Discovering Pure Snail Hand Cream

[NewTricks]

On a recent shopping trip to TJMaxx, I browsed the hand lotions and creams. Sitting demurely on the shelf was Pure Snail HAND CREAM, with a cartoon snail gracing the front (made by esfolio) and labeled in Korean and English. Several assumptions kicked into gear.

The first; snails are slow and this probably meant the cream had a very slow absorption rate. 👍

The second: I work with fabrics and am particularly fond of those made in South Korea for the quality and colors. Their hand cream must also be good.👍

The third: multi-lingual labeling was sophisticated and exotic, therefore the cream must be also.👍

No testers were available, but the cream was reasonable at $4.99 for 3.38 fl. oz.

I did not drag out my glasses to look more closely. This is perpetual weakness. After about a month of use, I looked at the back of the tube.

 

"This highly intensive hydrating effect of snail secretion filtrate and plant extracts function that prevents moisture loss to skin makes strengthen soft and healthy." (OK, forget the grammar for now.)

Number 6 on the ingredients list: snail secretion filtrate. 

The slimy tracks from snails on sidewalks is actually "snail secretion filtrate." Or maybe I'm making another assumption. If not, I've been using and enjoying putting snail slime on my hands.

 

[David H. Lipman]

[NewTricks]

Lessons for myself & others: read carefully before purchase. Be mindful of personal bias which influences daily behavior. Lastly, carry glasses in a pocket!  🤓

[nukecad]

What did you think it was, 100% pulverised snails? (With the ground shells for a bit of a scrub).

Sue them for false labeling/false advertising. - It isn't "Pure snail" it's got all kinds of other ingredients in there.

Edited May 22 by nukecad

[David H. Lipman]

It is an old trick.  They'll claim they include 100% snail slime in their product.

It's like when you see Cranberry Juice on the shelf that claims 100% juice and then you read the ingredients and the first ingredient (and thus the preponderance) is grape juice.

EDIT:

Another example - you see Rye Bread on the shelf and you read the ingredients and the first ingredient (and thus the preponderance) is Wheat

Edited May 22 by David H. Lipman

[NewTricks]

2 hours ago, nukecad said:

With the ground shells for a bit of a scrub

😆  That may be....all I know is I felt a little sick when I read it. But I haven't died yet, so it wasn't that bad....wait, I feel something....... 

 

53 minutes ago, David H. Lipman said:

They'll claim they include 100% snail slime

🤣 And who's going to speak Japanese for me when I call? I'm a whistle-blower from way back, but I'm gonna pass on this. 

 

I can't read and I can't count either. Snail secretion is #5, not #6. My Sunday retail therapy "gone bad." 

[nukecad]

Of course they get away with it because the tiny 'ppm' that is snail slime is "pure" snail slime.

Does that say 62.9 parts per million?

Even if it's 629 that's  a trace ingredient. They'd get more if a snail accidentaly fell into a 100 gallon vat of the stuff.

[David H. Lipman]

15 minutes ago, NewTricks said:

🤣 And who's going to speak Japanese for me when I call? I'm a whistle-blower from way back, but I'm gonna pass on this.

I believe the product is Korean (Hangul).

[NewTricks]

I TOLD you I couldn't read. 

It's times like this where I embarrass myself, all before noon!

Edited May 22 by NewTricks

[NewTricks]

11 minutes ago, nukecad said:

They'd get more if a snail accidentaly fell into a 100 gallon vat of the stuff.

You are wicked!

[nukecad]

1 hour ago, NewTricks said:

You are wicked!

Just good at intrepreting the small print.

Don't knock it, I've just this week had an ombudsman ruling that knocked over £3,000 (GBP) off the electricity back-bill for the property I moved out of 2 years ago. It's a 6 year long story but I had read the small print about what UK law allowed the electricity company to back-bill for and what they couldn't. I'm still waiting for the company's response to the ruling, they have 28 days to comply with the ruling or appeal.

Edited May 22 by nukecad

[NewTricks]

34 minutes ago, nukecad said:

Don't knock it,

Absolutely NOT. It was the "accidental" part that was hilarious. Plus I had a brief vision of a snail falling in.

CONGRATS on your preliminary ruling! Quite an accomplishment too. I'm glad to know there are like minded people here who have the persistence (6 years) to follow what must have been a convoluted story from the start. I'm well acquainted with the scenario-David and Goliath conflict based on the fine print. I once won a case with a post it note. 

Taking the risk of doing it yourself, keeping organized and following through reap those rewards. That's a skill that not many possess. Keep up the good fight and let us know the outcome. 

Edited May 22 by NewTricks
typo

[nukecad]

20 hours ago, NewTricks said:

 It was the "accidental" part that was hilarious. Plus I had a brief vision of a snail falling in.

There's always the chance that they might have recruited a bunch of 'Kamikaze snail' (google it).

