L'Oreal Men Expert Tanning Moisturiser 50ml - Down from £8.99 to £2.25 Instore SAINSBURY'S - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
Who is it for?

Grey, dull, your skin needs a holiday. Self-tan? Not for you: it's not natural, it makes you go orange, it gives you streaks....

It's time to change your mind with the first self-tanning moisturiser specifically for men from L'Oreal Paris Men expert.

£8.99 in Boots

http://www.boots.com/brandtreatment/product_details_brand_treatment.jsp?productid=1074678&classificationid=1040282
Deal Tags:
More From Sainsbury's:

All Comments

(48) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#2
This is great at giving a natrual bit of colour to your face - works better on skin that is already a little darker, doesn't really work for pasty men.

The downside is it makes your face smell like biscuits.
#4
BristolDeal
This is great at giving a natrual bit of colour to your face - works better on skin that is already a little darker, doesn't really work for pasty men.


I don't find that. I use it specifically cos I'm a bit pasty. Just gives me a bit of a heathier look.
#5
May I ask what store this was spotted in? Not a bad price, have to decide where to go shopping later and if this is available in store, I think I'd be heading down to Asda :lol:
#6
mfc1986
It was instore at Grantham branch.
#7
I don't find that. I use it specifically cos I'm a bit pasty. Just gives me a bit of a heathier look.


since when has impersonating UV skin damage been considered a "healthy" look? say you like the look fine, but damaging your skin for aesthetic purposes is in no way healthy.
#8
Aaarrgghh! I've just realised it was Sainsbury's not Asda. Can I still edit???
#9
Can't even find it on Sainsbury's website.. shall check instore later & let you guys know
#10
OmniGod;2562594
since when has impersonating UV skin damage been considered a "healthy" look? say you like the look fine, but damaging your skin for aesthetic purposes is in no way healthy.


WTF? This gives a really natural bit of colour to your face, you don't end up looking like Jodie Marsh or something. :?
#11
BristolDeal
WTF? This gives a really natural bit of colour to your face, you don't end up looking like Jodie Marsh or something. :?


umm, you need to check what "natural" means. if it was a "natural" colour you were after, well, unless you've been painting your face white, you already have a natural colour. Tanning is causing UV damage to your skin cells. If you have to go out and do it to yourself it is not "natural". it is, in fact, what scientists would refer to as "unnatural", as in, the opposite iof natural. you have deliberately changed your appearance away from natural.

You have changed your appearance in order to look unhealthy - now, it may be more aesthetically pleasing (a lot of people find size 0 attractive, and think it looks good. you'd be hard pushed to find someone who would defend it as looking "healthy", and even harder pressed to find someone who would describe it as a "natural" look), but it is not a "healthy look".
#12
This is quite an extreme reaction to a moisturiser.
#13
You should chill a bit - if we all go back to the natural look we would all be wearing nothing and living in the tree's. For what I have read nobody here has said that you should sun bake - is it not safer to use this fake tanner and use sun screen? and anyway a sensible amount of sun is fine it's also not healthy to have no exposure . . .
#14
BristolDeal
This is great at giving a natrual bit of colour to your face - works better on skin that is already a little darker, doesn't really work for pasty men.

The downside is it makes your face smell like biscuits.



I bet you look swell, Bristol.:whistling:
#15
Checked in two Sainsburys... they don't even sell this product? They do different types but not this one!!
#16
OmniGod
umm, you need to check what "natural" means. if it was a "natural" colour you were after, well, unless you've been painting your face white, you already have a natural colour. Tanning is causing UV damage to your skin cells. If you have to go out and do it to yourself it is not "natural". it is, in fact, what scientists would refer to as "unnatural", as in, the opposite iof natural. you have deliberately changed your appearance away from natural.

You have changed your appearance in order to look unhealthy - now, it may be more aesthetically pleasing (a lot of people find size 0 attractive, and think it looks good. you'd be hard pushed to find someone who would defend it as looking "healthy", and even harder pressed to find someone who would describe it as a "natural" look), but it is not a "healthy look".


The sun is a great source of vitamin D, which in fact has an effect against certain cancers by preventing the overproduction of cells.
#17
I'm losing my colour can i use ethsi to bring it back ? LOL
#18
mattius
The sun is a great source of vitamin D, which in fact has an effect against certain cancers by preventing the overproduction of cells.


agree :oops: looks like this smily used too much he he!
#19
loreal make **** moisturiser anyway. got alcohol in it = rubbish
#20
chrisdarl
Checked in two Sainsburys... they don't even sell this product? They do different types but not this one!!


http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q165/jamesphillips_photos/Image1-1.jpg?t=1216502165
#21
Was it in a clearance section? or along with the rest of the range?

Thanks
#22
Just with the rest of the range on the shelf. There was 1 or 2 others on offer as well I think but not nearly as much as a reduction as that one.
#23
BristolDeal
This is great at giving a natrual bit of colour to your face - works better on skin that is already a little darker, doesn't really work for pasty men.

