Crayola · Lip Gloss
Lip Smacker Crayola Liquid Lip Party Pack
Lower concern. Liquid lip cosmetic with no known PFAS triggers identified.
Lip Smacker's liquid formulation uses standard cosmetic pigments and waxes without reported waterproofing or stain-resistant coatings. No public PFAS disclosures found, but product type carries minimal inherent PFAS risk.
Shop Crayola on Amazon →Material
water-based liquid pigments, waxes, oils
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
Why this grade
Safe base material
Made from a material with no inherent PFAS use (ceramic, mineral, or natural fiber).
Category baseline
cosmetics is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement about PFAS in this product.
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
Lip Smacker Crayola products use water-based liquid pigments combined with waxes and oils as the primary formulation. This water-based approach avoids many solvent-related hazards common in traditional liquid lip products. The absence of heavy organic solvents reduces inhalation and dermal absorption risks. Waxes and oils serve as occlusive agents and are generally recognized as safe ingredients in cosmetics when sourced from standard suppliers.
The brand's record and disclosure
Crayola is a heritage children's product brand (owned by Hallmark) with long-standing informal commitment to child safety due to market positioning, though formal certifications (e.g., dermatologist-tested, hypoallergenic claims) vary by product line. The brand does not publicly disclose detailed safety testing protocols or ingredient sourcing specifics on this product. No major recalls or safety controversies for Lip Smacker lip products are on public record. Ingredient transparency is limited compared to indie or premium cosmetic brands.
How it compares in its category
Liquid lip glosses typically carry low hazard profiles compared to long-wear liquid lipsticks or matte formulas, which rely on film-forming resins and volatile carriers that increase off-gassing and skin irritation risk. Water-based formulations like this one sit at the safer end of the category spectrum. Most competitor brands in the children's lip gloss segment (e.g., other Lip Smacker flavors, basic drugstore alternatives) use similar water-based or wax-oil bases. Premium or indie brands may offer higher transparency but no demonstrably lower chemical risk.
If you buy it
Store in a cool, dry place away from direct sunlight to prevent oil separation and oxidation. Do not apply if the product shows separation, discoloration, or unusual odor, as water-based products lack the preservative stability of synthetic formulas and can degrade over time. Avoid contact with eyes; if irritation develops (redness, swelling), discontinue and rinse with water. Replace every 12-18 months to minimize microbial growth risk in the applicator wand.
Beyond PFAS: other things we checked
Established hazard classes for this product type, assessed from public information. These never change the PFAS grade; a Likely flag caps the Verdict at “Buy with care.”
Preservative adequacy and microbial growth
Water-based formulations require effective preservatives to prevent bacterial and fungal growth. Product literature does not disclose preservative type or concentration; if preservative system is insufficient, contamination risk increases over time, especially after opening.
Fragrance allergens and sensitizers
Lip Smacker products are marketed with strong flavor/fragrance profiles (e.g., fruity, candy scents). Individual fragrance components are not disclosed; some consumers report lip irritation or allergic contact dermatitis, though this is not unique to this brand or product line.
Color additive safety (pigments)
Water-based liquid pigments in cosmetics are typically synthetic or natural colorants approved by regulatory bodies (FDA color additives list for cosmetics). No specific safety alerts or recalls linked to Crayola Lip Smacker pigments have been identified in public records.
Talc or asbestos contamination
Lip glosses do not typically contain talc as a primary ingredient. Wax-oil bases are inherently talc-free, so contamination risk is minimal unless undisclosed talc is used as a secondary thickener; no evidence suggests this practice for this product.
Heavy metal trace contamination in pigments
Synthetic pigments can carry trace levels of heavy metals (lead, cadmium, arsenic) depending on sourcing and manufacturing. Crayola does not publicly release heavy metal testing data for this product; reliance on supplier standards without third-party verification leaves a gap in transparency.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 72% confidence. It is not a lab result.
No independent PFAS lab test is on record for this exact product. A lab test could move the score in either direction.
The brand has not made a specific, verifiable PFAS-free statement, so part of this score reflects that missing disclosure rather than a confirmed material.
Formulations and coatings change between production runs. Always check the current label before buying.
More lip gloss 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.