HIGH POTENCY DOESN’T HAVE TO MEAN HIGH AGGRESSION: Why we think the future of effective skincare lies in what surrounds the active.
During our research, as we spoke with over 50 women about how their skin was changing during midlife and what they felt was missing from skincare, one tension surfaced repeatedly:
“My skin is sensitive, but I still want effective skincare.”
They told us they wanted vitamin C. They wanted retinoids. They wanted exfoliating acids and peptides. They weren’t looking to abandon high-performance ingredients simply because their skin had become drier, more reactive or less tolerant than it once was.
But the market often seemed to present them with a choice: If your skin is sensitive, choose the gentle formula or just focus on moisturizing. If you want serious results, graduate to the stronger active and accept some irritation along the way. Peeling, redness, tightness and dryness can almost become signs that a product is doing something.
That tension became one of the questions behind Steinder Weisen:
What if potency and tolerability weren’t opposites?
The percentage is only part of the formula
Skincare has become remarkably numerate. We know our percentages now. Concentration is useful information and meaningful concentrations are fundamental to how we formulate at Steinder Weisen.
But a percentage tells you how much of an ingredient is present. It doesn’t tell you the entire story of the formula surrounding it.
Skin never encounters “10% vitamin C” floating independently in space. It encounters vitamin C inside a complex chemical system alongside solvents, lipids, humectants, emulsifiers, antioxidants, botanical compounds and other actives.
All of those decisions matter. So when we formulate a high-potency treatment, our question isn’t simply:
How much active can we put in this?
It’s:
What does the skin need around that active?
That distinction became one of the foundations of Steinder Weisen.
Our first rule: as potency increases, support should increase with it
We think of this as buffered potency.
Not buffering in the narrow chemical sense of simply controlling pH, but as a broader formulation philosophy: building support around concentrated actives rather than leaving the skin to contend with them alone.
If we ask more of the skin, we believe the formula should give more back. That means building support around our actives using ingredients and concentrations informed by peer-reviewed research and clinical studies—particularly research relevant to dry, sensitive, reactive and barrier-compromised skin.
Sometimes that means formulating at levels that aren’t necessarily the easiest to work with.
Panthenol at 5%+ is one example. Clinical studies have evaluated 5% panthenol and demonstrated benefits related to skin hydration, transepidermal water loss and barrier recovery. We also formulate with substantial levels of saccharide isomerate (PENTAVITIN®), alongside sodium PCA, ceramides, cholesterol and other components of the skin’s hydration and lipid-support systems.
At these levels, highly humectant ingredients can create formulation challenges of their own. Higher concentrations can contribute to tackiness, stickiness and an undesirable after-feel, which can make them more difficult to incorporate into an elegant sensory formula.
Rather than simply reducing their concentration until the formula felt more conventionally elegant, we worked on the architecture around them.
LAMELLARE™ Structural Lipid Crème is an example of this approach. Its high concentration of Copper Peptide Complex is surrounded by a hydration system and lipid architecture designed to support the skin barrier, including ceramides, cholesterol and borage oil—one of the richest botanical sources of gamma-linolenic acid (GLA), an essential omega-6 fatty acid.
Research on dietary GLA-rich borage oil has demonstrated improvements in measures of skin-barrier function, including reductions in transepidermal water loss, with studies in older adults and women also reporting improvements in parameters associated with dry skin.
This is particularly relevant to the changing skin we formulate for. As estrogen declines, the skin undergoes changes in its lipid composition, hydration and barrier function. Rather than treating hydration as the job of a single humectant, LAMELLARE approaches it as a system: bring water into the skin, help retain it, replenish important lipids, and support the barrier responsible for keeping that water there.
For us, this is part of the formulation challenge: not choosing between a clinically interesting concentration and a beautiful skin feel, but engineering the formula until we can achieve both.
The result reflects a larger Steinder Weisen principle: We choose ingredients and levels based on what we believe the skin needs, then work through the formulation challenges to make that system feel beautiful on the skin because we believe that:
Skin that’s struggling deserves more than correction, it deserves pampering and a touch of nutrient-rich indulgence.
