When she’s growing her account, she’s trying to figure out why no one cares about her and why there is no engagement. And she finds out getting a response, even if it’s anger, is the route for growth. In that sense, the feedback loop is exclusively anger. She just wants to do something that causes people to argue.

CP: I really loved how principled Natalie was, but I also felt like that is actually why she could never change. I was wondering if you could tell us a little bit about Natalie’s principles and how that shaped her character in the book.

CCB: I think Natalie is very threatened by anyone who starts again. That is something, as soon as someone makes a decision that requires them to radically change their lives, she looks at it as pathetic. How could you change your life?

We have principles that define how we view the world and that help us understand ourselves. ‘This is what matters to me.’ Natalie’s principles are, I think she would view them as morally righteous, but I think they’re more so a very cold and emotionless framework for how to view the world that she clings to very desperately. I don’t think they provide her comfort so much as they make her feel increasingly desperate because they define a type of woman who doesn’t exist. They define a type of world that isn’t real, and they make her feel like she’s constantly failing.

She’s very fixated on how other women are hypocritical. And I think that the things we see in other people often reflect what we’re insecure about ourselves. And that’s true of Natalie and her relationship to ethics, morals, and how you move through the world.

CP: I did want to ask this question about the children. To me, the children were the heroes [of the story.] Why them [and not someone else]?

CCB: When I was writing this book, I knew, and this is not a spoiler, I knew that Natalie was not going to be someone who was going to undergo massive growth. I think that is clear. I think we read books [where] characters face a problem either external or internal, then overcome that problem and hopefully become better people at the end of that book. That is not the ride we go on with Yesteryear.

I spent a lot of time thinking about generational trauma and generational healing. With these ideologies, some people do change. But I think when you talk about these big religious and political principles, they more often gradually change over many generations. It’s very hard to see a ton of change in a single generation. The more I thought about that, the more I became really excited about the idea of what the children could represent and how they could kind of exist in opposition to Natalie. So much of this book is in her head, and there has to be a time where you can have the children and you can have them seeing their mother because that is the final boss. That’s the final audience for her. And that’s her greatest test.

Subscribe now

—This conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

Books That Helped Me Avoid Doomscrolling

Empire of AI by Karen Hao

Whenever I start a book that depresses me, I get sleepy. I think it's a defense mechanism, the same way I fall asleep in cars to protect myself from motion sickness. Empire of AI has repeatedly knocked me out cold. It's a tough, haunting read, and a necessary reminder of who's clamoring for more and more power in this country. Hao surfaces this quote from a 2013 Sam Altman blog post that I haven't been able to shake:

"Successful people create companies. More successful people create countries. The most successful people create religions."

(He heard it from Qi Lu. The original source is unknown.)

As a founder whose brand is literally called Dieux—French for “gods”—I have opinions. Mainly: don’t give companies blind faith. They’re made up of flesh-and-blood humans—not worthy of worship, but in need of regulation.

Subscribe now

Yesteryear by Caro Claire Burke and Strangers by Belle Burden

These two books, which I devoured back-to-back, are both about women upholding patriarchal systems in wildly different ways. Yesteryear is a trippy novel about a tradwife who finds herself actually living on the homestead. Not in a quaint content way, in the “I’m stuck in the 1800s” way, and she’ll do anything to get out. Strangers, conversely, is a modern memoir about why you really, really need an airtight prenup if you’re doing the important, unpaid work of being a mother. I won’t spoil either, but both made me think about gender roles, beauty, and how we’re perceived, whether through social media or through vulnerable essays about your husband leaving. The throughline: the person who’s going to save you isn’t a prince. It’s the person staring back at you in the mirror every morning.

Cannot recommend them enough. I’m hosting an author talk with the immensely talented Caro Claire Burke—we sold out in 5 minutes—which makes me think we need to start a book club.

The Problem With Plastic by Judith Enck and Adam Mahoney

You may not know this, but plastic is projected to skyrocket in price over the next few months, which doesn’t bode well for a lot of beauty brands. This book is a sobering reminder that we could live in a better world if we had a government willing to fight for it. I’d always assumed pollution and plastic consumption were uniquely American problems due to our culture. Turns out, we just skipped the regulations Europe enacted decades ago. This, in turn, gave corporations carte blanche to flood our market and pollute our land with goods that would be taxed to hell elsewhere. I did spot some misinformation around microplastics (we work with PhD toxicologist Kwaku Agyekum on exactly this), so we put together an explainer on what you should actually be scared of.

Careless People by Sarah Wynn-Williams

Another memoir, this time from a policy expert who worked directly with Facebook’s upper ranks. A must-read for anyone on Meta’s platforms—and speaking as someone who spent two years in tech, her experience mirrored mine to a tee. If you’ve ever wondered why I am the way I am about regulating tech, this book will explain it.

