Receipt

Image Skincare Ormedic Balancing Antioxidant 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

Good choice

for Dryness

Hyaluronic Acid is a reference standard by mechanism for dryness; this serum carries it high in the ingredient list.

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
Sodium Hyaluronate
1 · Standing
Supported — its mechanism is established (a reference standard, not a trial result)
2 · Form
Adequate — concentration not declared; read from the position in the ingredient list
3 · Tolerability
Standard tolerability — fragrance load
Cautions: fragrance.
Evidence dots
Limited evidence
What readers report
No reviews read yet for this product. Shown beside the verdict; never blended into it.
Verdict since
October 13, 2026

The studies and documents on the row

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

Good choice

for Dehydration

Aloe Vera is a reference standard by mechanism for dehydration; this serum carries it high in the ingredient list.

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
Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Juice
1 · Standing
Supported — its mechanism is established (a reference standard, not a trial result)
2 · Form
Adequate — concentration not declared; read from the position in the ingredient list
3 · Tolerability
Standard tolerability
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
  • Cosmetic Ingredient Review — safety assessment and reported function — CIR Expert Panel

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

Unproven

for Dullness

Hyaluronic Acid has early or mechanistic evidence for dullness — 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
Sodium Hyaluronate
1 · Standing
Plausible — trials support it
2 · Form
Adequate — concentration not declared; read from the position in the ingredient list
3 · Tolerability
Standard tolerability
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
October 9, 2026 (unchanged across rebuilds since then)

The studies and documents on the row

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

Avoid

for Sensitivity

This formula carries fragrance — the kind of thing reactive skin flags first.

The formula carries a known trigger for the concern — fragrance for rosacea, comedogenic esters for acne, fungal triggers for fungal acne — which decides the verdict before any efficacy question.

Rule
F1 → Avoid. The formula carries a known trigger for the concern.
q3 = harsh
Why this rule exists: Sensitivity has no efficacy claim; the verdict is tolerability.
Rule F1 decided 605 verdicts across the catalog; “Avoid” is the verdict on 1,912 of 45,446. The full register.
Carrying active
Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Juice
1 · Standing
Not assessed
No evidence row exists for this active and concern; it is in the research queue.
2 · Form
Plausible — concentration not declared; read from the position in the ingredient list
3 · Tolerability
Carries a trigger — fragrance load
Cautions: a declarable fragrance allergen.
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)

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

Promising

for Sun Damage

Niacinamide has trial-level evidence for sun damage 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
Niacinamide
1 · Standing
Plausible — trials support it
2 · Form
Plausible — concentration not declared; read from the position in the ingredient list
Studied range: 5–10%, from the OTC monograph or label; needs leave-on contact; judge it after about 8 weeks
3 · Tolerability
Standard tolerability — photosensitization
Cautions: a photosensitising active — use sun protection.
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

← Back to the verdict All sun damage 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.

Formula flags read from the ingredient list
  • Fragrance
  • A declarable fragrance allergen
  • A photosensitising active — use sun protection

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