06 Oct 2026
- 84% of Brits have chosen one cleaning product over another because it claimed to contain fewer chemicals.
- 40% have paid more for a product claiming to be “chemical-free”.
- 61% think “chemical-free” means a product contains absolutely no chemicals.
- 68% say cleaning-product language can make products difficult to compare on shelf.
- 42% think lower-dose cleaning products are less effective than higher-dose ones.
There’s a chemistry problem.
It’s to do with the fact that people care what goes into the products they use, but the language on cleaning labels doesn’t make it easy to understand what any of it means.
So in August 2026, smol commissioned Censuswide to survey 2,000 UK adults¹ about cleaning chemicals, product claims and the words they see on packs.
The results? Britain wants to make informed choices but there’s a LOT getting in the way.
Why did we ask Britain about cleaning chemicals?
Chemicals are a major factor when people choose cleaning products.
In fact, 38% of the people surveyed said “chemicals in the product” was the most important factor when choosing a cleaning product, ahead of scent (22%), packaging (13%) and carbon emissions (7%).
Wanting to understand what’s in the products you use seems sensible but it’s hard when vague marketing claims are all you have to go on. Terms like “chemical-free”, “non-toxic”, “natural” and “eco-friendly” sound great but without context or evidence, they’re pretty pointless.
We wanted to find out what people thought these claims meant.
84% have chosen one cleaning product over another because it claimed to have fewer chemicals.
Using less chemicals is one thing, but claiming to be “chemical-free” is scientifically impossible. Yet, 40% of people said they had paid more for a product because it claimed to be chemical- free. And nearly one in five (18%) look for chemical-free products when shopping.
40% also said they have an instant negative reaction to the word “chemical” on a label regardless of what it is or does.
61% think “chemical-free” means no chemicals at all.
Oxygen is a chemical. Plants are made of chemicals. So are you. Yet almost two-thirds (61%) of people thought “chemical-free” products had no chemicals. And 41% thought water wasn’t a chemical.
As Professor Mark Lorch, biochemist and Professor of Science Communication at the University of Hull, puts it:
“Everything is a chemical.”
Cleaning labels leave 68% of Brits confused.
68% said cleaning products often used language that made it difficult to compare products on shelf. And only 56% felt confident understanding cleaning-product labels.
Product Labels | Confidence in understanding |
Packaged food | 70% |
Vitamins & supplements | 62% |
61% | |
Over the counter medicine | 59% |
Beauty products | 58% |
56% |
It seems like shoppers must constantly make sense of scientific-sounding or green-sounding claims, without being given explanations as to what they mean.
1 in 3 Brits think “chemical-free” and “non-toxic” have legal definitions.
Our survey also found 33% think “chemical-free” has a legal definition in the UK, and 34% think the same for “non-toxic”.
They don’t. They’re just buzzwords.
47% have paid more because a product said “natural”.
But “natural” doesn't always mean safer or lower impact. And conversely, synthetic doesn't automatically mean harmful.
What matters is the ingredient itself, how much of it is used, how you’re exposed to it and what it’s being used for. Yet nearly half of the people surveyed (47%) said they had paid a premium for a product just because it used the word “natural”.
42% think a lower dose means a worse clean.
And we also tend to think (mistakenly) that more product means better cleaning power.
42% think cleaning products with lower doses of ingredients are less effective than products with higher doses. At smol, our R&D Technical Manager Kathleen Bell puts it like this:
“For years, people have associated large doses with more effective cleaning, but that's just not the case.”
Cleaning performance comes from choosing the right ingredients in the right amounts. So we measure something more useful.
How does smol measure “less chemicals”?
We use chemical dry matter testing. We take the recommended dose of a cleaning product, remove the water and fragrance, leaving just the chemical matter behind, so products can be compared dose for dose.
Across 11 core smol products, representing more than 95% of our revenue, testing found that smol uses 34% less chemicals on average than selected leading brands.² Of course, cutting the amount in a formula only works if the product still does its job. Cleaning performance comes first, then we look at how to get there without using more than is necessary.
Chemicals in the home now rival concern about ultra-processed food.
One of the findings that caught our attention was that 60% said avoiding chemicals in household products matters as much to them as avoiding ultra-processed food.
People are looking more closely at ingredients and asking what goes into the things they eat and use around their homes. So they need clear information to help them do just that.
So, what’s our key takeaway?
People want to know what they’re buying. And they’ll swap products or even pay more if they think something contains fewer or “better” chemicals.
But our research shows how easy it is for vague words to cause confusion, which is where cleanwashing comes in. Cleanwashing happens when brands use unclear or even scientific- sounding claims about a cleaning product without showing the evidence behind those claims.
So when checking a claim, it’s a good idea to get into the habit of asking:
- What's in it?
- Why is it used?
- How was it tested?
- What’s it being compared with?
- If there’s a “less” or “more” claim… show how much
Which is all much more useful than pretending chemicals don't exist.
FAQs about our cleaning chemicals survey.
¹ Consumer research commissioned by smol through Censuswide among a nationally representative sample of 2,000 UK adults in August 2026. Censuswide is a member of the Market Research Society.
² 34% average reduction in chemical dry matter across 11 core smol products, accounting for more than 95% of revenue, compared with selected leading-brand products. See smol.com/our-claims for methodology, comparators and supporting evidence.
Hilary Strong, Chief Marketing Officer
Before smol, Hilary helped global giants and scrappy start-ups define what they stand for. Now, as our Chief Marketing Officer and Suds in Schools lead, she's on a mission to shake up laundry and cleaning for good, helping more people choose products that are better for people and planet.
ABOUT OUR AUTHORS