United States · Body powder · Product analysis
Nine declared ingredients, a talc-free corn starch carrier, and a buy box that no longer belongs to Amazon. The formula is the shortest in this batch and the easiest to audit; the fragrance line is the only part of it a buyer cannot see into.
Captured 2026-10-29 · all prices in US dollars as published, no currency conversion applied
01
Product information
Shower to Shower Original Fresh is the mass-market body powder that replaced talc with corn starch, and this listing sells it as a three-pack of 8 oz shaker bottles — 24 oz in total, roughly four months of daily use at a normal application rate. The brand is one of the oldest names in the category and the product is positioned squarely at utility rather than luxury: the copy promises dryness, odour control and chafe prevention, and never mentions skincare, scent design or pampering.
What makes the listing worth reading closely is that it is one of very few body powders on the US shelf that states a talc-free position in the title and backs it with a declared formula that contains no talc at all. The carrier is corn starch, supported by hydrolysed corn starch and a modified starch, with sodium bicarbonate for odour, calcium phosphate and hydrated silica for flow and absorbency, and a single fragrance entry carrying the chamomile accord.
Positioning. A commodity-positioned, talc-free body powder sold in bulk. The commercial argument is cost per ounce plus the talc-free claim; the formula is deliberately short so the claim is easy to verify.
Gallery
Source: Amazon
Source: Amazon
Source: Amazon
Listing facts
| Brand | Shower To Shower |
| Model | 007132 |
| UPC | 381370007081 |
| Category path | Beauty & Personal Care › Skin Care › Body › Cleansers › Body Washes |
| Best Sellers Rank | #21,932 in Beauty & Personal Care; #398 in Bath & Shower Gels |
| Item form | Powder, shaker bottle |
| Net content | 24 oz / 680 g total (3 × 8 oz) |
| Scent | Chamomile, time-released |
| Sold by | A third-party seller, fulfilled by Amazon |
| Availability | In stock at capture |
The rank at capture (#398 in Bath & Shower Gels) is a category artefact: the product is filed under body washes rather than powders, so it is ranked against a shelf it does not compete on.
02
Rating and customer voice
Aggregate rating 4.8 out of 5 from 2,247 ratings. The aggregate is high and the distribution is unusually top-heavy even for a body powder: 88% of the 2,247 ratings are five-star and 96% are four-star or better. That shape says the product meets expectations for most buyers rather than splitting them, which is what a functional commodity should look like when it works. The tail is small but not empty — the one-star bucket holds 1%, roughly 22 ratings.
Star distribution
| 5 star | 88% | |
| 4 star | 8% | |
| 3 star | 3% | |
| 2 star | 0% | |
| 1 star | 1% |
What buyers talk about
Aspect volume and positive share, as reported by the listing's own review summary. Mentions are counts, not shares of all reviews.
| Aspect | Mentions | Positive | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness | 183 | 96% | Absorbs sweat and keeps skin dry; the strongest signal in the listing. |
| Fragrance | 113 | 84% | The chamomile scent is liked and described as light rather than perfumed. |
| Value for money | 49 | 71% | The weakest major aspect: the three-pack is not cheap per bottle. |
| Cleansing feel | 46 | 93% | Leaves skin feeling clean rather than coated. |
| Repeat use | 19 | 95% | Buyers come back to it, the closest thing to a loyalty signal here. |
| Texture | 19 | 89% | Rubs in smoothly, no visible residue. |
| Soothing | 12 | 92% | Reported to calm chafed skin rather than merely drying it. |
| Freshness | 11 | 100% | Every mention of all-day freshness in the sample is positive. |
The listing’s own review summary reports that customers find the powder effective, like its smooth texture and scent, and consider it good value; one buyer notes it keeps them sweat-free all day and another describes it as a small daily pampering step. No negative theme reaches a majority in any aspect bucket.
03
Ingredients and formula
Nine ingredients, no preservative, no named allergens. The complete declaration is reproduced below in label order, which is concentration order. No ingredient has been omitted, and no risk rating that was not obtained is shown.
Formula at a glance
Structural base · 1
Zea Mays (Corn) Starch
Functional auxiliary · 7
Sodium BicarbonateTribasic Calcium PhosphateHydrated SilicaHydrolyzed Corn StarchMaltodextrinSodium Starch OctenylsuccinateWater
Fragrance and allergens · 1
Fragrance
Complete ingredient declaration
| # | INCI name | Function | Level | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Zea Mays (Corn) Starch | Absorbent, bulking agent | Structural base | The carrier; replaces talc entirely |
| 2 | Sodium Bicarbonate | Deodorant, pH buffer | Functional auxiliary | The odour-control mechanism |
| 3 | Tribasic Calcium Phosphate | Absorbent, anti-caking | Functional auxiliary | — |
| 4 | Fragrance | Perfuming | Fragrance and allergens | Generic declaration; no allergens named |
| 5 | Hydrated Silica | Absorbent, anti-caking, flow agent | Functional auxiliary | — |
| 6 | Hydrolyzed Corn Starch | Film former, absorbent | Functional auxiliary | — |
| 7 | Maltodextrin | Binder, absorbent | Functional auxiliary | — |
| 8 | Sodium Starch Octenylsuccinate | Modified starch, texture and absorbency | Functional auxiliary | — |
| 9 | Water | Solvent | Functional auxiliary | — |
Formula analysis
This is the shortest formula in the batch and also the most legible: one carrier, five absorbent and flow aids, three texture components and a single fragrance. There is no preservative system because there is nothing for one to protect — an anhydrous starch powder has almost no water activity, and the only water in the panel sits at the very end of the list.