Hydration doesn’t have to begin and end with hyaluronic acid
During our research, we realized something else: hyaluronic acid had become almost synonymous with hydration. It appeared everywhere: serums, moisturizers, masks, post-procedure products—often positioned as the default answer for dehydrated skin.
But we also heard from women with dry, sensitive and reactive skin who were actively looking for alternatives. Some felt hyaluronic acid didn’t provide the lasting comfort they wanted; for others, it simply didn’t work well with their skin.
So we chose not to build Steinder Weisen around it. Instead, we believe in nutrient density and ingredient diversity, giving skin a broader range of humectants, lipids, minerals, antioxidants, amino acids and barrier-supportive ingredients, each contributing something different to the formula.
Instead, we formulate hydration through multiple mechanisms: humectants such as sodium PCA and Pentavitin (Saccharide Isomerate), barrier-supportive ceramides and cholesterol, phospholipids, panthenol, ectoin, allantoin and nutrient-rich lipids, depending on the needs of each formula.
Because hydration isn’t the job of a single ingredient. It’s the result of attracting water, helping retain it, supporting the barrier that prevents its loss, and replenishing the lipids dry skin may be missing.
For us, leaving out hyaluronic acid wasn’t about declaring it a bad ingredient. It was about asking a more interesting question:
What else can hydration look like? The objective isn’t to neutralize the active or make an intentionally powerful treatment weak. The objective is to engineer potency into a more complete system that also supports the skin barrier. This becomes particularly important for the skin we formulate for: skin that is dry, sensitive, reactive, barrier-compromised or changing with age.
Menopause doesn’t simply change how skin looks. Declining estrogen is associated with measurable changes in how skin functions. Research has found lower levels of stratum-corneum ceramides after menopause, as well as changes in ceramide chain length, important because ceramides are fundamental components of the lipid matrix that helps keep water in and irritants out. Shorter ceramide chains have also been associated with a less effective epidermal barrier and greater transepidermal water loss.
At the same time, sebum production declines, water-binding components of the skin decrease, and the skin can become drier and less resilient. Estrogen deficiency is also associated with reductions in collagen, elastin and glycosaminoglycans. Research suggests that nearly 30% of skin collagen may be lost during the first five years after menopause, followed by continued decline thereafter.
In other words, changing skin may be losing some of the very structural, lipid and water-retaining components that once helped it tolerate environmental stress and intensive skincare. That’s why we don’t believe the answer is simply to give changing skin fewer actives.
We believe the active system and the support system have to be engineered together. Because during our research, we didn’t hear women asking for skincare that did less. They wanted efficacy without having to sacrifice comfort to get it.
BUFFÈRE™: Designing for the extreme use case
Changing skin may be losing some of the very structural, lipid and water-retaining components that once helped it tolerate environmental stress and intensive skincare. That’s why we don’t believe the answer is simply to give changing skin fewer actives. We believe it needs a stronger support system around them.
BUFFÈRE™ may be the clearest expression of that philosophy. We wanted to approach dehydration and barrier disruption through multiple mechanisms at once. So rather than building the formula around a single fashionable hydrator, BUFFÈRE combines 7% ectoin, 8.10% liposomal allantoin, more than 5% panthenol, 5.55% jojoba phospholipids, sodium PCA and saccharide isomerate, alongside ceramides, cholesterol and other barrier-supportive lipids.
Each contributes something different. Humectants help attract and retain water. Ectoin supports hydration and cellular protection against environmental stress. Panthenol and allantoin support skin comfort and barrier recovery. Phospholipids contribute to the lipid architecture of the formula, while ceramides and cholesterol support the lipid matrix that helps limit water loss.
In other words, we aren’t asking one molecule to solve dehydration. But what we put into BUFFÈRE was only half of the formulation challenge.
During our research, we noticed something interesting. Even products specifically positioned for babies, sensitive skin or compromised barriers often relied on many of the same familiar formulation ingredients. And while those ingredients may work beautifully for many people, we repeatedly heard from consumers whose skin simply didn’t get along with some of them.
So we asked ourselves: What would happen if we designed for the extreme use case first?
