- Premium reviews
- Express reviews
- Reviews rated
- Ratings received
‘Origins of Love’ tackles the controversial topic of Indian surrogacy brokers who arrange for poor local women to carry babies for (relatively) well-to-do western couples. The book starts in New Delhi where baby Amelia lies in the intensive care ward, infected with HIV. Her European ‘parents’ have been killed in a car accident and her birth mother has disappeared into the night. Only social worker Simran Singh is interested ento try to find the baby a family. It’s unclear how and when the baby could have become infected since both the parents and the bio-mother had negative blood tests on their records and nobody is around to tell the truth any more.
It would be easy to make this a story of evil, lazy, European career women selfishly keeping their figures by letting a poor brown lady half a world away deal with the pain and inconvenience of birth but author Kiran Desai tries to give balance to the controversy. We’re shown a host of reasons why both the Indian and western women could find themselves in the situation of considering surrogacy. For every desperate western woman who can’t do it herself, there’s a woman seeking physical, emotional or economic independence through the money that surrogacy brings.
In London a woman miscarries her child after years of trying to conceive. Left unable to continue trying, she tries to persuade her partner to consider surrogacy and they travel to India to consider their choices. He has a half-dream of finding people who might know his grandfather, a man who was rumoured to have a local ‘wife’ in India and who might have had children with her. They have a complex set of options, none of them easy - adoption, surrogacy, or even just giving up on their dream.
Simran goes to London to try to track down a man she thinks might have been the sperm donor for baby Amelia and goes to absurd lengths to pretend she’s a successful woman who wants a baby but doesn’t want a husband. There’s a ‘will they won’t they’ storyline with a man she manages to simultaneously be attracted to and - thinking he may be the source of the HIV - to be repelled by.
I found the flow of the story very confusing and annoying with the plot hopping backwards and forwards in time. At times you really can get a bit lost about what’s supposed to have already happened and what’s still to come. The plot often feels unnecessarily complicated and some threads of the story disappear for long periods and pop back again unexpectedly. Explanations eventually emerge for most of the questions raised but sometimes it can all feel a bit forced.
At the end of November last year I started to get some really disturbing headaches which - thanks to Dr Google - I quickly identified as being Aura Migraine headaches and found were probably just ‘one of those things’ about getting older. I’ve read that they are quite common in pre-menopausal women and I'm in the right age range to get these.
These aura attacks normally aren’t painful but they were pretty scary when they started. I can’t really even call them headaches because they don’t make my head ache - but they do affect my vision. I get sparkly patches of disturbance around the periphery of my vision. Generally the attacks are quite mild and last around 15 minutes. Occasionally I’ll have one with more disturbance and my very first attack was accompanied by a banging headache that thankfully hasn’t come back since.
More googling brought me a potential solution - Riboflavin.
Riboflavin is vitamin B2 and for reasons I don’t claim to fully understand, it’s a vitamin that has been studied for its impact on reducing migraines and headaches. It’s been shown to reduce both the frequency and severity with testers taking fewer painkillers and reporting fewer attacks.
I bought a bottle of Solgar vegetarian capsules on Amazon and started taking them about 3 weeks ago. During that time I’ve had just one mile aura attack. Prior to taking them, they were happening as often as 3 times a week.
I chose Solgar because it’s a good brand and because I prefer a vegetarian option if it’s available. The capsules contain 100 mg of riboflavin and should be taken with food. Don’t try to just get away with a glass of water or milk as they may repeat on you and a half digested riboflavin capsule tastes really foul as I have found out to my cost. Not only are these vegetarian, they’re also suitable for vegans and are free from sugar, salt and starch as well as being suitable for people with allergies to gluten, wheat, dairy, soy, yeast, preservatives, sweeteners and artifical colours or flavours.
A bottle contains 100 capsules so if I stick with the programme, that’s about 3 months worth. I have a lousy history of adherence to supplement regimes and my cupboards are full of barely started bottles of assorted goodies. If you’re like me, take comfort from the best before date being 2018.
One final thing to be aware of is that these tablets give you fluorescent yellow pee. It’s realy quite impressive but if you’re forewarned, it shouldn’t come as too much of a shock.
Last week I gave back my Nokia Lumia 620 after nearly 2 years together. It had reached a point where we were no longer compatible. I won't say he'd changed or I'd changed but we'd definitely grown apart. He'd stopped talking to me, stopped responding to my touch. He had to go!
It had been a mostly quite harmonious relationships. We'd not chosen each other - it was an 'arranged' marriage brokered by the IT department who'd clearly got an excellent deal on the 620 and were handing it out to everyone. I'd not wanted it. I wanted to stay with my old HTC android phone but they'd been recalled. There were no options - other than spending my own hard earned dosh on buying an iPhone.
The lack of Android was my first and greatest annoyance with this phone. When I got it I was doing Weightwatchers and tracking on my HTC. Nokia Lumia are Windows phones, not Android, and there was no app for Windows. I was miffed.
Setting it up would have taken me forever. It's all very well that the phone companies tell us their phones are 'intuitive' but it's only the case if you've had one before. There was almost zero similarity between this and my earlier phones. Luckily a colleague - the department boffin - showed me how to transfer icons to my home screen with the hold, click, shrink, drag methods.
Battery life was never excellent and towards the end of life it was downright poor. I used to carry a spare battery in case of emergencies. I know this is common with mobile phones but it's supposed to be mobile, not permanently tethered to a charging cable.
The size and weight are fine but you should buy a case and a screen cover as the breakage of screens proved to be a common problem amongst the users at work. For what I needed - which was pretty basic - the phone was fine for most of the time I had it. I had home and work emails, facebook, photos, weather apps, internet access and that was pretty much my lot. I don't keep music on a work phone or do anything terribly complicated.
Two things killed my phone and led to it going back to the IT department's cardboard box of doom. The screen became intermittently unresponsive. The phone would ring and I'd couldn't take the call because the screen jammed. Or I couldn't hang up a call because the screen wasn't responding. And the other issue was that it wouldn't switch on unless I took the back off and removed the battery. It had to go.
When I first bought my set of small Dr Hauschka samples tubes just over a year ago, I wrote about the set and tested all of the products. At that time I raved about the Quince Boyd milk and how fantastic it smelled. I thought it was lovely. And then I put the products back in their tin and back in the cupboard and got them out again today. During that time they’ve been stored in a cool, dark place. Today I got this one out with a slight sense of excitement because I’d liked it so much and it smells of disappointment. I was never sure what quince should smell like but a year ago it smelled better than this.
If the tubes or the tin were marked - as I might have expected - with the little logo of the half-open jar and a number to indicate the expected life after opening, I would feel justified in kicking myself for not using it before it went bad. But there is no such logo and on my little tube, it clearly states “Best used before the end of: see fold” and the date on the fold at the end of the metal tube says 02. 2016.
If this smells this bad after a year, what will it smell like in another 12 months? Sorry Dr Hauschka but you’re making promises that you can’t deliver and a natural products company should know better. Shame on you. On the cardboard sleeve that was inside my tin, the Best before date was given as 05.2015 - the date of the shortest dated product in the tin.
The cream is a buff beige, it’s very soft and it spreads very quickly and very easily. I was surprised how far just a small blob went. And then I got my nose down and close to my arm to sniff in the quince goodness and coughed as the aroma caught the back of my throat. The cream soaks in well and quickly but I really want to go and wash it off to get rid of the unpleasant smell.
My advice on Dr Hauschka? Don’t buy it by mail, smell it in the store before you buy and make sure you do actually like it, and then use it as quickly as you can.
Like the rose body moisturiser I already reviewed, this will cost you £24 for 145ml and I wouldn’t buy it if it were £2.40 a bottle.
When I got my tube of Rose Body Moisturiser out of the tin of Dr Hauschka samples to sit and write about it, my first instinct was the check the use by date on the tube because I struggled to believe that it hadn’t gone ‘off’. According to the use by date stamped on the crimped end of the tube, I have another three months before it will be past its best. I can only imagine how bad it would be if I’d left it another year before getting round to writing.
I expected a milk-like consistency. Why? Because in French it’s ‘lait pour le corps rose’ - i.e. rose milk for the body ‘ and in German it’s ‘Bodymilk Rozen’ - or rose body milk. So imagine my surprise that it came out of the tube as quite a thick cream. Imagine also my surprise that it looked a dull sludgy beige in colour. I squirted out a little more to see if it was just an ‘end of tube’ effect - something quite typical with metal tubes - and it did get better further through the tube.
It thins out with a bit of rubbing and I found it relatively easy to rub in the cream although it did leave my skin tacky for another half hour after applying.
