In this article from The New York Times , eyelash enhancers are getting taken down a notch. The controversy surrounding new eyelash enhancers began in November 2007, when the FDA pulled 12,682 tubes, or about $2 million worth, of Age Intervention Eyelash, a lash enhancer then sold by Jan Marini Skin Research.
The product contained bimatoprost, a drug approved for the treatment of glaucoma, but not for hair growth. This is the same ingredient Botox-developer Allergan is getting approved for lash growth, as we have already reported. But the sale of their product has yet to begin, awaiting approval. Ophthalmologists who treat glaucoma with bimatoprost have found that hair growth was a side effect of the drug, but also found optic-nerve damage and blindness. Not exactly a price we’re willing to pay for pretty lashes. Ultimately, the FDA said Age Intervention Eyelash was pulled because it was "making a medical claim," and because it didn’t disclose the included bimatoprost.
Since last year, a rash of new products have also entered the market, claiming similar effects to the pulled product. Re-branded to promise "to condition and lengthen lashes," products like neuLash, RevitaLash and MD Lash Factor are applied like eyeliner and don’t contain bimatoprost.
But do they work? The manufacturers say… well, sort-of. According to an exec at neuLash, "We do not claim neuLash grows eyelashes, but invite users to judge the
results of their lashes and brows after four weeks of use." Huh? Well, SCS invites you to be skeptical before you shell out $140 for a tube.