Post on 25-Jan-2023
1
Advertising is prolific and permeates most of our daily lives.
Billboards, magazines, commercials, and products themselves show
branding by subtly persuading people in various ways. In
particular, the anti-aging market uses taglines and visuals that
incorporate scientific imagery and concepts in order to sell
their products. This paper will address how anti-aging skin care
products are marketed, what the role is that science plays within
advertising, what the controversy is that surrounds these
products and how cultural narratives are expressed.
‘Anti-aging’ is a term that unfortunately encompasses a
multitude of viewpoints and therefore needs addressing. According
to John Vincent, there are different anti-aging groups: those who
equate old age with ill-health by ‘battling’ disease, those who
wish to control the human lifespan on a cellular level (who aim
for immortality), and those who want cosmetic interventions
(2007:941). Furthermore, Courtney Mykytyn has conducted
ethnographic research on anti-aging advocates and emphasizes that
not all support the idea of living forever and even though these
“immortalists” exist, they are not the majority (2009:211).
2
Specifically, she suggests, “…anti-aging advocates clamor most
fundamentally for a salve to the physiologically painful decline
that has become synonymous with aging…constructed as agonizing
for individuals, heartbreaking for families, and costly for
society at large” (2009:210). Leigh Turner agrees, “…there is a
profound difference between developing more effective biomedical
interventions and making humans ‘immortal’” (2004:220).
Therefore, not all anti-aging advocates want less wrinkles and
want to live forever. Some are in the field for lessening pain of
the elderly and their families who endure hardships due to aging
related diseases. For the purpose of this paper, I will be using
the term ‘anti-aging’ to describe cosmetic skin products that are
marketed to consumers, who are mainly women. Traditionally, the
demographics with anti-aging skin care products have been sold
mainly to women, but the climate is apparently changing.
Hindustan Unilever launched their Pond’s product by, “…responding
to a larger change in the core target consumers of anti-aging
products — from the middle-aged 35-40-years-old women to 20-
something girls, yes, but even men too” (Sharma 2008). Moreover,
3
“[r]ecent skin care-for-men introductions…are all going after
this demographic…which points to men's grooming as one of the
fastest-growing categories in beauty and personal care” (Strailey
2011). The anti-aging demographics tend to be geared towards the
“boomer generation” which is approximately over the age of 50
(BCC Research 2013). Companies are stretching their demographics
to reach a wider audience. Therefore, the industry is
constructing what this public “needs” in order to buy their
products. Finally, Mykytyn also points out that, “…many anti-
aging researchers argue that the consumer-directed interventions
are not really anti-aging…in that they attempt to forestall or
mitigate the effects of aging, but they do not actually intervene
directly into the process of aging itself” (2009:213). Despite
this, skin care products are marketed as ‘anti-aging’ and here
begins the controversy.
“With age, gene activity slows down, resulting in less youth proteins found on skin. Doyou know youth proteins on skin give good skin quality? Lancôme gives you the
ultimate solution: Genefique, the first ever Youth Activating Concentrate. Boost genes’activity and stimulate the production of youth proteins to continually give skin its
youthful appearance. Drop by drop, infuse your skin with life” (Beauty Gypsy2012).
4
Figure 1: Lancôme Genefique Adhttp://thebeautygypsy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/lancome_genifique.jpg
The above description is an excerpt from a Lancôme anti-
aging skin care product advertisement, seen in Figure 1. This
example is one of many that markets false claims about their
products to potential buyers. Moreover, the claims made are
controversial because of the quasi-effectiveness of the products.
