When Deodorant Burns and Brands Must Speak Up

It’s rarely glamorous when a trusted product turns problematic. For many of us, deodorant is simply a reliable daily ritual—spray or roll-on in the morning, worry less about odour or sweat for the day. So when reports emerged that Mitchum’s 48-hour roll-on antiperspirant was causing burning underarms, irritation, rashes and worse, it struck a nerve. People.com+2ITVX+2

What happened?

Mitchum issued an apology after a large number of consumers in the UK, Ireland and South Africa reported severe reactions—including red, blistering underarms, stinging, and what some described as “chemical burns”. People.com
 The company’s response: the formula itself hadn’t changed, but a change in the manufacturing process of a raw material caused some batches to interact with skin differently. They’ve reverted to the original process and are withdrawing affected batches. ITVX+1

Brand impact: trust meets trauma

For a brand like Mitchum, once known for strong antiperspirant performance, this kind of incident does several things at once:

  • Erosion of reliability: When a product you’ve used for years suddenly fails you—or worse, injures you—the implicit trust breaks. 
  • Emotional fallout: Some users reported pain, sleepless nights, even scarring. These aren’t mild product complaints, they’re health & wellbeing issues. The Independent 
  • Reputational risk: Social media (especially TikTok) amplified individual stories, turning niche complaints into widely seen alerts. Mitchum’s delay in addressing the issue left a vacuum where frustration grew. People.com 
  • Credibility gap: The phrase “temporary irritation” used in the brand’s statement was criticised as downplaying severity. Wanting to reassure is one thing; seeming to minimise pain is another. People.com+1 

Should brands speak out when things go wrong?

Yes—and they must. But how they speak matters just as much as that they do.

Why speaking out is necessary:

  • Transparency builds trust. Acknowledging fault or potential fault avoids the sense of cover-up. 
  • It’s a moral imperative. If consumers may be harmed, the brand has a duty of care. 
  • It prevents reputational escalation. Waiting while complaints mount gives power to social outrage rather than brand narrative. 

But speaking out poorly can backfire:

  • Vague language (e.g., “temporary irritation”) can be perceived as dismissive. 
  • Half-measures (e.g., “voluntary removal” rather than full recall) may be seen as cost-driven rather than consumer-driven. 
  • Delay is costly. The longer a brand stalls, the more stories proliferate unchallenged. 
  • Over-focus on process (e.g., “we changed manufacturing”) without empathy for the affected lacks emotional resonance. 

What Mitchum should (and partly has) done

  • Full public clarity: Which batches are affected, what consumers should do, how the brand is compensating. They did publish codes for affected batches. The Independent 
  • Offer support: Direct channels for complaints, medical advice referrals, refunds or replacements. 
  • Undertake remediation: Fix the manufacturing process, reassure customers, then communicate the fix. Mitchum states they have reverted the process. ITVX 
  • Use brand values: Acknowledge the deviation, reaffirm that quality and safety are core values—and show how they will prevent recurrence. 
  • Follow-up communication: Don’t just issue one apology and vanish. Provide updates, transparent monitoring, and showcase prevention measures. 

What it means for consumers

For anyone using antiperspirants or deodorants:

  • Check batch numbers and product codes if you hear of issues. 
  • Watch for skin sensitivity signs: redness, stinging, blisters. These may be more than simple irritation. Verywell Health 
  • When you feel uneasy about a trusted product changing subtly (smell, texture, effect), trust your gut. 
  • Understand that large brands may not always publicise manufacturing changes or minor formula tweaks—but your skin might notice. 

The bigger picture: brand accountability in personal care

This incident with Mitchum is part of a broader trend: personal-care brands must balance innovation (new scents, new packaging, manufacturing efficiencies) with safety, clarity and consumer trust. As consumers become more informed—and empowered through social media—brands that hide behind opaque statements or delay responses risk far more than lost sales; they risk becoming irrelevant or distrusted.

In conclusion

When your underarm deodorant leaves your skin burning, it isn’t just a bad day—it’s a breach of trust. And when a brand doesn’t act swiftly, clearly, and empathetically, that breach deepens.

For Mitchum, the path back isn’t just reverting a manufacturing tweak—it’s rebuilding how they speak, how they listen and how they protect the people who rely on their products.

For us consumers, incidents like this are a reminder that even everyday products deserve scrutiny—and that our comfort, safety and trust are not too small to matter.