The Six Skin Archetypes
Six recurring patterns in how skin responds to internal conditions over time. Each archetype describes a tendency — not a permanent state, not a diagnosis, and not a prescription for intervention.
The Skin Codes™ framework identifies six archetypes. Each is defined by a recurring relationship between an internal domain — androgen activity, hormonal rhythm, stress load, restoration capacity, metabolic clearance, or sleep timing — and the patterns that may be associated with skin expression.
Most people recognise elements of more than one archetype. A dominant pattern typically emerges alongside a secondary influence. The framework accommodates this without resolving it — dual patterns are common and expected, not inconsistencies to be explained away.
A-Type · Androgenic Active
The Alchemist of Energy
High drive, output, and responsiveness to challenge. Skin reflects momentum and pressure, particularly when recovery is insufficient.
B-Type · Oestrogen Dominant
The Empathic Radiant
Flow, sensitivity, and responsiveness to internal rhythm. Skin reflects emotional and hormonal shifts more visibly than external stress.
C-Type · Cortisol Reactive
The Resilient Force
High mental load and delayed physical recovery. Skin often mirrors stress patterns before they are consciously recognised.
P-Type · Progesterone Depleted
The Restorative Muse
Reduced restoration capacity relative to output. Skin reflects slower repair, dryness, or thinning when recovery is under-supported.
D-Type · Detox / Estro-Metabolic
The Grounded Rejuvenator
The relationship between internal load and clearance. Skin reflects renewal efficiency rather than production.
S-Type · Sleep-Deprived Circadian
The Dream Weaver
Disrupted rhythm and timing of recovery. Skin quality closely mirrors sleep depth, consistency, and circadian cues.
Using the archetype descriptions
Each archetype page contains a canonical definition, a description of what the pattern reflects, commonly associated patterns in skin expression, relevant internal dynamics presented as educational context, and focus priorities drawn from the pattern's underlying logic.
These descriptions are observational. They describe what people with this tendency may notice — not what they will experience, not what is wrong with them, and not what they should do. Recognition is the goal. Resolution is not the framework's concern.
The descriptions use deliberate language: may be associated with, often noticed as, can influence. This language is not hedging. It is accurate. The framework describes tendencies, and tendencies are probabilistic by nature.