Motivating factors for this include money and ageism. The
debates are typically situated between the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) and the skin care product companies. In the
Lancôme case above, they have tried to claim that their skin care
product works like drugs. The FDA warning letter (2012) said of
Lancôme’s Genefique products, “The claims on your website
indicate that these products are intended to affect the structure
or any function of the human body, rendering them drugs under the
5
Act. The marketing of these products with these claims evidencing
these intended uses violates the Act.” Lancôme then issued a
statement saying, "Lancôme is committed to complying fully with
all laws and regulatory standards" (Corbett Dooran and Glazer
2012). The outcome is resolved in the end with the FDA Close Out
Letter (2012) to Lancôme that says:
“…it appears that you have addressed the violationscontained in this Warning Letter. Future FDAassessments and regulatory activities will furtherassess the adequacy and sustainability of thesecorrections. This letter does not relieve you or yourfirm from the responsibility of taking all necessarysteps to assure sustained compliance with the FederalFood, Drug, and Cosmetic Act…”
Lancôme stopped the advertisement. At the very least, some
standards are put into place, specifically with the FDA and
advertising standards communities to try and protect the
consumer. The marketing strategies that are used by these
companies will be examined further in order to properly analyze
how those strategies contribute to the proliferation of the
issue.
Molly Edmonds (2014) explains the role of science within the
marketing of anti-aging skin care products:
6
“While the label may be full of words that sound complex andscientific, you’re likely just buying some excellentcopyediting. When the terms are put into plain language,even the priciest products offer nothing more than justmoisturizing and exfoliating. Since the terminology soundstechnical, consumers can be forgiven for thinking they’rebuying something close to medicine, but if these creamsactually did change the fundamental structure of your skintissue, they’d have to be classified as a drug”
The Lancôme advertisement in Figure 1 is one example of how
companies use scientific terminology to sell products by using
the term “genes.” Most skin care product adverts incorporate
terms from scientific fields such as biology, genetics and
technology. Barbara Duden’s theory of the “pop-gene” comes into
play as to how non-scientists interpret the use of the word in
every day life, “[t]he gene is tied to hopes and promises of a
future in which there is no sickness, no old age, you don’t have
to die…” (2009:261). Therefore, the word is transformed from its
original meaning into narratives of imaginaries. In the case of
skin care products, the gene becomes a way to “stay young” for
consumers. Catherine Waldby’s (2003) idea of “dream biology” is
important here because people take a scientific concept and make
it their own. People are transforming the meaning of one thing
7
and applying it to the wants and desires of an imagined state.
Donna Haraway suggests that, “[s]cience…is rhetoric, a series of
efforts to persuade relevant social actors that one’s
manufactured knowledge is a route to a desired form of very
objective power” (Haraway 1988). Marketing companies hold power
in this situation and use science as a means of achieving
financial gain. Olshansky et al. give their take on the validity
of anti-aging claims, “…scientists who study aging…have issued a
position statement containing this warning: no currently marketed
intervention—none—has yet been proved to slow, stop or reverse
human aging, and some can be downright dangerous… anyone
purporting to offer an anti-aging product today is either
mistaken or lying” (2002:92-93). This is shown, not just in the
Lancôme case, but also with the Nivea Company.
Nivea’s “DNAge” skin product ad claimed the following, “An
innovation in skin care, which boosts surface skin cell renewal leaving you with
noticeably firmer looking skin.” Again, Nivea uses scientific language of
“cell renewal” and DNA, and visuals of a stylized double helix
symbol to promote their anti-aging product in Figure 2.
8
Figure 2: Nivea DNAge Adhttp://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/08/26/article-1209038-062D47C6000005DC-932_468x611.jpg
A response from the Advertising Standards Agency (2009) said the
following, “…the claims appeared to suggest the changes achieved
would be permanent, when this could not be substantiated. It also
ruled there was no clear basis of evidence to make the claims.”
Turner suggests that organizations, “…market their products to
individuals eager to postpone the effects, or at least the
observable physical manifestations, of aging…the products
promoted by these groups have no credible scientific basis: there
are no proven, scientifically established ‘anti-aging’
medications” (2004:220). Moreover, he says there is a lot of
“magical thinking” on all sides of the debate (2004:220) People
9
tend to see what they want to see, typically ignoring the
evidence. Therefore, marketing a product as a potential ‘fountain
of youth’ will win over consumers if that is what they want for
themselves, despite any evidence to the contrary. Figure 3 shows
an ad for Nerium AD that says, “Accidental discovery in biotechnology leads
to age-defying breakthrough! Real Science Real Results”
Figure 3: Nerium Adhttp://www.better-health-energy.com/images/Nerium_results_300x250_fore.jpg
Another ad from Olay uses military metaphors, “Join me in the battle against aging!” in Figure 4.
