The True Cost of Inconsistent Skincare and the Source of My Weary Heart

The fourth installment in "The Biology of Building" series

I've always found it fascinating that research exists quantifying how much money consumers waste on the trial-and-error skincare cycle—that exhausting loop of buying products, using them briefly, experiencing disappointing results, and starting over with something new.

It's a reality acknowledged by both brands and their customers, yet it persists. I sometimes wonder whether this statistic emerged organically from broader consumer research or if someone specifically set out to measure this particular problem. Either way, its documentation confirms what we all intuitively know: the current approach isn't working.

I'm committed to ending this cycle that costs the average person $15,000 in unused or ineffective products over their lifetime. But beyond this financial toll, there's something else that keeps me up at night.

This additional cost isn't financial—it's biological.

Research in cellular biology reveals that prolonged periods in protection state create structural changes in skin that become progressively harder to address the longer they persist.

Let me paint the picture of what this actually looks like for consumers:

Think of collagen as the skin's internal scaffolding—normally arranged in a perfect, orderly pattern like a well-built lattice. When stuck in protection state, this scaffolding breaks apart and tangles, creating permanent lines and wrinkles. Meanwhile, elastin—the stretchy protein that lets your skin snap back into place—becomes stiff and brittle, like a rubber band that's lost its stretch. The cushiony support layer that gives your face its youthful fullness gradually deflates and becomes chaotic without the right signals to rebuild it. And the cells that control your skin's color begin creating patchy, uneven pigment that becomes increasingly stubborn and difficult to fade over time.

Every month spent in unnecessary protection state accelerates these changes. This isn't about vanity—it's about preserving the skin's functional integrity and preventing avoidable damage.

So that begs the question: what if my skincare products are actually forcing my skin into protection mode? Is that possible? How would I even know if that's happening?

The uncomfortable truth is that yes—even expensive, highly-touted products can trigger protection state in your skin.

Dermatological research has documented several clear signs that your skin has shifted into protection mode:

- Stinging or burning sensations with products you previously tolerated well (Berardesca et al., International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 2013)
- Uneven texture and poor makeup application (Draelos, Cosmetics in Dermatology, 2016)
- Increased reactivity to environmental factors you once handled easily (Misery et al., Journal of Dermatology, 2011)
- Reduced efficacy of active ingredients that once showed results (Proksch et al., Experimental Dermatology, 2008)
- Visible flaking despite regular moisturizing (Van Smeden et al., Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 2014)
- That puzzling combination of oiliness with underlying dehydration (Muizzuddin et al., Journal of Cosmetic Science, 2010)

A 2021 study in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology demonstrated that skin maintained in protection state for just 120 days showed gene expression changes that persisted for up to 8 months after the triggering conditions were removed. These aren't superficial effects—they're foundational alterations to the skin's architecture.

Finding Balance in a World of Extremes

This research supports a theory of mine:

skincare that focuses solely on what we want (reversal and prevention of aging) without adapting to what the skin actually needs can be actively harmful. 

The industry has created this pendulum swing between aggressive clinical approaches on one extreme and completely natural approaches on the other—both missing the crucial element of responding to the skin's changing receptive state.

The irony is painful: applying anti-aging ingredients regardless of the skin's receptive state is what prevents people from achieving the very results these products promise.

This hubris of ignoring whether the skin is in protection or regeneration state doesn't just cost consumers money—it actively blocks the skin renewal and repair processes that anti-aging skincare products claim to support.

What's needed isn't another extreme position but a centered approach that recognizes both the wisdom of natural systems and the precision of scientific understanding.

This balance is what I've found in the collection of products I've curated over the years—formulations created by a woman who was classically trained in product chemistry before becoming trained as an herbalist and starting her own line. What I value most is how her dual training created a balanced, centered approach to formulations that work with the skin's intelligence rather than fighting against it—products that adapt to the skin's needs rather than forcing it into submission.

There are other lines that support the skin as an intelligent organ, but this one I know so well—intuitively at this point. It's necessary to have that relationship with products—knowing their strengths, weaknesses, and how to use them.

The effectiveness of any product collection isn't just about the formulations themselves but about the practitioner's depth of understanding in how to use them strategically.

The Path Forward

The message I've been trying to articulate throughout my career is both simple and revolutionary: we must work with the skin's intelligence rather than fighting against it. We need to recognize when the skin is in protection state and address those triggers before attempting regenerative treatments. The cost of not doing so could be causing signs of aging.

I've seen the near-permanent damage that inconsistent skincare has caused so many skin dwellers, and it feels deeply unjust. Years of trial and error don't just empty wallets—they leave biological imprints that can persist for months or even years after the triggering conditions are removed.

I've worried about communicating this effectively without overwhelming people. After all, it requires a fundamental shift in how we approach skincare—moving from product-first thinking to system-level understanding. But the evidence I've accumulated through thousands of client interactions gives me unwavering confidence.

Throughout my decade of work with clients—over 20,000 hours of hands-on experience—I've witnessed the remarkable transformation that occurs when we shift from fighting against the skin to working with its inherent intelligence. I've seen how addressing the underlying triggers that push skin into protection state creates receptivity that makes active ingredients dramatically more effective.

Just T-1 day until launch, and I couldn't be more ready to share this new path forward. After years of development, testing, and refinement, it's time to end both the financial and biological costs of the trial-and-error cycle—replacing inconsistency with a systematic approach that honors your skin's intelligence while providing the structure it needs to thrive.

Read the previous post in this series: When Your Audience Isn't Receptive (And Neither Is Their Skin)

[Sign up to be notified when Proof Positive Skin Care™ launches: LINK]