Half of these Products are Killing our Follicles!

[Old Baldy]

Read this very carefully:

http://www.sixwise.com/newsletters/05/0 ... oiding.htm

Nizroal is in the top 10 MOST TOXIC consumer junk to put on your head.

So, please, get ketoconozole and have your pharmacy compound it with a natural shampoo.

Did you notice your link is to a site that sells products? :wink:

Guys: PPG and SLS are safe. Same scare tactics used by many companies over the years. Don't fall for that crap IMHO.

I've been making my own soaps and creams for years. Probably done over 2,000 hours of reading on cosmetic formulations, ingredients, how to make creams and soaps. Probably spent another 2,000 hours over the years actually making soaps and creams, etc.

IMHO, PPG and SLS are safe. Simple as that. They do not kill follicles. To conclude that they do is ridiculous IMHO.

Anyone can have an allergic reaction to most, if not all, ingredients commonly used in soaps and cosmetics.

There was an article I read a while back where a couple of people had an allergic reaction to borage oil in the creams they were using. Borage oil is considered to be very healthy for the skin, yet some people are allergic to it. You can ALWAYS find something bad about ANY ingredient used in cosmetics and soaps if that's what you are looking for.

This guy knows a little bit about medications, etc. His answer is short, to the point and accurate IMHO:

Peter H. Proctor View profileIn article <3ACD7BEE> ken gwee <slg> writes: >From: ken gwee <slg> >Subject: does SLS in shampoo really hurts the scalp?? >Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 16:18:54 +0800 >does sls really do the damage?? and does alcohol dry up the scalp?? is >alcohol harmful to the scalp tissue?? thanks! Not at normally-used amounts. Dr P
More options Apr 6 2001, 8:30 am

Newsgroups: alt.baldspot
From: pproc...@proctorgamble.com (Peter H. Proctor)
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 06:27:04 UNDEFINED
Local: Fri, Apr 6 2001 6:27 am
Subject: Re: does SLS in shampoo really hurts the scalp??
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

In article <3ACD7BEE> ken gwee <slg> writes:
>From: ken gwee <slg>
>Subject: does SLS in shampoo really hurts the scalp??
>Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 16:18:54 +0800
>does sls really do the damage?? and does alcohol dry up the scalp?? is
>alcohol harmful to the scalp tissue?? thanks!


Not at normally-used amounts.

Dr P

Many people are allergic to PPG but that doesn't mean it is unsafe or will kill follicles:

In article <20000409231630> dante99...@aol.com (Dante99999) writes:
>From: dante99...@aol.com (Dante99999)
>Subject: Dr. P or anyone- Propylene Glycol
>Date: 10 Apr 2000 03:16:30 GMT
>Dr Lee is now selling Minoxidl 5% without Propylene Glycol. I thought it was
>not possible to get that high a concentration without Propylene Glycol?


It is not impossible, but requires either suspending the agent rather
than dissolving it or some sort of solubolizing agent

Also doesnt the PG help with the effectiveness?


True, In fact, about half of what you get from 2% minoxidil (
Rogaine ) is from the propylene glycol-containing vehicle. OTOH, many
people are allergic to propylene glycol.


Peter H. Proctor, PhD, MD

PPG, alcohol and SLS will NOT kill your follicles IMHO. In fact, the PPG and alcohol might even help your hair grow a little bit. Well, that's what the Upjohn studies on minoxidil. revealed. I say Upjohn is a little more reputable than some wacko "only natural" jibberish put forth by some merchants. MERCHANTS being the key word!! :wink:

I mean, WTF is "natural". Even a wacko like me can't understand that one. :lol:

 

[IBM]

it will be better if we all die.

 

[Johnny24601]

re:

I did not know that sixwise.com, a website that does not state any affiliations with acclaimed dermatologists or doctors, was a definitive source on product safety.
Seriously, can people please stop posting the results of their google searches as fact. It's a friggin joke and waste of time.
SLS is included in so many products that it is impossible for anyone to avoid contact with it. Is it really reasonable to accept that it is killing our hair or causing cancer when everyone has been exposed to the chemical for years?

 

[Jacob]

SLS decreases SOD..if that hasn't been mentioned before.

The demonstration that levels of Cu,Zn-SOD within the epidermis are significantly reduced following topical exposure to irritants strongly suggests that oxidative stress is involved in the inflammatory process. Importantly, as regards our understanding of the mechanisms involved in ICD, this change appears not to be restricted to dithranol, which is known to generate ROS during auto-oxidation, but also extends to chemicals such as SLS, which are not normally directly associated with ROS generation

http://www.john-libbey-eurotext.fr/en/r ... article.md




But the point I'd like to make is...if you can get products w/out SLS..alcohol..PG..etc...why not? This is one of the reasons why I've gone with Elsom Research for most of my topicals.