I love rose scents but if it didn’t say ‘rose’ on the tube, I’m not convinced that I could have identified this rather dull and slightly ‘off’ scent as being rose-based. Surprisingly Rosa Damascena flower extract is the second biggest ingredient in this product after water and before sweet almond oil. There’s even a fair dose of shea butter so it ought to be a decent cream. The rose elements of the ingredients list include the aforementioned Rosa Damascena flower extract, Rosa Canina fruit extract, Rosa Damascena flower wax and Rosa Damascena flower oil. So the question remains, why doesn’t it smell a lot more clean and rosy than it does?
My conclusion would be that a product like this that’s supposed to be organic probably just isn’t stable enough to be sold with such a long best before date. I bought this kit at the end of 2013 so at the time it was sold, it was giving an unrealistically long shelf life, especially considering the tiny metal tubes it was enclosed in.
This product is normally sold in a bottle which might be more stable than the tubes. A small 10 ml tube like mine is available for £3 but the full size - a not very generous 145ml bottle - would cost you £24.00. There are many companies using similar natural claims that don’t charge such shocking prices for such poor creams.
I bought a Dr Hauschka kit a while ago - it was the Daily Body Care Kit which contained six none-too-generous small tubes or bottles of Dr Hauschka body products. One of these was the Dr Hauschka hand cream.
I am quite surprised that a company with as enormous a range of products as Dr H (sorry, I just can’t keep typing that name) seemingly has only ONE hand cream but perhaps they figure they’ve got it right and don’t need to introduce any more hand creams. I’m not so sure.
Dr Hauschka is a German brand focusing on natural plant-rich therapeutic products, or at least that’s how I’d characterise them. This positioning isn’t rare in Germany and any visit to a shop selling toiletries will throw up many other of these naturopathy/plant science/organic quackery companies.
The hand cream is a light primrose yellow in colour and is quite thin and runny. It spreads easily and soaks into my hands very quickly leaving them touch-dry again very quickly so I can get back to my keyboard without having to wave my hands around or go looking for a tissue to soak up any excess. Oddly, the Dr H website suggests that it’s a perfect product for softening dry, rough elbows. Now call me picky if you like, but I don’t consider my elbows are very near to my hands and surely a product to fix hands and elbows is a body lotion rather than a hand cream.
Half an hour or so after applying this, I don't feel any sense of lingering effectiveness. It's more of a quick fix, short term product than a hard-working and long-lasting option.
Despite all their ‘natural’ and ‘organic’ claims, I’m not impressed by the ingredient list since I prefer to buy hand creams containing a high level of shea butter and it seems this has none. The top ingredients are water, alcohol and glycerine and only the fourth ingredient is actually a plant oil - in this case sweet almond oil. There are a ton of different natural extracts including carrot extract - which maybe explains the strange colour - but I cannot work out which of them is responsible for the really quite unpleasant scent of this product. To me it smells like someone chucked everything they could find into the pot rather than committing to one scent direction and made something that doesn’t smell balanced or pleasant.
If I haven’t put you off, a tiny 10 ml tube of this stuff will set you back £3 and a 50ml tube is £12.50.
It’s a bizarre thing about Kindles that their covers often cost up to half of the cost of the actual e-reader. I think that’s crazy but for a case that does something special, I am more than willing to pay GBP20 to protect my investment. I paid 19.99 in the Black Friday sales last year.
The origami case is designed for the 7 inch 3rd Gen Kindle Fire HDX so if you don’t have one of those, don’t buy it. If you do, go place your order because it’s a really clever piece of kit. I’m reminded of William Morris’s oft quoted maxim about having nothing in your home unless you know it to be useful or believe it to be beautiful. The Origami Case scores on both points. It’s a deeply satisfying piece of practical design.
You can keep things very simple and just use it as a straightforward cover but it comes into its own when it converts into a stand. I really wanted a stand for my new kindle because I watch a lot of films and TV shows on my device and it’s much easier to watch if you don’t have to hold it all the time.
I can’t pretend that I understand how it works but the case uses magnetism and clever folds - hence the Origami name. The Kindle fits onto the back plate of the case by magnetism so there are no straps or buttons or gizmos. It just magnetises into place and provides a hard, protective shell. The foldable side of the case is a stiff polyurethane sheet that can either lie totally flat over the screen to protect it, or flat against the back to make it easy to hold when you’re reading. Then when you want to use it as a stand, you bend along the folds and it snaps into place by magnetism. The screen then stands at an angle of around 50 degrees for easy viewing.
The stand can be used in both landscape and portrait format and I’ve done both. I find it more stable in landscape. When you close the case, it automatically turns off the Kindle. I also like that the inside of the part of the case that goes over the screen is lined with a sort of soft microfibre fabric.
The only concern I’ve had about the Origami case is the magnetism. I was charging it on my husband’s dressing table and when I went to pick it up, it had picked up a couple of keys and paperclips. I’m a little nervous that if I put this in my handbag, it would pick up all sorts of metal junk in my bag, and more seriously it would probably wipe out any hotel room passes I was carrying.
Most of the year we have no problem with flies but because we have three cats and we tend to feed them in the kitchen or the utility room, in the summer months the food can attract flies and I don’t want them making my furry friends poorly. Mind you, given that cats are happy to eat still warm small critters and even their own (or another cat’s vomit), it’s fair to say our cats aren’t the fussiest of eaters. I definitely don’t want to use toxic insect sprays which might harm feline and human inhabitants and I also think they’re a pretty nasty way to kill insects. Better surely that they go from thinking “Hey, pretty blue light” to total oblivion in a nano-second.
we used to have a very effective bug zapper which crackled as it dispatched the little winged beasties into the next world. It worked but I really didn’t like hearing the execution of the flies. I want them dead but I don’t want front row seats for watching the deadly deed being done. Last summer my husband picked up this high voltage insect killer at Lidl or one of the DIY chain stores. It was very inexpensive - around the £7 or £8 mark. The RRP is 14.99 but if you fancy frying the life out of any passing insects, you can pick one up on Amazon at the moment for around a tenner.
This is a neat little device and it can either be stood on a flat surface or hung from a hook on the ceiling. It stands about 8 inches high and is very lightweight since most of it is made of plastic. Our zapper sits on top of one of the kitchen cabinets and is plugged into a socket below.
The construction is quite simple. It has a long, narrow, blue light bulb in the middle which attracts the bugs. Around the blue light there are concentric wires and as the bugs fly excitedly toward the blue light, they get fried on the wires. The larger bugs then drop into the plastic tray at the bottom where they are collected whilst the little ones sometimes stick to the wires in a slightly disturbing way.
Our zapper is plugged in and switched on constantly even through the colder months when there are no flies. If you get nervous about spending money on electricity, don’t worry. This device is just 3 or 4 watts which means it can be left on for thousands of ours and not impact on your electricity bill.
It’s lightweight, light on the wallet and very light on your fuel bills but it will quietly zap the living daylights out of flies, moths and midges.
I love the Body Shop rose hand cream and the rose hand butter so I thought it was pretty likely that I'd also love the hand oil. This just goes to show that we shouldn't make assumptions and that I should test stuff in the store before buying. Why? Because I think it's absolutely awful and I really don't know what I'm supposed to be doing with it.
The rose scent of this range of hand products is excellent - a really classy, high quality rose - and the roller ball applicator makes it easy to apply in a targeted way. Though I'm still not really sure how or why I should be using it.
What I most don't like is the thick, sticky texture. As an oil, I'd like it to be thinner and easier to spread. I find it hard to rub in and unpleasant. I've tried using it on my cuticles, figuring that the roller ball might mean that was what it's intended for, but it's still not very good. I guess if I had particularly dry patches of skin on my hands it would be a way to target those areas, but I don't have that problem and so I don't get any advantage from this product.
I can't find this product on the Body Shop website any more which makes me suspect that I'm not the only person who didn't like it but also means I can't tell you what it cost. I know that at the time I thought it was pretty expensive and I hoped for a lot more than I got from this disappointing product.
I found a tin of Badger Cuticle Care in my drawer recently and wondered why I’d forgotten that I had it. I clearly remember buying it in Waitrose when I was on a ‘make my cuticles better’ drive. I soon lost interest and put the tin to one side. Why? Because I found this product really difficult to like.
Superficially it has a lot going for it. It comes in a cute little tin with a badger on the lid - who could resist. For that matter, who even knew there were badgers in North America? The problem is that you soon realise that the little tin is way too big for what it needs to do. I have been using another balm on my cuticles - it comes in a tiny 7 ml tub with a good screw top. It’s big enough. This one contains 21g of product and is about the same size as a Vaseline tin - and just as likely to have the lid fall off and the contents get covered in fluff and dust and all the rubbish at the bottom of your handbag.
