A serum being applied with a dropper, the everyday act behind the topical routines the two studies tested.
Shixart1985CC BY 2.0
Illustrative. A generic serum dropper, not one of the products in the Allergan studies, and the person shown was not a participant.
The First GLP1 Face Skincare Study Is Nine People Rating Their Own Faces
"GLP1 face" is one of the most searched worries in wellness right now, and until this week it had almost no data behind it. Then a company announced some, and the number that spread was "about 10 years younger." I read the source documents, and the more useful story is how small that number's foundation is.
- Allergan Aesthetics (AbbVie) presented two small studies of a topical routine in people taking weight loss medications, the first branded clinical data attached to "GLP1 face."
- The headline number, faces looking about 10 years younger, is what participants said about themselves. It was not measured. The studies finished with nine and eleven people, and no control group is described.
- The company's own release states the number is participant reported, and a trade analysis called the finding subjective and nonbiologic.
- These are conference posters from the company selling the products, not peer reviewed papers. Read the result as a first data point, not a verdict.
What was actually tested
Allergan Aesthetics, part of AbbVie, announced results from two single center studies of a three product routine: a growth factor serum, a neck cream, and a firming, toning body lotion. Participants were people taking medical weight loss medications, including GLP1 receptor agonists such as Ozempic and Wegovy. The results were shown as electronic posters at the Science of Skin Summit in Austin, which runs September 17 to 20, 2026.
In the first study, people used the routine for 12 weeks, and nine completed it. In the second, the same routine was paired with three DiamondGlow dermabrasion treatments over six weeks, and eleven people completed at least one assessment after treatment. Investigators scored the face, neck, upper inner arms, and distal thighs. The company reports improvements in dryness, skin tone evenness, crepiness, roughness, lines and wrinkles, and texture, some as early as week two.
- 9
- People who finished the first study
- 11
- People in the second study
- 0
- Control groups described
- 10 yrs
- Perceived by participants, not measured
Where the 10 years younger claim comes from
Two numbers did the marketing work: about 10 years younger at week four for people using the serum twice daily, and about 7.5 years younger after three dermabrasion sessions plus six weeks of the routine. Both are participant reported perceptions. The company's own release describes them that way, and Dermatology Times, an independent trade outlet, called the finding "subjective and nonbiologic." Nobody measured a biological age. People looked at their own faces and said how old they seemed.
What the data cannot tell you
The release describes no control group and no randomization. The investigators assessing improvement work with a commercial interest in the result. With nine and eleven completers, a few unusual responders can move every average. Allergan's own co author, Elizabeth Makino, says larger studies are needed to characterize the findings. That is a fair thing for the sponsor to say, and it is worth reading twice.
a few unusual responders can move every average
There is also a pattern worth noticing. A second company, SkinHealth Systems, presented its own scalp treatment data at the same summit on September 15. Two vendors sharing small company run results at one conference is what the start of a claim wave looks like, well ahead of any independent trial.
Honest caveat
This is a company press release about its own unpublished conference posters, and the ceiling on the evidence is low: nine and eleven completers, single center, no described control or placebo arm, no randomization described, assessments by parties with a commercial interest, and a headline outcome based on self report. Nothing here shows the products reverse skin aging, biological or otherwise, and Dermatology Times says so explicitly. Please never repeat the 10 years younger figure without the word perceived next to it. The two PubMed indexed papers the company cites are real, but they are a review and a perspective piece, not evidence for these products. I found no contradicting data, and that reflects an almost empty literature, not a robust one.
What this means for you
If you are taking a weight loss medication and noticing changes in your skin, your concern is legitimate, and rapid weight loss does change how skin looks. But this study cannot tell you that a specific serum will fix it. What it gives you is a way to read the next beauty claim you see: check who ran the study, how many people were in it, whether there was a comparison group, and whether the impressive number was measured or self reported. Here, the answers are the manufacturer, nine, apparently no, and self reported. Anything that looks that way deserves curiosity, not a purchase.
Primary sources
- Allergan Aesthetics Presents New Clinical Data Evaluating Skin Quality Improvements in Individuals Taking Medical Weight Loss Medications. PR Newswire, September 17, 2026.
- Targeted Skincare, Dermabrasion Show Skin Quality Improvements During Medical Weight Loss. Dermatology Times, September 17, 2026.
- Science of Skin Summit 2026, Fairmont Austin, September 17 to 20, 2026. Conference posters, not peer reviewed publications.
- Alexiades M et al. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 2026. PMID 42162206. Background literature cited by the company.
- Dayan SH et al. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 2026. PMID 42210880. Background literature cited by the company.
Common questions
Did this study show the skincare reverses aging in people on GLP1 drugs?
No. The figure that travelled into headlines, faces looking about 10 years younger, is what participants reported about themselves, and the company's own release describes it that way. Dermatology Times called the finding subjective and nonbiologic. Nothing in the data shows the products change biological aging.
Is there any better evidence on skin changes during rapid weight loss?
Very little that is independent. The company cites two 2026 papers, one in Aesthetic Surgery Journal and one in the Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, but those are a review and a perspective piece, not trials of these products. A randomized, controlled trial with independent investigators would be the meaningful upgrade, and I have not found one.
Should I wait for better data before trying a growth factor serum?
That is a personal call, and this study cannot make it for you. What it can tell you is that the current evidence is a sponsor's small, uncontrolled report. If the products interest you for their own reasons, treat the results as a reason for curiosity, not as proof of an effect, and talk to a dermatologist if you are on a weight loss medication and worried about your skin.
Stay Curious.
Better health isn't found in a single article. It's built through curiosity, evidence, and small discoveries over time. Join thousands exploring longevity, gut health, recovery, nutrition, and the tools that truly make a difference.