When Estée Lauder started out, it’s unlikely she would have been able to foresee that the 2020 consumer would demand a lot more than a “jar of hope”, as she billed her products then. These days clinical trials are integral to skincare sales – we want proof that the products we’re buying actually work – but putting a new serum through its paces pre-launch was an expensive process reserved for beauty giants. Until now.

Wanting proof of efficacy makes sense given that, as a nation, we spent £86.5 million on certified organic and natural skincare products in 2018 (a 14 per cent increase from the previous year), and a natural serum is much more susceptible to the “snake oil” label than a high-tech one. Which is why more and more natural brands are putting their money where their mouths are, and carrying out independently-led clinical trials.

“Before now, there were more clinical trials on synthetic ingredients and products, but that’s certainly changing,” says co-founder of Votary, Arabella Preston. “The consumer has evolved and wants more proven efficacy on natural brands, which is why we are set to see a rise in clinical natural testing for 2020.” In fact, that’s exactly what Preston herself will be doing for the first time as the decade begins.

Read more: Face Feeling Dry? Here Are The Best Moisturisers For Every Single Skin Type

“Until recently the beauty industry could be split into two camps – either all natural and organic or high-tech science. Nature and science sat apart from each other,” says Jeanette Thottrup of Seed to Skin skincare, a brand founded upon “green molecular science”. “I was determined to create a product line with a wealth of natural benefits without sacrificing efficacy,” she says. It was key to Thottrup to independently test her products pre-launch by setting up clinical trials.

Participants used a Seed to Skin regime over 30 days, with results indicating an average 30 per cent increase in collagen production, 19 per cent increase in skin elasticity and an 11 per cent reduction in wrinkle visibility. Impressive results, but only 10 women (aged between 46 and 63) took part. It’s certainly a small trial when compared to those carried out by behemoth brands, but studies like these cost a lot of money. Thottrup considers it a huge triumph for a smaller, niche start-up, and so do retailers – Liberty rewarded Seed to Skin with a large spot in its infamous beauty hall.

Skincare brand Wildsmith launched in 2018 and has since spent £60,000 on trials, a substantial sum that can prohibit other small, natural brands from testing. For Wildsmith, it paid off, with 95 per cent of its subjects showing cellular renewal – increased collagen levels – as a result of using its Repair Copper Peptide Cream. The Super Eye Serum was another winner, with testers reporting a 31 per cent reduction in dark circles.

Read more: How To Handle Hormonal Acne

But what exactly does clinical testing involve? It’s certainly infinitely more rigorous than it used to be. For example, Wildsmith now uses a measuring device that compares the overall depth and height of fine lines and wrinkles, to assess improvement in skin smoothness and thereby the wrinkle-reducing properties of the product. The brand also opted for an old-school method: taking the testing out of the lab and into the bathroom. It commissioned the Beauty Bible, a platform for the beauty community, to get 50 people to blind test the products and share their feedback. The Copper Peptide Cream scored an average of 8.2 out of ten – beating 40 other day creams that were being tested.

So, is it time to stop viewing natural skincare products as inevitably less effective than their science-driven counterparts? Nausheen Qureshi, a biochemist who formulates for her own skincare line, Elequra, and others, has strong feelings on the topic: “My whole reason for living is trying to prove that engineered natural skincare out-performs most of the current skincare heroes [that aren’t necessarily natural],” she says.

The problem is, many natural skincare brands simply don’t have the necessary capital to carry out trials that could improve their products’ standing in the eyes of customers when a range is in its infancy. Qureshi spent £15,000 per product on testing, but the results suggest it was worth it: participants using her Eye Architecture Cream for 28 days reported a 34 per cent reduction in fine lines and wrinkles, for example. “There is a reason the trials are beginning to happen now,” she continues. “In the last ten years, natural technology has become much more effective. But my words mean nothing – the clinical results say much more than me,” she concludes. “And that’s just how it should be.”

More from British Vogue: