Is sunflower oil comedogenic? What the pore-clogging tests found
Sunflower oil graded 0 out of 5 for pore clogging and 0 for irritation when tested at 10% in Fulton's 1989 rabbit-ear survey. Fulton called it naturally less comedogenic than most plant oils. The same paper also found that fatty acids mixed into sunflower oil clogged pores more than when delivered in a fast-evaporating solvent, so the oil's own 0 does not describe every formula it is in.
- Label name
- Helianthus Annuus (Sunflower) Seed Oil
- Also listed as
- sunflower oil, sunflower seed oil, helianthus annuus seed oil
- Comedogenic grade
- 0 / 5 · Not significant (0) or negative
- Tests
-
- Fulton 1989: comedogenic 0/5, irritancy 0/5 — rabbit ear, 10% in propylene glycol
What the tests found
The one published grade for sunflower oil is in James Fulton’s 1989 rabbit-ear survey [1]. Tested as a 10% solution in propylene glycol (method), the oil scored 0 on both of his scales, plugging and irritation. Like the rest of his oils section, the entry is flagged as source-dependent, and for several other oils he added a separate, lower refined-grade result (sesame dropped from 3 to 1). No such second grade is given for sunflower.
In his discussion, Fulton picks out this oil. For sesame, avocado and mink oil, he notes that results improved with more refined grades, “however, it seems easier to use safflower oil and sunflower oils, which are naturally less comedogenic” [1].
Sunflower oil as a carrier: a different result
The same paper used sunflower oil a second way. Fulton tested fatty acids in two vehicles: a fast-evaporating solvent (ether or acetone) and sunflower oil, which does not evaporate. Pore-clogging grades were higher in sunflower oil for most of the acids [1]:
| Fatty acid | In ether or acetone | In sunflower oil |
|---|---|---|
| Myristic acid | 1 | 3 |
| Palmitic acid | 0 | 2 |
| Stearic acid | 0 | 2 |
| Lauric acid | 3 | 4 |
Irritation went the other way and was generally lower in the oil. Fulton attributes the difference to the vehicle: a nonvolatile carrier stays in contact with the skin. In practice, sunflower oil scoring 0 alone does not mean it leaves the ingredients dissolved in it inert.
Where the evidence is weaker (or disagrees)
- No direct second test. Sunflower oil itself has no grade from any other lab in our sources.
- The sister oil got a different grade elsewhere. Fulton paired sunflower with safflower oil as “naturally less comedogenic” and graded safflower 0. Morris & Kwan (Revlon, 1983) tested safflower oil undiluted and graded it 1-2 [2]. They also noticed that oils combining a lot of oleic and linoleic acid were, on the whole, more potent [2].
- Sunflower oil fits that higher-potency profile. CIR’s 2017 report lists its linoleic acid at 51.5-73.5% and oleic acid at 14.7-37.2% [4]. Morris & Kwan’s trend would therefore not predict a zero, although they never tested sunflower oil.
- Unrefined oil is a different material. CIR says crude oil is “often” refined: neutralized to remove free fatty acids, bleached, then deodorized to strip odor compounds [4]. Fulton’s source asterisk suggests an unrefined sample might not reproduce his 0.
- Broader context. Kligman, revisiting the rabbit assay in 1996, wrote that vegetable oils “are usually non-comedogenic” [3].
Where it shows up, and how much
Sunflower seed oil is among the most widely used plant oils in cosmetics. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) 2017 assessment of plant-derived fatty acid oils (Int J Toxicol 36 Suppl 3) uses 2010 FDA registration data and 2010 industry surveys [4]. It reports:
- Number of uses: 1,414, second only to shea butter among the oils reviewed. Of these, 1,054 were in leave-on products.
- Maximum concentrations:
- leave-on products: up to 96%
- rinse-off products: up to 92%
- bath products: up to 75%
- lip products and others that may be incidentally swallowed: up to 41%
- eye-area products: up to 19%
- Human patch tests: sunflower oil at 20% in a face serum and at 39.8% in a massage oil was tested in repeat patch tests. The summaries describe it as not an irritant or sensitizer.
If you want to avoid it
Sunflower oil is already at the bottom of Fulton’s scale, so in his data there is no lower-graded oil to switch to. For comparison, plant oils that graded higher in the same survey include soybean, corn and cottonseed oil (3 each), and peanut oil (2) [1]. If an oil-based product causes concern, other ingredients dissolved in the oil, and how high they sit in the ingredient list, may matter more than the sunflower oil itself.
Sources
- 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 (p. 325), Table III (p. 332) and discussion pp. 328-329. https://library.scconline.org/v040n06/13
- 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. Table III and discussion p. 222. https://library.scconline.org/v034n05/1
- 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
- Burnett CL, et al. Safety Assessment of Plant-Derived Fatty Acid Oils. Int J Toxicol. 2017;36(Suppl 3):51S-129S. doi:10.1177/1091581817740569. Tables 4, 5 and 11. Cosmetic Ingredient Review. https://cir-reports.cir-safety.org/view-attachment?id=ad62ac6b-8e74-ec11-8943-0022482f06a6
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.