The downside is it makes your face smell like biscuits.


Downside? Bronzed man smelling of jammy dodgers? Sounds like a good time (to me)!:whistling:
#24
Thanks for sharing your shopping list with us mfc1986, it got my curiosity going...
I see you like your hot chicken ...:thumbsup:

Good to see a fellow HUK Dealer recycling carrier bags and claiming nectar points :-D. With over 3000 points saved I was wondering if you were collecting them to buy more moisturiser - maybe as a job lot of stocking fillers for christmas :stocking: :santa:...

Seriously though, nice bargain. Heat and rep added...:)
#25
ok, just to clear up - I never said that there was anything unhealthy about the moisturiser, or that i have a problem with the moisturiser - i pointed out that to describe tanned skin as "healthy" or "natural" is innacurate.

And, for anyone interested, the sun is not a "source" of Vitamin D, no matter what newspapers and tv tells you. Vitamin D is a type of Steroid (strictly speaking, it's 5 different steroids, all very similar, all with very slightly different chemistries, and even different sources), much like testosterone, or progesterone, or dozens of other chemical compounds the body needs. It is primarily developed (circuitously) from ingested cholesterol, where one of the stages requires UV light from the sun as an activating energy. Other sources wherby vitamin D can be taken into the body whole include fatty fish, eggs, and even mushrooms. This is of course splitting hairs, but someone might find it slightly interesting.
#26
OmniGod
. Tanning is causing UV damage to your skin cells. .


Idiot - since when is putting fake tan on your face causing it UV damage !! - :roll:


also dark skinned people arent necessarily those with tans..it is generally accepted that those people from the continets such as greece,Spain etc etc look on the whole better aesthetically than pasty white people...its a fact....and a fact that is obviously true because of the millions of pounds spent by British people trying to get a bit of colour to themselves by using products such as these.

voted HOT from me...i use this and it gives a natural tanned look, better than a lot of other tanning product, but as has been already said, it does have a distinctive smell, but only for the first day.
#27
DB2k
loreal make **** moisturiser anyway. got alcohol in it = rubbish


:whistling: you put it on your face mate, you dont eat it !!!:roll:
#28
rajs
I'm losing my colour can i use ethsi to bring it back ? LOL


Ive never used 'ethsi' so i cant really comment :whistling:
#29
Thanks mfc, just been on my hols but could be good for rubbing into my white bits lol :-D
#30
OmniGod
. Vitamin D is a type of Steroid .


Not really correct - Vitamin D is a group of fat soluble pro-hormones.
#31
OmniGod

And, for anyone interested, the sun is not a "source" of Vitamin D, .


Also an incorrect statement....the sun is in effect a source of vitamin D....Vitamin D is produced in skin exposed to sunlight, specifically ultraviolet B radiation.


Might be worth getting your facts right before posting.
#32
have tried this stuff on a few occasions and I find it gives quite a strong affect and unless you manage to cover yourself evenly and over all visible skin, it looks a bit daft. Not easy to use, I won't be using it again. Good price for those that have managed to use it successfully.
#33
JayJaz
have tried this stuff on a few occasions and I find it gives quite a strong affect and unless you manage to cover yourself evenly and over all visible skin, it looks a bit daft. Not easy to use, I won't be using it again. Good price for those that have managed to use it successfully.


Like ANY tanning product, you need to put a bit of common sense into using it - ie, you cant expect to just slap it on randomly and get a good even tan. Ive used this for 2 years and NEVER had anything other than perfect results....youve just got to make sure you 1) spread it 'thinly' and 2) spread it 'evenly' over your whole face and neck........the big key here is the thinly....as it doesnt matter if you get only a slight tint the next day as you can do it again and build up the tan....most people tend to just slap it on and then wonder why it doesnt look good.

This product is the BEST natural looking tanning product ive used...and ive had L'ancome £30 stuff.
1 Like #34
ok,. Spenspuma, you should learn to read - i never said tanning cream caused damage, i said tanning itself did. the point i made was that attempting to look tanned is an attempt to look like you have damaged skin.

and i never commented on the aesthetic of the tan, merely that the look was neither natural, nor strictly a healthy look. if you'd bothered reading my post, you would have seen that.

and, you seem to be under the misguided idea that hormones and steroids are mutually exclusive compounds? perhaps you should do some research. Steroid is a term used by Chemists to describe a whole family of compounds, with similar chemical structures. I can presume you have read the first line of the wikipedia article on Vitamin D, and now consider yourself an expert. well, i guess my 4 years studying chemistry at degree level pale in comparison to your 2 mins reaearch, but to indulge you, perhaps you should read more of the arcticle:-

"Chemically, the various forms of vitamin D are secosteroids; i.e., broken-open steroids.[5] The structural difference between vitamin D2 and vitamin D3 is in their side chains. The side chain of D2 contains a double bond between carbons 22 and 23, and a methyl group on carbon 24."

