Receipt

Bubble Super Clear Acne Treating Serum

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

Strong choice

for Acne

Salicylic Acid is an approved or monograph active for acne; this serum carries it at 2%.

A first-line active — approved, monograph-listed or named in current guidelines — at an effective strength, with no trigger for the concern.

Rule
R2 → Strong choice. A first-line active (approved, monograph-listed or named in a current guideline); declared at a working strength, or a labelled active.
q1 = first-line · q2 = adequate
Why this rule exists: A regulator- or guideline-recognised first-line active, declared at an effective strength, in a form the claim supports.
Rule R2 decided 905 verdicts across the catalog; “Strong choice” is the verdict on 1,475 of 45,446. The full register.
Carrying active
Salicylic Acid
1 · Standing
First-line — a regulator recognises it for this use; trials support it
Document: § 333.310 Acne active ingredients. (U.S. Food and Drug Administration — 21 CFR Part 333 Subpart D (Topical Acne Drug Products), Code of Federal Regulations via GovInfo), opened July 27, 2026
2 · Form
Adequate — declared at 2%
Studied range: 0.5–2%, from the OTC monograph or label; judge it after about 6 weeks
3 · Tolerability
Gentle
Evidence dots
Moderate evidence
Row checked against its sources on July 27, 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

← Back to the verdict All acne products → Disclose a concentration or correct a fact →

Strong choice

for Blackheads

Salicylic Acid is an approved or monograph active for blackheads; this serum carries it at 2%.

A first-line active — approved, monograph-listed or named in current guidelines — at an effective strength, with no trigger for the concern.

Rule
R2 → Strong choice. A first-line active (approved, monograph-listed or named in a current guideline); declared at a working strength, or a labelled active.
q1 = first-line · q2 = adequate
Why this rule exists: A regulator- or guideline-recognised first-line active, declared at an effective strength, in a form the claim supports.
Rule R2 decided 905 verdicts across the catalog; “Strong choice” is the verdict on 1,475 of 45,446. The full register.
Carrying active
Salicylic Acid
1 · Standing
First-line — a regulator recognises it for this use; trials support it
Document: 21 CFR § 333.350 - Labeling of acne drug products. (US Code of Federal Regulations (Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School)), opened July 27, 2026
2 · Form
Adequate — declared at 2%
Studied range: 0.5–2%, from the OTC monograph or label; judge it after about 6 weeks
3 · Tolerability
Gentle
Evidence dots
Moderate evidence
Row checked against its sources on July 27, 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

← Back to the verdict All blackheads products → Disclose a concentration or correct a fact →

Not for this

for Large Pores

The actives here have been researched for large pores and the evidence does not support the claim.

The actives have been researched for this concern and the evidence does not support the claim.

Rule
R10 → Not for this. An active researched for the concern and found wanting; the product’s category job is not a recognised companion to the concern.
q1 = none · supportive = false
Why this rule exists: Researched and found wanting is a different sentence from unresearched (R11).
Rule R10 decided 489 verdicts across the catalog; “Not for this” is the verdict on 489 of 45,446. The full register.
Carrying active
Salicylic Acid
1 · Standing
None
2 · Form
Adequate — declared at 2%
Studied range: 0.5–2%, from the OTC monograph or label; needs leave-on contact; judge it after about 6 weeks
3 · Tolerability
Gentle
Evidence dots
Not from a trial row
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

← Back to the verdict All large pores products → Disclose a concentration or correct a fact →

Promising

for Excess Oiliness

Salicylic Acid 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
Salicylic Acid
1 · Standing
Plausible — trials support it
2 · Form
Adequate — declared at 2%
3 · Tolerability
Gentle
Evidence dots
Moderate evidence
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

← Back to the verdict All excess oiliness products → Disclose a concentration or correct a fact →

Good choice

for Sensitivity

No fragrance, drying alcohol, declarable allergens or sensitising preservatives in this serum — the profile sensitive skin looks for.

For sensitivity only: no fragrance, drying alcohol, declarable allergens or sensitising preservatives in the formula.

Rule
F2 → Good choice. The formula carries no trigger and no caution for the concern.
q3 = gentle
Why this rule exists: Gentle = no weighted deduction fired and fit ≥ 90.
Rule F2 decided 1,955 verdicts across the catalog; “Good choice” is the verdict on 1,955 of 45,446. The full register.
Carrying active
Centella Asiatica & Colloidal Oatmeal
1 · Standing
None
2 · Form
Plausible — concentration not declared; read from the position in the ingredient list
Studied range: 0.05%, from the trials on the row; needs leave-on contact
3 · Tolerability
Gentle
Evidence dots
Not from a trial row
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

← Back to the verdict All sensitivity products → Disclose a concentration or correct a fact →

Good choice

for Rough Texture

Salicylic Acid is a reference standard by mechanism for rough texture; this serum carries it at 2%.

A trial-supported active, or a reference standard by mechanism, at a working level; or a first-line active below its studied range.

Rule
R5 → Good choice. A supported active (trial-backed, or a reference standard by mechanism); declared at a working strength, or a labelled active or at a plausible but undeclared level.
q1 = supported · q2 = adequate | plausible
Why this rule exists: Trial-supported or guideline-supported active, adequately or plausibly dosed.
Rule R5 decided 9,843 verdicts across the catalog; “Good choice” is the verdict on 10,340 of 45,446. The full register.
Carrying active
Salicylic Acid
1 · Standing
Supported — its mechanism is established (a reference standard, not a trial result)
2 · Form
Adequate — declared at 2%
Studied range: 0.5–2%, from the trials on the row; needs leave-on contact; judge it after about 6 weeks
3 · Tolerability
Gentle
Evidence dots
Limited 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

  • International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary and Handbook — declared function — Personal Care Products Council
  • United States Pharmacopeia / National Formulary — excipient monograph — USP-NF

← Back to the verdict All rough texture products → Disclose a concentration or correct a fact →

Unproven

for Acne Scarring

Centella Asiatica has early or mechanistic evidence for acne scarring — a reasonable bet, not a recommendation; the other actives here are not yet assessed for it.

The lead active has early or mechanistic evidence only, or is present below a working level. A reasonable bet, not a recommendation.

Rule
R9 → Unproven. An active with early or mechanistic evidence only; the product’s category job is not a recognised companion to the concern.
q1 = plausible · supportive = false
Why this rule exists: Plausible-tier actives alone do not earn a recommendation, and 'not for this' would overstate the case against them. 'Unproven' with the evidence dots lets the reader judge the bet (added 0.2.0 after the first shadow run put a 10% niacinamide serum at 'not for this' for hyperpigmentation). 0.5.0: the closing clause reads the other heroes — "nothing else here addresses it" only when every other active has a researched 'none' row; "not yet assessed" when that is the truth. Rows whose dots read moderate or better now reach R9p first.
Rule R9 decided 4,156 verdicts across the catalog; “Unproven” is the verdict on 4,156 of 45,446. The full register.
Carrying active
Centella Asiatica & Colloidal Oatmeal
1 · Standing
Plausible — trials support it
2 · Form
Plausible — concentration not declared; read from the position in the ingredient list
3 · Tolerability
Gentle
Evidence dots
Limited 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

← Back to the verdict All acne scarring products → Disclose a concentration or correct a fact →

The category job

No category-job specification exists for this category yet, so there is no job reading.

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.

Next on the Your first visit route · stop 3 of 4Ask your questionThe Library · Questions & answers
Take the whole Your first visit tour (4 stops)