Skinredientspore-clogging ingredient checker

Ingredient ratings / Mineral Oil

Is mineral oil comedogenic? What the pore-clogging tests found

By Skinredients · Checked against the sources 2026-10-16

In Fulton's 1989 rabbit-ear survey, mineral oil tested at 10% graded 0 to 2 on the 0-5 pore-clogging scale, with no irritation. Fulton said the result depended on the source: some mineral oils passed and others did not. Kligman later wrote that the older rabbit-ear reports of comedogenic mineral oils were false positives of the original assay.

Label name
Mineral Oil
Also listed as
paraffinum liquidum, liquid paraffin, white mineral oil, liquid petrolatum
Comedogenic grade
0–2 / 5 · Borderline (2–3) or reported positive
Tests
  • Fulton 1989: comedogenic 0–2/5, irritancy 0/5 — rabbit ear, 10% in propylene glycol

What the tests found

The grade usually quoted for mineral oil is from James Fulton’s 1989 survey in the Journal of the Society of Cosmetic Chemists [1]. Every ingredient in that survey was run at 10% in propylene glycol (method). His table prints mineral oil as 0-2 for pore clogging, with no irritation (0). Fulton’s scale treats 0-1 as not significant and 2-3 as borderline, so mineral oil sits on the border between those two bands.

The range reflects the supplier more than the scoring. Fulton marks his whole oils section as “results depend on source of raw material,” and his discussion singles out this ingredient: “Mineral oil presents a complex problem: some sources are acceptable; others are not” [1]. The paper does not name the samples, and it does not say which ones scored 0 and which scored 2.

The same paper tested mineral oil a second way, as a carrier. Fulton put the pigment D&C Red #36 into four vehicles. It graded 3 in mineral oil, 2 in pentaerythrityl tetracaprate/caprylate, 1 in propylene glycol and 0 in PEG 400 [1]. He called the dye plus mineral oil combination “more comedogenic than the individual compounds” and named PEG 400 and the pentaerythrityl ester as possible replacements for mineral oil in that use. He also noted that a nonvolatile vehicle stays on the skin, while propylene glycol slowly evaporates and leaves a concentrate of the test material.

Where the evidence is weaker (or disagrees)

The strongest challenge comes from Albert Kligman, whose own 1972 “acne cosmetica” work helped start the concern. In 1996 he wrote that he and Mills had reported “petrolatums and mineral oils from different sources” as uniformly comedogenic, and that under his revised assay “it turns out that these were ‘false positives’” [2]. The original method put material inside the ear canal, where loose horny material builds up naturally. It also did not biopsy the untreated ear as a control. The revised method moved application to the underside of the pinna, just outside the ear canal, added the control biopsy and extended dosing to three weeks.

That paper has a gap: the retest data it reports are for petrolatum. None of five petrolatum samples were comedogenic, and in a human study petrolatum applied for eight weeks did not raise comedone counts in acne patients. It gives no new grade for mineral oil itself. Kligman also found that a crude “red veterinarian petrolatum,” and three “Vaseline-like greases” of unknown makeup, were comedogenic. That fits Fulton’s point that grade and refining matter. Kligman’s broader conclusion was that “comedogenicity has nothing whatever to do with oiliness” [2].

Mineral oil also served as the diluent in Morris & Kwan’s 1983 study (lanolin alcohol at 30%, lanolin acid at 50%), but that paper did not grade mineral oil on its own [3]. Mills and Kligman’s human back model found the rabbit ear more sensitive than human skin [4]. On purity, a 2019 review by authors including an L’Oréal employee notes that the EU allows mineral oils in cosmetics only if they meet purity specifications for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [5].

Where it shows up, and how much

We did not find a Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) safety assessment for mineral oil itself, so there is no CIR table of cosmetic use concentrations to quote. The checkable figure comes from the US OTC skin protectant monograph. It allows mineral oil as an active ingredient at 50 to 100 percent, or 30 to 35 percent when combined with colloidal oatmeal [6]. The 2019 review describes mineral oils as used mainly in skin and lip care products [5]. On a label it can also appear as paraffinum liquidum.

If you want to avoid it

Fulton’s own paper names one replacement. In the pigment test above, he suggested pentaerythrityl tetracaprate/caprylate or PEG 400 in place of mineral oil as the carrier [1]. Grades from the same survey for that ester and for other oils in a similar emollient role are lower grades, not verdicts:

  • Pentaerythrityl tetracaprylate/tetracaprate: 0 (Fulton 1989) [1]
  • Squalane: 1 (Fulton 1989) [1]
  • Cyclomethicone: 0 (Fulton 1989) [1]
  • Sunflower oil: 0 (Fulton 1989) [1]

How far down the ingredient list mineral oil appears is a rough sign of how much a product contains. Fulton’s own data show that the other ingredients mixed with it can matter as much as the oil itself.

Sources

  1. Fulton JE Jr. Comedogenicity and irritancy of commonly used ingredients in skin care products. J Soc Cosmet Chem. 1989;40(6):321-333. Table I, Table II and discussion pp. 327-331. https://library.scconline.org/v040n06/13
  2. Kligman AM. Petrolatum is not comedogenic in rabbits or humans: a critical reappraisal of the rabbit ear assay and the concept of “acne cosmetica.” J Soc Cosmet Chem. 1996;47(1):41-48. https://library.scconline.org/v047n01/44
  3. Morris WE, Kwan SC. Use of the rabbit ear model in evaluating the comedogenic potential of cosmetic ingredients. J Soc Cosmet Chem. 1983;34(5):215-225. https://library.scconline.org/v034n05/1
  4. Mills OH Jr, Kligman AM. A human model for assessing comedogenic substances. Arch Dermatol. 1982;118(11):903-905. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7138047/
  5. Chuberre B, Araviiskaia E, Bieber T, Barbaud A. Mineral oils and waxes in cosmetics: an overview mainly based on the current European regulations and the safety profile of these compounds. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2019;33 Suppl 7:5-14. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31588613/
  6. 21 CFR 347.10, Skin protectant active ingredients, paragraph (l) (2025 edition). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2025-title21-vol5/xml/CFR-2025-title21-vol5-sec347-10.xml

Comedogenic grades describe single raw materials tested in a lab, usually on rabbit ears. They are a guide for acne-prone skin, not a prediction for any product or person, and this page is not medical advice. How the scale works.