I appreciate that reading all those long words might seem troublesome, but occasionally they are there for a reason.

as you said, UV radiation is needed for production of Vitamin D. or wait, I thought *I* said that. lemme check. *runs off to check previous posts* yep, i thought i did. i also pointed out that the molecular components of Vitamin D are taken in through food, and sometimes even Vitamin D is taken in whole, without the necesity to make itself in the skin.
#35
"Chemically, the various forms of vitamin D are secosteroids; i.e., broken-open steroids.[5] The structural difference between vitamin D2 and vitamin D3 is in their side chains. The side chain of D2 contains a double bond between carbons 22 and 23, and a methyl group on carbon 24."

Oh dear....................OmniGod you really need to get out more...................But its summer you know so better make sure you get that factor 3,000,000 on or you might end up lookin like a prune :thumbsup::-D
#36
OmniGod
ok,. Spenspuma, you should learn to read - i never said tanning cream caused damage, i said tanning itself did. the point i made was that attempting to look tanned is an attempt to look like you have damaged skin.

and i never commented on the aesthetic of the tan, merely that the look was neither natural, nor strictly a healthy look. if you'd bothered reading my post, you would have seen that.

and, you seem to be under the misguided idea that hormones and steroids are mutually exclusive compounds? perhaps you should do some research. Steroid is a term used by Chemists to describe a whole family of compounds, with similar chemical structures. I can presume you have read the first line of the wikipedia article on Vitamin D, and now consider yourself an expert. well, i guess my 4 years studying chemistry at degree level pale in comparison to your 2 mins reaearch, but to indulge you, perhaps you should read more of the arcticle:-


I appreciate that reading all those long words might seem troublesome, but occasionally they are there for a reason.

as you said, UV radiation is needed for production of Vitamin D. or wait, I thought *I* said that. lemme check. *runs off to check previous posts* yep, i thought i did. i also pointed out that the molecular components of Vitamin D are taken in through food, and sometimes even Vitamin D is taken in whole, without the necesity to make itself in the skin.


You are embarrsing yourself. This is a forum for people to help others. Your responses are aggressive and condescending. Arguing on a message board is not big and not clever. It is clear you should focus on your lack of knowledge of social etiquette as opposed to bragging about your Chemistry prowess.
#37
OmniGod
ok, just to clear up - I never said that there was anything unhealthy about the moisturiser, or that i have a problem with the moisturiser - i pointed out that to describe tanned skin as "healthy" or "natural" is innacurate.

And, for anyone interested, the sun is not a "source" of Vitamin D, no matter what newspapers and tv tells you. Vitamin D is a type of Steroid (strictly speaking, it's 5 different steroids, all very similar, all with very slightly different chemistries, and even different sources), much like testosterone, or progesterone, or dozens of other chemical compounds the body needs. It is primarily developed (circuitously) from ingested cholesterol, where one of the stages requires UV light from the sun as an activating energy. Other sources wherby vitamin D can be taken into the body whole include fatty fish, eggs, and even mushrooms. This is of course splitting hairs, but someone might find it slightly interesting.


Yawn,
#38
bcbjork
You are embarrsing yourself. This is a forum for people to help others. Your responses are aggressive and condescending. Arguing on a message board is not big and not clever. It is clear you should focus on your lack of knowledge of social etiquette as opposed to bragging about your Chemistry prowess.


What he said. :thumbsup:

This is a hot deal btw regardless if you agree to the various methods of getting some pigment into your skin.
#39
OmniGod
ok,. Spenspuma, you should learn to read - i never said tanning cream caused damage, i said tanning itself did. the point i made was that attempting to look tanned is an attempt to look like you have damaged skin.

and i never commented on the aesthetic of the tan, merely that the look was neither natural, nor strictly a healthy look. if you'd bothered reading my post, you would have seen that.

and, you seem to be under the misguided idea that hormones and steroids are mutually exclusive compounds? perhaps you should do some research. Steroid is a term used by Chemists to describe a whole family of compounds, with similar chemical structures. I can presume you have read the first line of the wikipedia article on Vitamin D, and now consider yourself an expert. well, i guess my 4 years studying chemistry at degree level pale in comparison to your 2 mins reaearch, but to indulge you, perhaps you should read more of the arcticle:-


I appreciate that reading all those long words might seem troublesome, but occasionally they are there for a reason.

as you said, UV radiation is needed for production of Vitamin D. or wait, I thought *I* said that. lemme check. *runs off to check previous posts* yep, i thought i did. i also pointed out that the molecular components of Vitamin D are taken in through food, and sometimes even Vitamin D is taken in whole, without the necesity to make itself in the skin.


Give it a rest this is really boring zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
#40
OmniGod
. the point i made was that attempting to look tanned is an attempt to look like you have damaged skin.
.


Nope..false statement. Are you saying that Spanish people look like they have damaged skin????:roll: - People like the look aesthetically of those on the continent as it just looks nicer.....nowt to to with looking burnt.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!