PFAS30/ 100Poor
Overall0/ 100Bad
Laura Mercier Caviar Extravagant Mascara Trio

Laura Mercier · Waterproof Mascara

Laura Mercier Caviar Extravagant Mascara Trio

Poor

Waterproof mascara may contain PFAS. No public disclosure by brand.

Verdict: SkipWaterproof mascara carries PFAS risk; no brand disclosure on chemical safety. Use sparingly, remove carefully, monitor for irritation.

Waterproof mascaras often use fluorinated polymers to resist moisture. Laura Mercier has not disclosed PFAS status; no third-party testing found.

The safe swap

Burt's Bees 100% Natural Nourishing Mascara, Black Brown

Burt's Bees

Burt's Bees 100% Natural Nourishing Mascara, Black Brown

75/100 safety

75Excellent

Same rubric that flunked this product. The swap earned Excellent.

Still want this one anyway? Check the price on Amazon. We’d swap it.

Material

pigments, oils, waxes, waterproof film-forming agents

Brand disclosure

Brand is silent on PFAS

Lab data

No public lab test

What’s concerning

♾️

Waterproof / stain-resistant treatment

water-repellent coating treatments have historically used PFAS.

65/ 100
♾️

Category baseline

cosmetics is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.

80/ 100
♾️

No PFAS disclosure

No public statement about PFAS in this product.

85/ 100
♾️

PFAS

Waterproof mascaras commonly use fluorinated polymers or silicone-PFAS hybrids to achieve water resistance. Laura Mercier does not disclose whether this product contains PFAS; the risk is elevated for any waterproof mascara without explicit PFAS-free certification.

Source: ATSDR
70/ 100
🏷️

Fragrance allergens and undisclosed fragrance components

If this mascara contains fragrance (common in premium formulas for sensory appeal), specific allergens are not listed on packaging. Fragrance can trigger contact dermatitis or irritation in sensitive eyes; the 'fragrance' ingredient hides dozens of potential sensitizers.

70/ 100
⚠️

Bacterial or fungal growth from improper storage or expired product

Mascaras are water-based or oil-rich formulations exposed to eye bacteria during application; if not replaced within three months or stored in warm/humid conditions, microbial colonization becomes probable and poses eye infection risk.

20/ 100
⚠️

Contact dermatitis from film-forming polymers or emollients

Synthetic polymers, silicones, and certain oils in waterproof mascaras can provoke localized allergic reactions or irritation, especially in users with sensitive eye skin or latex/polymer sensitivities. Laura Mercier does not disclose specific polymer types.

70/ 100

What’s reassuring

⛏️

Heavy metals

Iron oxides and synthetic colorants in mascara are regulated under cosmetics safety rules; no specific recalls or contamination incidents for Laura Mercier mascaras are on record. Standard cosmetics testing by FDA does not typically reveal heavy metal content unless a safety issue emerges.

Source: FDA
95/ 100

The full breakdown

What it's made of and why it matters

This mascara trio uses pigments, oils, waxes, and waterproof film-forming agents to create long-wear color and water resistance. The 'waterproof' claim typically requires synthetic polymers or silicone-based binders that may contain PFAS (PFAS "forever chemicals") to repel water. Laura Mercier does not publicly disclose the specific film-forming agents or their PFAS content, leaving the exact formulation opaque to consumers.

The brand's record and disclosure

Laura Mercier (owned by Estee Lauder Companies) has not made public commitments to PFAS elimination or transparent ingredient disclosure beyond standard ingredient lists. The brand maintains a silent stance on PFAS in waterproof products, which is typical of mainstream cosmetics but does not provide assurance. No major safety recalls or regulatory actions specific to this mascara line are on record, though the parent company has faced scrutiny on broader chemical safety and sustainability practices.

How it compares in its category

Waterproof mascaras across the market segment carry similar PFAS exposure risk; Laura Mercier is neither ahead nor behind in transparency. Non-waterproof alternatives and mascaras with plant-based film formers (available from brands like RMS Beauty or Ilia) reduce PFAS likelihood, though they sacrifice longevity. Laura Mercier's premium positioning does not correlate with disclosed chemical safety or PFAS avoidance; price reflects brand prestige, not reduced hazard.

If you buy it

Remove mascara daily with gentle oil-based cleanser to avoid eye irritation and lash damage, which can increase sensitivity to residual chemicals. Waterproof mascaras require more thorough removal; incomplete cleansing may leave film-forming agents on the lash line. Replace every three months to avoid bacterial buildup and oxidized formulation. If you experience eye irritation, redness, or contact dermatitis, discontinue and consider switching to a non-waterproof or PFAS-transparent alternative.

What we don’t know

Basis
Model estimate, 35% confidence, not a lab result
Lab test
None on record for this exact product
Brand statement
Laura Mercier has made none

Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.

Safer alternatives in Waterproof Mascara

Burt's Bees 100% Natural Nourishing Mascara, Black Brown

Burt's Bees

100% Natural Nourishing Mascara, Black Brown

Wax, pigments, natural oils (typical mascara base)

PFAS Grade75Excellent
Overall Grade67Good
🏷️

Fragrance allergens and undisclosed sensitizers

Limited concern

70
⚠️

Bacterial growth and contamination in wax formula

Limited concern

70

Lower concern; conventional non-waterproof formula with no identified PFAS drivers.

Risky category by default

More waterproof mascara grades

How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.