10
Figure 4: Olay Total Effects Adhttp://www.extramirchi.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Kajol-anti-ageing-cream-Olay-ads-Pictures-
2.jpgMilitary metaphors are not uncommon in anti-aging marketing
campaigns. Vincent suggests that as, “…the details of much
biochemical and physiological research are not comprehensible by
lay people, it is understandable that practitioners use metaphors
when communicating with non-biologists” (2007:944). Richard
Lewontin goes on to explain, “[t]he trouble with most metaphors
in biology is that the people using them don’t know what to
import and what to leave out” (2009:279). The language is
typically used in the business community more so than the medical
community and Vincent says the, “…the most prolific use of
military metaphors is by the promoters of cosmetic interventions…
11
These components of contemporary anti-ageing science most appeal
to non-scientific audiences” (2007:957) and those military ‘war
on aging’ metaphors “…play on the fear of a loss of physical
attractiveness” (Vincent 2007:951). Therefore, consumers start to
think about overcoming their fears by “battling” the problem of
aging. Scientific terminology and military metaphors are rampant
throughout anti-aging marketing.
Situated against scientists themselves, Vincent suggests
that “…cosmetic charlatans can readily be excluded from
mainstream science as ‘quacks’…for putting forward fantasies that
are beyond the known capability of science” (2007:955). Adam
Gollner (2013) points out that there is, "…no documented validity
to any life-extension strategy, but that hasn’t deterred the
making, selling, and buying of countless longevity creams,
potions, and pills.” Also, in order for science to provide a
product that works, studies would have to be conducted over
several decades and include a placebo group as well (Weintraub
2006). Therefore, a sense of patience on both the industry and
participants in a study like that would be hard to come by. The
12
American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine (A4M) is a professional
organization, “…dedicated to the advancement of technology to
detect, prevent, and treat aging related disease and to promote
research into methods to retard and optimize the human aging
process” (2010). “A4M sponsors conferences, sells books and DVDs
about anti-aging…It also waves around research showing that the
industry pulls in $56 billion a year now -- and that number could
swell to $79 billion by 2009…” (Weintraub 2006). This makes
salient the first major actor that motivates the anti-aging
industry: money. “L’Oreal is tied with rival Procter & Gamble Co.
for leadership in the U.S. anti-aging market, which grew to $2.9
billion in 2011 from $2.7 billion in 2010, according to
Euromonitor International” (Corbett Dooran and Glazer 2012). BCC
Research projects the following numbers, “The total market for
antiaging products and services was valued at $249.3 billion in
2012. This is expected to increase to nearly $261.9 billion by
the end of 2013 and $345.8 billion in 2018…” (2013). These
numbers are staggering and shows what the consumers are willing
to pay for a chance to look and feel younger. Gollner (2013) also
13
suggests that researchers have started companies that are
intertwined with the multinational pharmaceutical industry. With
stories and numbers like these, it is no wonder that marketing
executives are distorting the truth. What counts for these
companies is the bottom line and there is no social
accountability. Even in the medical field, the anti-aging economy
is based on the idea that “aging is a disease requiring
technological intervention” (Petersen and Seear 2009:267).
Researchers propose that on a greater scale, this medicalization
of aging is driven by factors such as government support for
biotechnology, private sector investment, strong professional
networks and symbiotic relationships between scientists and
members of industry (Petersen and Seear 2009:269). In our
society, these factors coupled with large markets and big
financial returns perpetuate ideas that aging is “bad.”
