Brickell Renewing Face Scrub for Men
Everything behind the verdicts on this product: the rule that fired for each concern, the three answers and the documents they rest on, every study on the row with the date it was opened, and the versions of the tables that produced them. Nothing here is edited by hand; it is generated from the same records the verdicts are.
The scaleRecommendedGoodSupportingEarly evidenceNot for thisAvoidhow it works
Engine 5.2.0 · rules 0.5.1 · evidence table ev-2026.10-r231 · computed October 13, 2026 · how we decide · the evidence table · the anchors
for Excess Oiliness
Green Tea Extract has trial-level evidence for excess oiliness but no guideline or regulatory standing yet — promising, short of a recommendation; the other actives here are not yet assessed for it.
The lead active has at least one trial behind it for the concern but no guideline or regulatory standing yet, and is present at a working level. Short of a recommendation.
- Rule
- R9p → Promising. An active with early or mechanistic evidence only; declared at a working strength, or a labelled active or at a plausible but undeclared level; the product’s category job is not a recognised companion to the concern; moderate or strong evidence dots on the carrier’s row.
q1 = plausible · q2 = adequate | plausible · supportive = false · strength = moderate | strong
Why this rule exists: 0.5.0: 'Unproven' beside three filled dots read as one question answered twice with opposite words (7,018 rows). The chip measures standing, the dots measure trial volume; where the row carries at least one RCT or a tier-2 source (moderate dots) and the active is present at a working level, the honest word is Promising. Unproven is reserved for plausible-standing rows with limited or weak evidence, or an under-dosed form. Same rank as Unproven — a bet either way; the dots order them.
Rule R9p decided 4,872 verdicts across the catalog; “Promising” is the verdict on 4,872 of 45,446. The full register. - Carrying active
- Soothing Botanicals
- 1 · Standing
- Plausible — trials support it
- 2 · Form
- Plausible — concentration not declared; read from the position in the ingredient list
Studied range: 3–5%, from the OTC monograph or label; needs leave-on contact - 3 · Tolerability
- Standard tolerability — fungal triggers
Cautions: fungal-acne triggers. - Evidence dots
- Moderate evidence
Row checked against its sources on July 17, 2026 (evidence table ev-2026.10-r231). - What readers report
- No reviews read yet for this product. Shown beside the verdict; never blended into it.
- Verdict since
- September 5, 2026 (unchanged across rebuilds since then)
The studies and documents on the row
- Green Tea and Other Tea Polyphenols: Effects on Sebum Production and Acne Vulgaris — Antioxidants (Basel) — narrative review; authors declare no conflict of interest (2016), opened July 16, 2026
- A comparison of the effects of topical green tea and lotus on facial sebum control in healthy humans — Hippokratia — n=22, single-blinded, placebo-controlled, split-face, Sebumeter (2013), opened July 16, 2026
- Outcomes of 3% green tea emulsion on skin sebum production in male volunteers — Bosnian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences — n=10, NO control group; excluded from rct_count (2010), opened July 16, 2026
- Epigallocatechin-3-gallate improves acne in humans by modulating intracellular molecular targets and inhibiting P. acnes — Journal of Investigative Dermatology — TIER 2, but its human endpoint is ACNE; its sebum data are in SEB-1 sebocytes (cell culture). Excluded from this claim. (2013), opened July 16, 2026
← Back to the verdict All excess oiliness products → Disclose a concentration or correct a fact →
No category-job specification exists for this category yet, so there is no job reading.
Listed for Rough Texture, Blackheads, Dullness, with no verdict: the actives here have no evidence row for those concerns yet. That is a gap in our table, not a mark against the product.
- Rough Texture: The actives here (physical exfoliant, Caffeine, emollients, Green Tea Extract) are in the research queue for rough texture; no verdict until their rows are written.
- Blackheads: The actives here (physical exfoliant, Caffeine, emollients, Green Tea Extract) are in the research queue for blackheads; no verdict until their rows are written.
- Dullness: The actives here (physical exfoliant, Caffeine, emollients, Green Tea Extract) are in the research queue for dullness; no verdict until their rows are written.
- Fungal-acne triggers
A verdict is Dermington’s assessment of how well a product’s ingredients fit a concern — never a claim about what the product treats. Every rule is public and the same for every product; a brand cannot buy a reading. How we decide · what has changed · disclaimer.