Enough about the tin, what about the stuff inside? Sadly it’s disappointing. At this time of year it’s cold and stiff. It’s not easy to use as it’s too hard and too sticky. I can’t get a tiny bit out so I end up with loads of it all over my fingers. It doesn’t rub in easily and my cuticles don’t feel ‘cared for’ in the way that I expected.
It contains loads of good stuff, has great organic and natural credentials and I really do WANT to like it but I don’t. I will give other Badger products a go but this one is going into the bin. I hate the way it feels and I don’t want it around. I have a sneaky suspicion that I might be keeping the tin though - that little badger is just too cute.
I’m a great lover of the Emjoi Micro Pedi and my husband bought me one a few years ago for Christmas. Because I have two homes, I often end up duplicating home items so that I don’t have to drag them back and forth. I decided to buy a second battery-operated foot pedi machine and opted for the Scholl Pedi Express because it was a lot cheaper than the original Emjoi model. I bought mine last year in the Black Friday deals and so I’m writing from the perspective of a year with the Scholl and several years with the Emjoi.
Electric pedi sanders are great and the two models are so similar as to make you wonder Emjoi didn’t work harder at protecting their design. In both cases you have a chunky handy into which you put the AA batteries. Both have a slide button on the front to switch it on - both are one speed only. The revolving head spins a coarse sandpaper roller over your skin to rub away hard, dry skin.
I prefer the design of the Emjoi as it seems to offer a bit more freedom on the angle at which you present the pedi machine to the skin. With the Scholl I find there’s quite a restricted position in which it works properly. As I move the pedi over my feet, I have to over-manoeuvre the Scholl to keep it in good skin contact compared to the Emjoi.
For both of the devices I am deeply irritated by having to use batteries. In these days of rechargeable equipment, I feel the manufacturers should have been able to make a plug in or a rechargeable device to save on throw-away batteries and usage costs. I don’t notice a marked difference between the battery power with the two devices.
The other component of the cost of running one of these is the replacement rollers. Substitute rollers made by other companies are available now for both devices at around 10.00 for 4 (see Amazon) but the ‘official’ rollers are 6-8 pounds each. If you have monster hard skin like me, that can add up over a year.
The Scholl electric pedi is generally available slightly cheaper than the Emjoi but chances are you’ll not find the difference significant. I’ve only see the rollers available in one coarseness on the Scholl whereas the Emjoi has a finer sanding option if you buy the less coarse rollers. Personally I’m always looking for maximum grind so I only buy the coarse ‘blue’ rollers but for those with less challenging hard skin, the option to have two strengths may be important and may drive them away from the Scholl.
Despite repeatedly reporting to dooyoo that this review had not received its dooyoo miles due to the system adding multiple additional words as a result of formatting, I have still not been able to get any payment for this review.
I have therefore decided to delete the content. I have lost a lot of points since the revamp of dooyoo early in the year as a result of this problem and I'm not going to continue to give my work to the site for nothing.
I was given a full sized tube of Dermalogica Multivitamin Hand and Nail Cream to test about a year ago and I’ve now almost finished the tube. I always have a lot of different hand creams on the go but I often get bored with them before I reach the end. I didn’t want to miss a drop of this one so I’ve just cut open the tube and scrape out all the little bits left inside because this stuff is too good and too expensive to waste. You’d be amazed how much cream you can get out of an apparently empty tube.
Dermalogica is not a cheap brand and a 75 ml tube of this will set you back around 20 pound. I’m not going to pretend that’s not extraordinarily expensive for a hand cream so I would recommend trying to get a sampler before you buy.
The cream is much more lightweight than the ones I would normally buy and it’s not really a tough cold-weather hand cream. When the temperature plummets, I want something thicker and more substantial than this. However, for the warmer times of the year, it’s perfect because it’s light enough to soak in quickly and get your hands back to typing and writing condition without wasting too much time.
During the time I’ve had this cream, I’ve been decanting small amounts into small screw-top tubs so I don’t have to carry too much around. It became a staple in the bottom of my handbag and I was soon taking it out for a dab after each time I washed my hands and rubbing it into my cuticles and nails as well as my hands. What I like best about the cream is the scent which is absolutely delicious. It’s a sort of citrussy rose scent mixed with a big dollop of coconut. Considering that I loathe the smell of coconut products, it’s all the more remarkable that I like this one so much.
On the downside, I find it’s necessary to reapply this frequently as the impact wears off very quickly. This means I’m encouraged to apply it to my cuticles more often, but if I were paying 20.00 for a hand cream, I’d feel a bit cheated if I had to reapply it multiple times.
The cream is positioned as an anti-ageing product but it contains no sun protection which seems like a lost opportunity to me. It has retinol and a bunch of natural plant extracts but I’d rather have a good sun filter. What’s the point in trying to ‘reverse’ skin ageing when you could just try to prevent it in the first place.
I’m happy to have had the chance to try this, I love the smell and I find it easy to use regularly but it’s just too expensive for a hand cream.
Ever since the clever folks at Elizabeth Arden first worked out how to stick liquids inside little capsule beads way back in the 1990s, they seem to have been finding new and different things to encapsulate. I started with them way back when they were really ‘hot’ at AHA capsules and picked them up 20 years later in the form of these Ceramide Gold UltraLift & Strengthening Eye Capsules and their Ceremide Daily Youth Restoring Serum capsules (which I’ve already reviewed and which you use on your face). I got an excellent price for a multi-pack containing 3 packs of 30 of these eye capsules for 25.95 from www.allbeauty.com The regular price for 60 of these at Boots is 50.00.
I’ve used 60 of the ones for my face but am still working my way through the first pack of 30 eye capsules. If I were to buy again, and if I could get them at a good price, I would but the face capsules ahead of the eye ones. They really just don’t ‘do it’ for me the way the others do.
The first challenge is to actually get into the capsule. The capsules look a bit like an egg and a sperm just met and to get into the contents, you need to twist off the tail. What’s quite an easy to twist off format in the larger face capsule is a very tiny and fiddly little blob in the eye version. If I have nail scissors to hand, I use them, but when I’m travelling and relying on my fingernails, I find it hard to get the tip off without spilling the liquid that’s inside.
Once you’ve got the twist off tip twisted off, the liquid inside is VERY thin and quite hard to direct. You should dab it on your fingertips and then pat it around the eye area. If you get the dispensing a bit clumsy and lose some of the liquid you can be left short-changed but if you get it all out, for me it’s just too much thin oil for my eye area and I’m left wondering what to do with the rest of the capsule once I’ve sorted out my eyes. It’s too expensive to just throw it away so I tend to use what’s leftover on the skin around my mouth.
After applying, the oil sinks in within five to ten minutes and you can apply other products on top. I find it’s just too much if I use both the eye and face capsules at the same time and I’d rather just stick with the face ones. The product is supposed to make skin firmer, rduced lines and puffiness and give you softer smoother skin. Does it? It’s hard to be sure but used regularly, it does make my skin feel very good.
I am a big fan of the French toiletries firm L’Occitane and I’ve tried a lot of their products, thanks partly to their habit of selling products in collections of small bottles and partly to the generosity of one of their shop assistants at the outlet store where I shop. I particularly love their face creams but I hadn’t given much attention to their ‘Ultra Gentle Moisturizer’, tending to focus instead on their fancier products. Whilst sorting through my drawers for products I owned that were listed on dooyoo, this one popped up - in fact I had several tubes - so I popped one in my bag to take away with me last week.
In contrast to many of the heavily scented products from L’Occitane, the ‘ultra gentle moisurizer’ (they spell it with the Z) is an unscented and relatively simplistic product. It doesn’t claim lots of cutting edge or highly technical goodies. Instead it focuses on the use of 8% shea butter in the lovely rich recipe. Most who know shea will probably associated it with good quality hand creams more than face creams but I’ve had several other products in their ‘Shea’ range and I know them to be excellent for dry or really dry skin.
For me this is a winter or very dry environment cream. I had two 9-hour flights last week so this cream was the best protection I could come up with for surviving the harsh cabin air. I slathered it on quickly just before take off, gave it a lighter top up about half-way through, and when I stepped off the other end, my face was much more awake and well cared for than any other part of me.
The hotel where I was staying was horribly air conditioned. The noise alone would have been enough to drive me crazy but the dry, unpleasant air meant I kept up the ‘Ultra Gentle Moisturizer’ all week. It made my skin for comfortable, moisturised and cared for all week and it was really noticeable that I woke up with my skin feeling fabulous each morning. I really can’t grumble.
This wouldn’t be my choice for light or summer moisturising but when you really need a bit of TLC, this one is top of the list. At an RRP of 29.00 for 50 ml it’s quite inexpensive for L’Occitane and worth every penny. Give it a go!