Scientists are not totally exempt from the company and buyer
relationship. Gollner (2013) gives a perfect example:
…many well-regarded aging scientists demonstrate a lackof reticence when making sweeping declarations aboutending the disease of growing old…In a 2011 open
14
letter, biotech company Sierra Sciences wrote of anurgent need for investors when they lost funding duringthe recession: “It is no exaggeration to say that weare on the brink of actually curing the disease we callaging!” Actually, most rational humans would agree thatstatement is an exaggeration. However, Sierra Scienceswas unarguably on the brink of something else:bankruptcy. The letter, circulated widely on anti-agingwebsites, appealed for $200,000 a month to keep the laboperational; if no one stepped up, they wrote, it“would be a tragedy for humanity, as well as a missedopportunity to create a multi-billion dollar industry
Even though Courtney Mykytyn’s ethnography has shown that most
anti-aging advocates are for the well-being of the elderly, some
scientists are in it for the money. Not only are these particular
scientists implicated financially, but they tend to lack some of
the more tactful social communication skills as Gollner pointed
out. They tend not to think about the consequences of their words
when speaking with the general public or the media. This example
becomes another way that misinformation about anti-aging products
gets perpetuated.
Science for Life Extension Foundation is a Russian group
with many advocates, one of whom being Maria Konovalenko, a
molecular biophysicist. Her blog claims that they, “…integrate
efforts in order to increase funding for research in regenerative
15
medicine, gerontology, genetics, neuroscience, systems biology,
and related sciences aimed at studying the mechanisms of aging
and searching for methods to increase human longevity”
(Konovalenko 2012). This description sounds inclusive to all
definitions of ‘anti-aging,’ yet the advocates within this group
are not so diplomatic with their agendas. Konovalenko has written
in the past about her personal views on aging, “… we need to
change the perception of aging, so there would be no confusing
terms like ‘healthy aging’, which is an oxymoron. It’s like
‘dignified poverty’, or ‘merciful tyrant’. Aging is not and can
not be healthy. Aging is itself a disease” (Konovalenko 2013).
The personal views of the scientists are very clear and certainly
have an effect on what research gets conducted, as well as how
the perception of aging as a disease is perpetuated. Aubrey de
Grey is another anti-aging advocate who works as a biomedical
gerontologist with the SENS Research Foundation. Their research,
“…emphasizes the application of regenerative medicine to age-
related disease, with the intent of repairing underlying damage
to the body's tissues, cells, and molecules. Our goal is to help
16
build the industry that will cure the diseases of aging” (SENS
Foundation Website 2013). He has co-written a book titled Ending
Aging (2007) with Michael Rae, whose back matter says the
following: “[n]early all scientists who study the biology of
aging agree that we will someday be able to substantially slow
down the aging process, extending our productive, youthful lives…
Dr. de Grey believes that the key biomedical technology required
to eliminate aging-derived debilitation and death entirely--
would not only slow but periodically reverse age-related
physiological decay, leaving us biologically young into an
indefinite future…” For anti-aging advocates, the motivations
range from wanting to lessen pain due to age related problems to
wanting to avoid death itself. Haber explained that, “…anti-age
advocates generally depicted old age as a time to be feared and
despised, devising myriad procedures in order to eliminate it
entirely…their ideas and actions ultimately serve to marginalize
the very process of growing old” (Haber 2004:515). People like
Konovalenko or de Grey may not be aware of both the consequences
of such thinking that marginalizes the aging population or the
17
underlying thoughts that drive them to see aging as bad. For
those with a fear of aging, the ideas of marginalization and
perpetuation of societal standards of youth does not make much
difference in their thinking.
People are getting manipulated and conned out of money to
satisfy a societal construction of what it means to look good and
no one seems to be doing anything about it, other than the FDA.
Carol Haber explains the social construction of anti-aging
further:
The apocalypse o{ aging, the disease of old age, the horror ofwrinkles, and the loss sexuality, as well asthe "burdensome task" of supporting the old, allref1ect beliefs that go beyond simple hair dye orexercise programs. They reveal the return of disturbingideas about the nature of elderly people and their placein society…the new fountain of youth may not simply beoffering its supplicants the hope of fewer wrinkles and amore active sex life…the anti-age movement, like itslate 19th century and early 20th century counterparts,tends to demean and marginalize the very process ofgrowing old (2004:521).