The absorbency architecture is more layered than the marketing suggests. Corn starch does the bulk work; hydrolysed corn starch and sodium starch octenylsuccinate are modified forms that hold up better against moisture without caking; hydrated silica and tricalcium phosphate keep the powder flowing and stop it clumping in the bottle; sodium bicarbonate adds a pH-driven odour mechanism that has nothing to do with fragrance.
The one genuine gap is the fragrance declaration. The panel says ‘Fragrance’ and nothing else, so no individual allergen is disclosed. For a fragrance-sensitive buyer that is the least informative possible answer, and it is the reason this product cannot be cleared or flagged on allergen grounds — only marked unknown.
Fragrance allergens
0 of 9 declared ingredients are fragrance allergens named on the label. No fragrance allergen is named: the formula declares a single generic entry. In the EU a leave-on cosmetic must name declarable allergens above threshold, so this panel would not satisfy EU labelling. The absence of named allergens is a disclosure gap, not evidence that none are present.
The same formula against the rest of this batch
Declared ingredients by function level, stacked. The three products were collected on the same day from the same shelf, so the comparison is like for like.
04
Price and price history
The live buy box at capture was a third-party offer at $17.67, with Subscribe & Save at $16.79 (5% off). Amazon itself shows no list price and no offer on this ASIN, which is why the Amazon series in the price history has no current value at all.
Price at capture
| Price shown | $17.67 |
| List price | $19.40 |
| Unit price | $0.74 per ounce |
| Currency | USD |
All-time price record
Five published values per price type. These are lifetime figures: the archive’s summary block does not change with the chart window, so nothing here describes a shorter period.
| Price type | Lowest ever | Highest ever | Last observed | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amazon | $12.81 (2018-02-06) | $21.50 (2017-07-12) | — | $15.51 |
| 3rd Party New | $3.50 (2017-05-24) | $30.99 (2021-07-15) | $17.67 (2026-10-26) | $19.26 |
| 3rd Party Used | — | — | — | — |
Price comparison across the record
Where the current price sits
| Benchmark | Amazon | 3rd Party New |
|---|---|---|
| All-time range (high − low) | $8.69 | $27.49 |
| Range as % of the low | 67.8% | 785.4% |
| Current vs all-time low | n/a | +404.9% |
| Current vs all-time high | n/a | -43.0% |
| Current vs lifetime average | n/a | -8.3% |
| Lifetime average vs list price | -20.1% | -0.7% |
| Price at capture vs list price | -8.9% ($17.67 against $19.40) | |
Reading the record
Two things stand out. First, Amazon has stopped selling this product directly: the tracked Amazon series has no current observation and the buy box belongs to a third-party seller. For a commodity powder that normally means the item has been handed to marketplace fulfilment, and it changes how the price should be read — there is no Amazon reference price left to undercut.
Second, the width of the marketplace record. A $3.50 floor in 2017 and a $30.99 spike in 2021 on a product with a $19.40 suggested price are reseller artefacts, not market levels. The current $17.67 is the number that matters: 8.9% below list, 8.3% below the marketplace lifetime average, and 13.9% above the Amazon lifetime average, which was itself depressed by years of Amazon-held pricing.
Movement against benchmarks
05
Method, confidence and limits
How this was assembled
Prices were read against a US delivery address (New York 10001), so the currency is native USD. The product record, rating distribution, review-summary aspects and the ingredient declaration were read from the live listing at capture. Price history was read from an independent Amazon price-tracking archive that publishes all-time lows, highs, last-observed values and lifetime averages per price type. The two are reported side by side rather than merged, because they measure different things: the listing is a live buy box, the archive is a long-run record.
What was not available
| Element | Status | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Individual review text | Not rendered at capture | No review is quoted. Themes come from the listing’s own summary and aspect counts. |
| Buyer-uploaded photos | None exposed by this listing | Only the three listing images are shown; no substitute was used. |
| Ingredient risk ratings | Not obtained | No comedogenic or irritancy score is claimed for any ingredient. |
| Third-party claim verification | Not available | Claims are reported as the listing makes them, not as verified facts. |
Confidence
| Element | Confidence | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Listing facts, specifications, rank | High | Read directly from the live product page |
| Rating and star distribution | High | Published aggregate and histogram |
| Ingredient identity and order | High | Manufacturer declaration, transcribed in full |
| Aspect volumes and sentiment | Medium | Aggregated by the listing, not independently coded |
| All-time price values | High | Transcribed verbatim from the archive |
| Shape of the price series between extremes | Low | The archive publishes no observation-level history |
Limits worth stating
- Everything here is a single-day snapshot. Rank, price and review counts move between captures.
- Price averages cover the entire monitored life of the product, including launch pricing, and are therefore biased toward early periods.
- Last-observed prices are already days old at capture and are not live quotes.
- Star buckets are rounded shares, so a 0% cell is not proof that no such rating exists.
- Ingredient function is standard cosmetic chemistry, not a field published for this product; the four-level grouping is an analyst scheme, not a risk score.