Articles and Podcasts I Won’t Stop Talking About

• I didn’t know I needed a New Yorker interview with Mick Herron, but this was as delightful as binging a few episodes of Slow Horses, his wildly popular TV adaptation about endearing, inept spies. I’ve been thinking a lot about how fear of failure stops people from trying, and I didn’t know Herron’s story. After decades as a copy editor at an employment law research firm, Herron finally broke through as a novelist. "People say write what you know," he said. "So I wrote about people who are failures." Takeaway: be a failure, you might just do something worthwhile.

• I'm trying to "positive sandwich" this newsletter—flails arms—but we have to talk about the war America started in Iran, which is giving companies yet another excuse to raise prices. I find it rich that men like Jeff Bezos did nothing to stop this president from being elected, donated to his inaugural fund, and are now passing the cost of this horrific war on to their partners. With that being said, Dieux will not be raising prices right now. We'll have an exciting update on that front in a few weeks.

• I despise AI influencers, but I did find it grimly fascinating that grifters found this demographic particularly easy to target with gender stereotypes. First AI influencers were impersonating doctors, now they're impersonating Trump supporters. It's the same playbook as Russian troll interference in 2016. Check your sources. And if you see something that enrages you, just know you can scroll on.

• Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show had a ton of banger episodes this month. There was one with Heather Cox Richardson—one of my favorite historians and the woman behind one of Substack's most successful newsletters—on April 1st; another one with Ben McKenzie—yes, our OC king, who is also apparently now an economist owning the crypto bros—on April 15th (I’m personally grateful for his confirmation that crypto operates like a pyramid scheme, and for teaching me "Greater Fool Theory"); and a genuinely lucid conversation about AI on April 22nd. It was filled sensible ideas about running this technology through the democratic process and making it actually work for people. All three are worth your time.

Planet Earth, You. Are. A. Crew.

One thing I can't stop thinking about is the Artemis II mission. There is a lot of bad happening in the world right now like the Senate voting to strip Minnesota's Boundary Waters of protection from mining pollution, the EPA continuing to dismantle federal climate policy, and the list just goes on and on… but instead of spiraling, I've been self-soothing with videos of Christina Koch reminding us all that we are on the same lifeboat, floating undisturbed in the galaxy.

Watch this one first:

Then watch this one:

And while the environmental news isn’t good (don’t get me started on the Atlantic current), the work of women is being recognized. The winners of this year’s Goldman Prize—known as the “Green Nobel”—are all women, all doing incredible things for their communities. Learn more about them here.

I’m determined to end on a high note, so here are some cards we received this month from the teacher classrooms we’ve helped fund. We’re a little obsessed with education at Dieux, and we want to give classrooms every bit of support we can.

Subscribe now

Really proud of what we’re building, our team, and everything we’re bringing you in May and beyond. Thanks for letting me show you my brain.

You’re Dieux-ing great. 💙

—Charlotte Palermino

Welcome to Close Up With… a series exploring one person's relationship with beauty, how that relationship has transformed over the years, and how they experience being seen. This week, we’re talking to critic, reporter, and novelist Grace Byron. Her writing has appeared in The New Yorker, Nation, GQ, Granta, Bookforum, Vogue, and elsewhere. Herculine is her debut novel.

Subscribe now

On Her Childhood

“When I was young, I think I could tell when somebody was beautiful because of the way they were treated. Occasionally, I could be like, ‘Oh, that is a beautiful woman,’ but, honestly, I didn’t think too much about it as a kid. I was really disconnected from my body until I got older and transitioned. I wore a lot of hoodies, sweaters, and baggy clothing.”

On Discovering Her Sense of Style

“I have a complicated relationship with beauty, as I think most women do. I became more interested in it, though, once I started figuring out how I wanted to present myself to the world, in terms of style. I think it was a part of coming into my own womanhood.

“It took me a really long time to figure out what kinds of silhouettes I wanted to wear, what kinds of shoes I wanted to wear, and what I felt like my sensibility was. I would read SSENSE to see what brands people were wearing or cared about. Also, I think being in the literary world, there’s a certain uniform. You can either choose to opt into it or push against it. So, I definitely got a certain amount of turtlenecks and slacks.

“There were times where I felt like I could experiment more and wear interesting dresses for events where you don’t have to blend in, and at other times, I actually wanted to blend in and I would think of my outfits sort of like camouflage. I read Joan Didion’s packing list so many times because I wanted to know what she was wearing.

“I looked at a lot of author photos [for inspiration] like Toni Morrison’s, Joan Didion’s, and Jenny Disicki’s. I also started reading fashion writers like Judith Thurman and reading fashion coverage in The Washington Post to see what shows and brands were being talked about. I would walk around James Veloria and see what people were wearing there.