Society constructs a good versus bad narrative over something
that is simply a process. Therefore, people need to start
changing the harmful construct of aging being “wrong” and perhaps
make salient where their values and thoughts come from in order
18
to start changing the anti-aging landscape. Taussig et al. (2003)
did some research on little people and how some of them choose to
undergo limb extension surgery. The procedure is cosmetic and “…
they may desire individual improvement or perfectibility…that are
deeply consonant with shared aspects of our cultural milieu”
(2003:71). People not only undergo physical cosmetic changes, but
focusing on ‘normal’ aging leads to ideas that there is one way
to age and that, “…anything deviant from the typical pattern of
European-derived populations is pathological” (Ice 2005:89). The
idea that people want cosmetic changes because of societal views
can cost a lot of money. People exposed to societal pressures end
up feeling like they need to change who they are in order to
conform to societal norms in order to be happy. The neoliberal
ideas of improvement have no boundary. With so much money being
made, sometimes what is best for society, and people themselves,
falls by the wayside.
The promises of youthful skin, beauty and cell enhancement
are inherent within skin care product advertising. From the
evidence provided in this paper, the average consumer of these
19
products would be better off buying a cheaper moisturizing lotion
instead. The more consumers can learn about the manipulation and
false claims of anti-aging skin care products, the more money
they will save in the long run. Although the public is being
duped, at least the FDA has some regulatory practices in place to
mitigate the effects of dodgy advertising. Science has shown that
these products do not work and scientists also have their
terminology and images distorted and abused by media and bad
marketing practices. Companies like L’Oreal and Lancôme have used
scientific authority to lure consumers into believing they are
helping to keep them young. Cultural views of aging can be seen
from a negative perspective, that aging is something to get rid
of like a terrible disease. Other views counter this perspective
by showing the cultural construction of what aging is and how
Western society views the elderly. Aging is a process and the
human mind constructs values of good or bad as well as time
abstractions like beginnings and endings. There must be some
balanced ideas brought forth. Is there a way in which people can
improve themselves, but not to the detriment of their happiness,
20
well-being and bank accounts? The idea here is not to be
complacent all the time, which can lead to stagnation of the
self, but to look at what we are changing about ourselves and
why. Are we really using anti-aging creams for ourselves or
because society dictates it? Take away the obsessive and extreme
thinking that people need to look young or need to be perfect and
what is left is someone who can be ok with how they look and who
has more time and money to focus on non-superficial aspects of
their lives. Anti-aging creams do not work, so grab some
moisturizer instead. By doing so, not only will people be saving
money, but they will be contributing to the consumer voice that
does not perpetuate society’s desire for the fountain of youth.
References
American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine2010 Company Website. http://www.a4m.com/, accessed Feb.20, 2014.
21
BCC Research2013 Anti-Aging Products and Services: The Global Market. Website.http://www.bccresearch.com/market-research/healthcare/antiaging-products-services-hlc060b.html, accessed Feb.27, 2014.
Charan, Anubha2012 FDA yells at Lancôme for making creams sound like magic drugs. The Beauty Gypsy Website. http://thebeautygypsy.com/fda-yells-at-lancome-for-making-creams-sound-like-magic-drugs/, accessed Feb.26, 2014.
Corbett Dooran, Jennifer and Emily Glazer2012 FDA Rebukes Lancôme on Marketing. The Wall Street Journal Website. September.11http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872396390444426404577645740604858440, accessed Feb.26, 2014.
de Grey, Aubrey and Michael Rae2007 Ending Aging: The Rejuvenation Breakthroughs That Could Reverse Human Aging in Our Lifetime. St. Martin’s Press: New York.