The long story (short version):
Despite my telling the electricity supply company so on repeated occasions; they hadn't been billing at all since August 2017.
I left them in June 2021, they still didn't produce a final bill until March 2022.
They tried to back-bill for all the previous 4 years and 8 months. I complained that UK back-billing legislation for energy suppliers didn't allow that, and within 2-hours they had emailed a revised bill for the last 12 months that I was with them. (Inflated figures still of course)
Obviously that "revised" billing had been pre-prepared and were just trying it on for the almost 5 years in the hope that I didn't know the law.
However they were still wrong, the law is 12-months prior to the billing beig produced, not the last 12 months I was with them.
They wouldn't budge so eventually it was off to the Ombudsman, who has agreed with me and given them directions to put things right.
It's a bit more interesting now because back in March 2022 they could have lawfully billed for the last 2-months that I was with them, (end March to begining June 2021) - But I'm not at all sure that they can legally do that now.
The Ombudsman said nothing about those 2-months in his ruling, but he did emphasise to me on the phone that I will be able to challenge any new billing the company now produce if I believe that it is still wrong.
I think that was the ombudsman's way of telling me that his hands were tied, at the moment he can only rule on 12 moths before the billing was produced, but if I make a new complaint about any new billing then he could rule that those 2-months are also now out of time because they were never billed for correctly.
I need to re-read that particular bit of the back-billing legislation fine print again, but I'll wait and see what the company does now.

Edited May 23 by nukecad

[NewTricks]

@nukecad-what a story! You've told it well.

Before we go there, I DID look up Kamikaze snail and who knew there was so much out there? The most interesting is that there's a giant snail that lives in the Black Forest (Germany) which sheds its shell (can be 3 feet tall!) Someone was riding a bike, hit this fragment in the trail and became airborne! I've learned more about snails in the past couple days than over a lifetime! @David H. Lipman has shared various facts about snail "hygiene" which came from a medical mystery. End result: I'm going to stick with A La Maison brand lotion made from flowers and plants!

I've read your post multiple times to set the facts straight. Two facts rise to the top immediately.

2 hours ago, nukecad said:

they could have lawfully billed for the last 2-months that I was with them, (end March to beginning June 2021)

You're right, they may not be able to do that considering the time that's passed.

2 hours ago, nukecad said:

the law is 12-months prior to the billing being produced

  We can agree that this is a massive screw up, you've invested time and energy to resolve it, you're using the "system" to your advantage and you're willing to see it through to the bitter end. It may come down to someone, somewhere deciding they don't want to comb through the details or throw manpower on it and you may just get a reprieve with the matter being closed. No apology of course, just some generic language that it is all concluded.

Reading the fine print is very much required these days-everywhere.

[nukecad]

Oh no, - they have to issue a full written apology that's the first of the ombudsmans 4 directions.

Then to sort the billing out and re-bill correctly.

Then to rescind/remove any black marks, default notices, etc. (Experian and the like).

Then to give a statuatory £30 compensation to the account for not producing a final bill within 6 weeks of the account being closed.

(LOL £30 compensation - he's told them to write off over £3,000 of billing, that's plenty of compensation as far as I am concerned - Don't forget that I had actually used that electricity and would have paid for it if they hadn't been so incompetent).

Edit- Although I don't get to see it (normally anyway) I do know that the ombudsnan will send a commentary/statement of reasons to the supplier, no doubt telling them to get their act in order. (I say "normally" because he also indicated that this particular case may get published as an example of what suppliers in general are still getting wrong despite the consumer legislation).

Edited May 23 by nukecad

[NewTricks]

17 minutes ago, nukecad said:

they have to issue a full written apology that's the first of the ombudsmans 4 directions.

SHOCKING! That would be unheard of here, the differences between countries.

Rebill correctly-wonder how long that's going to take?

Rescind/remove negative effects- hopefully.....

Statutory compensation-🤣 🤣🤣 much bigger than "LOL"

Excellent.

[David H. Lipman]

Nah, US companies have been that offensive in billing practices.

[NewTricks]

31 minutes ago, nukecad said:

this particular case may get published as an example

fail to catch the edit: WOW, as it should be.

[nukecad]

Big companies use obnoxious practices everywhere.

At least in the UK (and EU) we have some better consumer protections than many other countries/regions.

They will never be problem free though.

[nukecad]

18 minutes ago, NewTricks said:

Rebill correctly-wonder how long that's going to take?

The company have 28 days (23 now) to comply or appeal.

Things could end up in a court of law yet. (I've no real worries there though with the ombudsmans decision being solidly on my side).

[David H. Lipman]

9 minutes ago, nukecad said:

Big companies use obnoxious practices everywhere.

At least in the UK (and EU) we have some better consumer protections than many other countries/regions.

They will never be problem free though.

Yepper !

https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-data-privacy-fine-europe-9aa912200226c3d53aa293dca8968f84

[nukecad]

Apologies to @NewTricks, I seem to have "crushed" your snail topic.

Isn't it odd how conversations wander off?

[NewTricks]

Hey @nukecad I'd much rather compare advocacy notes than beat myself up about snail slime. NP 😁

[NewTricks]

Regarding the news article about Meta sending data to the USA-the sign of the times. 😒

 

I have yet to compile & use a list of inoffensive words to express anger/disgust/rage.

 

[David H. Lipman]

OK, I'll add to it...

https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/news/2023/05/google-out-of-pocket-by-40m-after-location-tracking-lawsuit