“In a similar way, I also got really fastidious about asking people what makeup brands they were wearing. I feel like I researched my way into both of these things. I would walk into Sephora and be like, ‘Okay, this is Selena’s brand and it has this sort of cachet, and this is Bobbi Brown, and it has this history.’”

On Her Approach to Makeup

“I love a uniform. I love being about to do [my makeup] and go. Mascara, blush, highlighter. Sometimes, I’ll do eyeshadow, but not always. I can’t do a smokey eye—it’s not for me and it takes too much time. My look is a little subdued and very natural. I feel like I came of age during a time where the clean girl aesthetic was really taking hold. Thank God I missed the twee maximalist era. But I do think those trends are now being reimagined in a more measured and interesting way.”

On Plastic Surgery

“I think the beauty industry is inherently exploitative, and beauty ideals are often based on white European values of what’s beautiful. The history of trans medicine is also very complicated, especially when you consider the way surgeons do FFS, female feminization surgery. What kind of face do they think is ideal? What kind of face do they think is beautiful? There will always be an implicit value judgment, and you’ll be complicit in it to some degree. It’s complicated—is it internalized transphobia to want to look ‘cis,’ or is it partly an economic thing or is it a way to not be clocked on the streets and be subjected to potential violence and surveillance?

“When you choose to get plastic surgery, you’re entering an industry which has a lot of ideas about what women ‘should’ look like. There are so many choices that you’re making and you have to balance that with the danger of moving through the world. I don’t think you can say, ‘There’s no ethical consumption under capitalism,’ and dismiss it completely. There’s a lot of things the plastic surgery industry does wrong, but I don’t think plastic surgery is inherently wrong.

“I know some people who really obsess over plastic surgery going in, and I really tried to be like, ‘I’m going to do this, I’m going to try to not overthink it, and hopefully it’ll make my life a little better.’”

On the Beauty Standards Trans Women Deal With

“There’s an expectation that you need to pass. I think people who pass are obviously treated better in society, even sometimes by other trans people, which is shaped by what our ideas of beauty are at any given time. And who gets to pass is so circumstantial and based on whether or not you have access to certain care or medicine, what state you live in, and how much money you have. Plus, the history of trans medicine has often been much kinder to white people than it has been to people of color.

There’s an intense amount of surveillance put onto trans people, especially trans women, in terms of their ability to access beauty and how they are treated by other people. There are a lot of similarities with how different marginalized women are treated in terms of the idea that you need to aspire to a certain kind of beauty. It’s important to note that everyone can experience misogyny in different ways.

“The kinds of trans women who get really famous are models. It’s very telling when you see who gets access to acting gigs or the fact that Hunter Schaefer, Hari Nef, and Laverne Cox are booked and busy. It’s very telling in terms of what trans women are told to aspire to and who to look for inspiration and that can be very limiting.”

On Her Complicated Relationship With Beauty

“It’s a roller coaster. I’m also in recovery from an eating disorder, so I also feel like I’m still grappling with that and what it means to be beautiful. Can beauty be reclaimed or should we try to abolish it? Should we just have a different relationship to beauty? Or is beauty really a value system we want to cling to? On different days, I feel very differently about all of those things.

“My friend Zefyr Lisowski has a really great poem about beauty where she describes it as something you can harness as a weapon. It’s a real double-edged sword; it’s something you can use, it’s something that’s using you. I’d like to have a much more calm and static relationship to beauty. I don’t know if it’s possible.

“Is beauty something we should aspire to? I don’t know. Whenever someone calls me beautiful, my instinct is to be like, ‘No, I’m not,’ and change the subject. It’s also not the most interesting thing, but I am always aware of it. It’s always on my mind.

“I’m also aware of the fact that when I was considered beautiful, I was treated better. That’s a complicated thing because then you’re like, I have to maintain that. I think so much of the beauty industry is not just about gaining something, but about maintaining or fighting against something.

“I think why style has felt so important to me is because wearing a really fab gown is not about your weight or appearance. When I worked in childcare a long time ago, I had a boss who said, ‘You can say to a child that you like the color they’re wearing or that you like their bracelet, but you shouldn’t say something like, your hair is so beautiful.’ There’s something to that that I feel about adults. Sometimes I’ll say somebody’s skin is really beautiful, but I try not to say something about somebody’s physical appearance. I’ll say, I love the way you accessorize that, or ‘Oh, that’s a really fab jumpsuit.’

“Style isn’t value neutral either, but I feel like it’s a little bit less of a charged thing [than beauty] for people. For me, I feel really beautiful when I’m wearing my Chanel dress that I bought myself because I published a book. Or when I’m wearing heels or feel put together in that way. Fashion can be this kind of armor; it can also be something that can sort of attract or repel people in a way that’s interesting to play with.”

Subscribe now

—As told to Ama Kwarteng