Duden, Barbara2009 What Genes Say. In Ideas on The Nature of Science. David Cayley, eds. Pp.257-265. Goose Lane Editions, Fredericton.
Edmonds, Molly2014 Do Anti-Aging Creams Work? Discovery Fit and Health Website.http://health.howstuffworks.com/wellness/aging/anti-aging-tips/anti-aging-cream2.htm, accessed Feb.26, 2014.
Gollner, Adam Leith2013 Live Forever! Can Science Deliver Immortality? Salon Website. http://www.salon.com/2013/08/18/live_forever_can_science_deliver_immortality/, accessed Feb.26, 2014.
22
Haber, Carole2004 “Life extension and history: The continual search for the fountain of youth” The Journal of Gerontology 59A(6):515-522.
Haraway, Donna1988 Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. Feminist Studies 14(3):575-99.
Ice, Gillian2005 Biological Anthropology and Aging. In Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology 20:87-90.
Konovalenko, Maria2012 Personal Blog. About. http://mariakonovalenko.wordpress.com/about/, accessed Feb.17, 2014.
Konovalenko, Maria2013 There Can Be No Healthy Aging. The Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies Website, November.8. Electronic Document. http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/konovalenko20131108, accessedFeb.17, 2014.
Lewinton, Richard 2009 Losing Sight of People. In Ideas on The Nature of Science. David Cayley, eds. Pp.276-297. Goose Lane Editions, Fredericton.
Mykytyn, Courtney Everts2009 “Anti-Aging is not necessarily anti-death: Bioethics and thefront lines of practice” Medicine Studies, 1:209-228.
Olshansky, Jay and Leonard Hayflick with Bruce A. Carnes2002 No Truth to the Fountain of Youth. Scientific American, June, 2002: 92-95. PDF Document.http://www.sjayolshansky.com/sjo/Background_files/NoTruthtotheFountainofYouth.pdf, accessed Feb.4, 2014.
23
Petersen, Alan and Kate Seear2009 “In search of immortality: The political economy of Anti-aging medicine.” Medicine Studies. 1:267-279.
Poulter, Sean and Abigail Edwards2009 Anti-Aging Cream Advert Banned For Misleading Claims. Mail Online Website. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209038/Anti-ageing-cream-advert-banned-misleading-claims.html, accessed Feb.26, 2014
SENS Research Foundation 2013 About SENS Research Foundation. Website. http://sens.org/about/about-the-foundation, accessed Feb.17, 2014.
Sharma, Amit2008 Anti-Aging Cream Goes Young. Economic Times Website. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2008-06-02/news/27714789_1_anti-aging-skin-care-facial-creams, accessed Feb.27, 2014.
Strailey, Jennifer2011 Anti-aging Products Come of Age. Progressive Grocer Website.http://www.progressivegrocer.com/inprint/article/id1487/anti-aging-products-come-of-age/, accessed Feb.26, 2014.
Taussig, Karen-Sue, Rayna Rapp and Deborah Heath2003 Flexible Eugenics: Technologies of the Self in the Age of Genetics. In Genetic Nature/Culture: Anthropology and Science Beyond the Two-Culture Divide. Goodman, et al. eds. Ppl58-76. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Turner, Leigh2004 “Biotechnology, bioethics and anti-aging interventions” In Trends in Biotechnology, 22:219-221.
Vincent, John A.
24
2007 “Science and Imagery in the ‘war on old age’” In Ageing and Society 27:941-961.
Waldby, Catherine2003 Stem Calles, Tissue Cultures and the Production of Biovalue.Health 6(3):305-323.
Weintraub, Arlene2006 Selling The Promise of Youth. BusinessWeek Website, March.19. Electronic Document.http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2006-03-19/selling-the-promise-of-youth, accessed Jan.19, 2014.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)2012 Warning Letter to Lancôme. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Website.http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2012/ucm318809.htm, accessed Feb.26, 2014.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)2012 Close Out Letter to Lancôme. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Website.http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/ucm336860.htm, accessed Feb.26, 2014.