Susie Rushton: Beauty queen

Crème de la Mer started it all, early in the decade. Then, we wanted Eve Lom, La Prairie, Natura Bissé. Anti-ageing serums boasting ingredients including caviar, crushed diamonds, even exotic snake venom. Next came the pseudo-scientific "cosmeceuticals". While boom times have seen men buy ludicrously outsized LCD tellies, so the gender stereotype goes, cash-flush women have been splashing out on ever-more expensive skincare.

The credit crunch may put paid to that habit. But there is another factor that could bring about the end of the glory days of wild spending at the beauty counter – in Britain, at least. Real science is set to supplant marketing "science". Last month dermatologists announced that Boots No7 Protect and Perfect serum is to be the first product to submit to double-blind controlled trials. They expect a new era of commercial skincare to arrive, as brands compete to produce the first scientifically proven product. Although beauty companies fear that scientifically proven anti-ageing properties could find their products re-classified as "medicines" (such as the prescription-only retinoic acid, used to treat acne) and therefore render them useless in commercial terms, the chance to be able to badge a jar of cream "scientifically proven" – and therefore guarantee a bestseller – will tempt some to prove their claims in an independent lab test. For the moment, we'll have to stick with hype-in-a-jar. But here's some good news for those feeling the pinch. The product that has been setting the beauty blogosphere alight is a £2.49 anti-nappy rash cream, Waitrose's Baby Bottom Butter, which has been attracting rave reviews on parenting websites. Not for its efficacy in keeping little Archie's skin free from sore patches, but because mums have discovered that smearing it on their faces for a few weeks gave them (and I quote) "prepubescent" skin. Buy 10!