Instead of formulating for the average consumer and then trying to make the formula suitable for sensitive skin, we started with the person whose skin seems to reject almost everything.
That led us to formulate BUFFÈRE without a conventional fatty-alcohol structuring system and without hyaluronic acid, niacinamide, tocopherol, soy, grain-derived ingredients, nut butters or ragweed-family ingredients.
Not because we believe these are inherently bad ingredients. They’re not. Many have excellent applications in skincare. But “good ingredient” and “right ingredient for every person” are not the same thing.
By removing several ingredients and ingredient families that can be limiting for particular consumers, while simultaneously building a nutrient-dense hydration and lipid system around the formula, we wanted to create something that could work for a broader range of difficult-to-formulate-for skin.
It’s an approach borrowed from the logic of inclusive design: Design for the edge case, and you may create something that works better for everyone in between.
BUFFÈRE therefore approaches hydration from both directions: carefully considering what goes in, while being equally deliberate about what stays out.
The result isn’t a formula designed to do less because skin is sensitive. It’s a formula designed to give sensitive skin more ways to be supported—and fewer reasons to say no.
We focus on synergistic ingredients to amplify effects through multiple mechanisms of action versus one single ingredient innovation
There’s another pattern in the way skincare innovation is often discussed: the search for a single breakthrough. A laboratory discovers a new peptide. A biotechnology company develops a novel active. A brand builds its identity around a proprietary complex or delivery technology. Think of the way brands have built an entire scientific narrative around a signature complex.
These innovations can be meaningful. But they can also reinforce the idea that there must be one extraordinary ingredient or technology responsible for extraordinary skin.
We tend to talk about formulas as collections of individual ingredients that work together and amplify each others effects.
The most interesting part of formulation isn’t always what each ingredient can do independently. It’s what happens when they are deliberately combined.
At Steinder Weisen, we look for synergistic ingredients that can approach the same skin concern through multiple mechanisms of action.
Rather than asking one hero ingredient to carry the entire formula, we build systems around it.
The goal is synergy because the combination of ingredients working through different mechanisms is more intelligent than the ingredients viewed individually.
What that looks like in practice
Take ROWANE™, our Triple Vitamin C Émulsion.
It contains 8.88% total vitamin C across three forms: THD Ascorbate, 3-O-Ethyl Ascorbic Acid and Ascorbyl Glucoside.
We could stop the story there. 8.88% triple vitamin C is an easy number to communicate. But that isn’t how we think about ROWANE.
The vitamin C system sits alongside Australian Kakadu plum, known as the world’s richest natural source of vitamin C, tocotrienols, potent members of the vitamin E family, azelaic acid, an ingredient widely used in rosacea-prone skin, plus niacinamide, ferulic acid, ceramides, cholesterol, and carotenoid-rich glow oils: cloudberry, buriti, sea buckthorn berry and carrot oils.
The formula is designed as an antioxidant system, not a bottle built around a single percentage.
The same philosophy appears in LISSE™, our Barrier Exfoliant Concentré.
Its 9.52% dual-AHA system combines mandelic and lactic acids, Buffered by Design.
But exfoliation is only half of the formulation problem. If we’re going to deliberately accelerate the removal of surface cells, what should surround that process?
So LISSE™ also incorporates 3.40% N-acetyl glucosamine, more than 5% panthenol, and a nine-botanical complex of watercress, burdock root, sage, willow bark, witch hazel, lemon peel, ivy, soapwort and bladderwrack—building clarifying and skin-supportive ingredients around its 9.52% dual-AHA system.
With RÉAU™, our Omega Retinoid Concentré contains 0.36% Retinol by Molecular Weight, we wanted to rethink what a retinoid formula could look like for dry, sensitive and changing skin.
At its center is Retinyl Linoleate, an omega-rich retinoid ester that combines retinol with linoleic acid, an essential omega-6 fatty acid naturally present in healthy skin.
But the retinoid isn’t working alone. We pair it with Bakuchiol, which supports visible skin renewal through a complementary pathway without being a retinoid itself, and CoQ10, which adds antioxidant support to help defend against the oxidative stress associated with visible skin aging.
Then we surround that active system with a nutrient-dense lipid architecture of meadowfoam, rice bran, chia and goldenberry seed oils, cupuaçu and shea butters, squalane, phospholipids and other omega-rich lipids designed to replenish moisture and support the skin barrier throughout the renewal process.
So instead of asking a single retinoid to do everything, RÉAU approaches renewal through multiple mechanisms: vitamin A, driven renewal, complementary bakuchiol activity, antioxidant defense, and lipid and barrier support.
It’s our formulation philosophy in one product: Increase the potency. Increase the support. Different products. Different actives. The same underlying philosophy.
Sensitive skincare doesn’t mean unsophisticated
Perhaps this is the larger point. For a long time, sensitive-skin skincare has been defined largely by subtraction.
Remove the fragrance.
Remove the acids.
Remove the retinoids.
Lower the concentration.
Simplify everything.
And sometimes subtraction is exactly what skin needs. But we don’t believe sensitive skin should automatically be relegated to skincare that asks very little of it. There is another path: Formulate the high-performance treatment differently.
Think beyond the hero active. Think beyond the percentage printed on the front of the bottle. Think about the lipids surrounding it. The hydration system. The supporting actives. The vehicle. The complementary mechanisms. The entire architecture through which the skin experiences that potency.
Because ultimately, skin doesn’t experience an ingredient list one ingredient at a time. It experiences the formula. And that’s where we believe some of the most interesting innovation in skincare is still waiting to happen.
High potency. Buffered by design. Amplified by synergy.
The formula is only part of the system: The Layland Method™
The Layland Method™ was inspired in part by regenerative agriculture, where land is left to rest so it can regenerate and remineralize. The idea that a living system thrives not through constant extraction or intervention, but through cycles of renewal, replenishment and recovery. We applied that thinking to changing skin, alternating targeted actives with hydration, barrier lipids and recovery rather than asking skin to tolerate maximum intervention every day.
Skin moves through cycles of renewal and recovery. Its needs change from morning to evening, from one day to the next, and as hormones, environment, stress and age alter the way it functions.
We developed The Layland Method™ around a rhythm of treatment and recovery. Some days introduce retinoids or exfoliating acids. Others emphasize antioxidants, hydration, barrier lipids and recovery. The intention isn’t to expose skin to every active, every day. It’s to give skin different forms of support at different moments while addressing five interconnected areas of skin function: hydration, barrier integrity, oxidative stress, structural support and microbiome balance.
Before launch, the approach was tested by more than 20 participants representing very different perspectives on skin: including cosmetic chemists, beauty-industry professionals, estheticians, menopausal and perimenopausal women, and people with dry, sensitive, reactive and barrier-compromised skin.
We weren’t simply asking whether they liked an individual product.
We wanted to know what happened when the formulas were used as a system.
The feedback began surprisingly quickly. One participant with perimenopausal, dry skin reported that by Day 4, her skin felt recovered and looked deeply hydrated, plumper and healthier, with a glow she hadn’t seen in a long time.
Across the broader testing group, we heard variations of the same underlying theme. Participants described hydration that lasted throughout the day rather than disappearing after application. Sensitive and reactive skin was described as comfortable, calm and hydrated. Others reported softer, healthier-looking skin; greater radiance; products that layered without leaving skin greasy; and hydration without the congested feeling they had experienced with previous moisturizers.
One post-menopausal participant with rosacea-prone skin reported brighter, more radiant-looking skin after three days of ROWANE™ without the breakouts she typically experienced when trying vitamin C.
And perhaps the feedback that best captured what we were trying to build came from a participant with redness-prone, perimenopausal skin:
“Every step seemed to complement the next.” That is the idea behind The Layland Protocol™.
The formula matters. But so do sequence, frequency, complementarity and recovery. A retinoid doesn’t need to be used every night to belong in a serious regimen. An exfoliant doesn’t need to be used every day. And recovery isn’t time away from treatment. Recovery is part of the treatment strategy.
Because changing skin doesn’t need maximum intervention every day. It needs a system intelligent enough to change with it.