Free organic moisturiser worth £19.50 with Saturday's Telegraph

keith99_2

BFG wrote: »

It's only free if you were buying the paper anyway.

Plus if it's a send away there P&P to pay


Not to mention the petrol used to go to the shop to buy the paper...lol

You dont have to get it, some may like to though, its about choices.

BFG_2

shakka wrote: »

Doesn't it all depend on the quality of the ingredients ? I don't think that ALL studies have come to that conclusion, but SOME studies have shown that cheaper brands can perform as well as the very expensive ones in terms of moisturisation. The difference with an organic cream is that your body won't be absorbing any nasty chemicals which might potentially lead to all manner of health issues. If you're not interested in this offer then don't go for it, but I'd like to thank the OP as I think it's a good offer, so thanks x

1. Where's the study that proves a £40 jar is better than the 25p one??

2. Non-organic doesn't mean 'nasty chemicals', just the same as organic doesn't mean [better for you]. Best example being organic food...

I do hate it when manufacturers stick the latest buzzword on their products...used to be 'organic' now its 'green or low carbon'

sadly there are many consumers who actually fall for this cr4p/greenwash and shell out big money thinking they are either being 'healthier' or 'helping the environment' ...when typically they are doing neither.

RAnt over....

salerbil

BFG wrote: »

I somehow doubt that it's 'worth £19.50'

All studies on moisturisers show the chaeapest (usually about 25p) is as good as the ones selling at £40 [or even £19.50] a pop.

You're paying for the packaging and the big full page colour adverts in the magazines/TV [which remarkably in themselves don't actually help your skin...lol]

Just a thought.

I have to agree, I use the 25p stuff and I'm not any wrinklier than me Ma who uses the most expensive:eek: she can find :rolleyes:

ThinkingOfLinking

carole.uk wrote: »

looks like it is send away voucher see yesterdays post thanks to orginal poster http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1240155

If you're going to get all petty, I should point out that actually I posted this before that post was made if you look at times.

ThinkingOfLinking

BFG, who on earth gets the car to the newsagent?

And people who come here to slag it off; if you don't like it, you don't have to have it!!

iliketosave_2

Flickering_Ember wrote: »

BFG, who on earth gets the car to the newsagent?

And people who come here to slag it off; if you don't like it, you don't have to have it!!

Dont rise to it, you pointed out something most people appreciate that.
Unfortunately there are also people here not looking to save like the rest of us, but just to be negative about posts. Thanks for the original post.

gingermuppet

salerbil wrote: »

I have to agree, I use the 25p stuff and I'm not any wrinklier than me Ma who uses the most expensive:eek: she can find :rolleyes:

:T


Took me a while to get that one Salerbil. Trouble is,round here there's sometimes not that big an age gap between mothers and daughters!

grannybiker

Flickering_Ember wrote: »

If you're going to get all petty, I should point out that actually I posted this before that post was made if you look at times.

Actually, I posted it before that, at 6:19pm on 23rd!
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1239453&highlight=moisturiser
N.B. This is an attempt at humour, not grumpiness!

P.S. And the OP here got more "Thanks," Boo-Hoo!

yasminec

HI,
what do you use for 25 pence am interested to know
thanks
yasmine

shakka

BFG wrote: »

1. Where's the study that proves a £40 jar is better than the 25p one??

2. Non-organic doesn't mean 'nasty chemicals', just the same as organic doesn't mean [better for you]. Best example being organic food...

I do hate it when manufacturers stick the latest buzzword on their products...used to be 'organic' now its 'green or low carbon'

sadly there are many consumers who actually fall for this cr4p/greenwash and shell out big money thinking they are either being 'healthier' or 'helping the environment' ...when typically they are doing neither.

RAnt over....

No need to rant BFG- if you read my post correctly you would see that to some extent I agree with what you say. I understand that a cheap product can moisturise as well as an expensive one. At no point did I say that a £40 product works better than a 25p one so I'm not sure where you got that from? You were the one making wide-sweeping statements proclaming that ALL studies on moisturisers show the cheapest (usually about 25p) is as good as the ones selling at £40 (or even £19.50) a pop. Have you seen all studies ever conducted on this subject?

I also understand that not all non-organic products contain nasty chemicals, but the vast majority do. If you deny that then you're living in ignorance and need to research some of the ingredients which are currently being used in most everyday toiletries. The reason most organic products are more expensive is the cost of the ingredients are more expensive to produce. I agree that you are paying more for the packaging, which is necessary to prolong the life of the product as it's natural. Non-organic products are packed with synthetic ingredients so they can sit on the shelf for long periods of time. I would say that most manufacturers use a proportion of their profits for advertising which is just as well otherwise how would we be aware of their products? However, none of the companies I buy from take out full page colour adverts in magazines/ TV so again I'm not sure where you get that from? Do you seriously expect to be able to buy a quality product containing no nasty ingredients for only 25p Not to mention the organic products I make myself at home.

At the end of the day it's personal choice and we're all entitled to that, but it does seem as though you're taking your own personal view and pushing it onto others as fact, with a nasty attitude. If you don't care to take any responsibility for the planet or anyone else on it, that's also your choice. Just as it's mine to try and make more informed/ responsible choices. I don't think it's a bad thing to try to take the best care of myself and others that I can? At 36 years old I have a flawless, glowing, line-free complexion, long strong natural nails, long thick natural eyelashes and a mane of long, thick glossy hair: as nature intended! I have 3 grandparents in their 90's living unassisted in their own homes and free from cancers, alzheimers etc. Obviously we're lucky and have excellent genes but we also live well, eat the best quality food we can afford, use the most natural products we can and try to have the utmost repect for others. Sneer all you like but somehow I think we'd be a different picture of health if we ate crap food, slathered nasties on our skin and didn't give a stuff about anyone....;)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
It's cheapest (not chaeapest)....:D
It's Rant (not RAnt)
Sentences should begin with a capital letter, and end with a full stop.
Is it necessary to correct other's grammar on a moneysaving forum?