01 · Evidence context
What the rating actually records
The 1989 source lists coconut butter as the tested material. It does not justify assigning the same grade to every ester, surfactant, extract, or derivative that happens to originate from coconut.
The number is retained as a historical observation. The site does not convert it into a current clinical probability or a complete-product grade.
02 · Formulation context
Why the complete formula can differ
This checker therefore matches the reviewed name exactly and does not treat all words containing 'coco' or 'coconut' as equivalent. Finished-product concentration, vehicle, and rinse-off behavior still matter.
03 · Practical takeaway
How to use this result proportionately
Use the result to ask a narrower question about the actual labeled material. Avoid broad ingredient-family bans based on name fragments, and seek professional help for persistent inflammatory acne.
If you compare products, change one routine variable at a time and use the label from the product currently in hand.
04 · Primary source
Comedogenicity and irritancy of commonly used ingredients in skin care products
Journal of the Society of Cosmetic Chemists, 40, 321-333 · Primary rabbit-ear screening study
Ingredients were generally tested at 10% in a rabbit-ear model. The paper calls the assay extremely sensitive, reports source and vehicle effects, and says the survey is not definitive or a substitute for finished-formula and human evidence.
Open source record ↗