 

[Guest]

it will be better if we all die.

What the f*** has gotten into you man? You have been leaving weird posts all over the place!

 

[abcdefg]

If SLS is bad for me then good Ill use more of it next time I use it.

 

[Pondle]

SLS decreases SOD..if that hasn't been mentioned before.

The demonstration that levels of Cu,Zn-SOD within the epidermis are significantly reduced following topical exposure to irritants strongly suggests that oxidative stress is involved in the inflammatory process. Importantly, as regards our understanding of the mechanisms involved in ICD, this change appears not to be restricted to dithranol, which is known to generate ROS during auto-oxidation, but also extends to chemicals such as SLS, which are not normally directly associated with ROS generation

http://www.john-libbey-eurotext.fr/en/r ... article.md




But the point I'd like to make is...if you can get products w/out SLS..alcohol..PG..etc...why not? This is one of the reasons why I've gone with Elsom Research for most of my topicals.

The patch tests were left in contact with the skin for either 5 h or 47 h. You usually rinse off shampoos and shower gels containing SLS within a matter of seconds.

 

[Old Baldy]

I agree with how Jacob states his choice. There might be better stuff out there than SLS. Note: He doesn't say SLS kills follicles. (I don't use, and never have used, SLS in the creams and soaps I make because it can be irritating IMHO. But I don't think it will kill follicles.)

To me, what Pondle said "carries the day" but there are alternatives out there. I just don't like it when people keep saying SLS/alcohol will kill follicles. That's just plain wrong IMHO.

Like I said, I don't use SLS in my homemade concoctions but I will NEVER say SLS kills follicles. That's "going over the top" IMHO.

 

[JamesVegas]

You guys buy Revita, right?

The company that makes it states right in the product literature that they specifically avoided using SLS because of the damage it can do to hair follicles. This is a reputable company.

If you've ever shopped outside of your local BargainMart, you will find plenty of shampoos that are SLS-free, which a big red "X" through the letters SLS.

Let me ask you this - if you had a completely healthy head of hear - and took the minoxidil out of Rogaine -- would you pour the remainder on your head twice a day? Would you douse your healthy hair in PPG and alcohol?

My headline was an attention getter. I'm only saying that slathering chemical cocktails on our heads is probably making our problem worse. I'm not saying it'll make you go bald. Yes, the beneficial chemicals might have some effect, but they are certainly not enhanced by cheap and known toxic detergents and fillers.

The real danger of PPG and SLS are, like I said, debatable. Anyone here recall that mercury fillings in teeth were considered perfectly safe until 1998, when they were made 100% ILLEGAL in Europe. Yeah, the FDA will tell you theres no problem.

Listen up guys, the FDA does not oversee cosmetic forumlation. Europe has banned thousands of cosmetic chemicals. Our beloved FDA, has banned only 50 -- yes, 50. Everything else is fair game. The cosmetic does it's own testing. Do you trust them? If you do, I gladly part ways with you.


This is a matter of common sense. If you are going to tell me that cheap detergents are absolutely fine to use routinely on your scalp, then you deserve your fate.

You "anti-fear" people are the ones that probably also routinely eat microwave dinners and processed foods, arent you? They don't cause rashes, won't kill you, won't make you feel sick right away, etc. They're all FDA approved and "safe," right? You think the CEO of Coca-Cola gives that junk to his kids? You were (and apparently still are) as ignorant as they paid good money to keep you. You are the people that ate Oreo cookies, filled with the trans-fat your FDA told you was perfectly safe.
Why live your life in fear? Yeah, I hear you guys. No reason at all. I laugh, too.

Remember when the FDA told us trans-fats in foods were safe? Remember all the trans-fat you ate as a kid, and how it hasn't done a thing to you? Using your logic, that would be evidence that there is no problem with them. So, where is your faith in the FDA now that they are close to banning trans-fats altogether? Where is your faith in the FDA now that they finally told us, after decades of eating the it, that we should strive to consume ZERO grams per day. Where is your faith in the FDA now that these chemicals are being made ILLEGAL in restaurants in New York. Where is your faith in the belief that if you can't /tell/ it's harming you, it must not be?

I'm not pro-fear, I'm anti-ignorance. Period. There are people on this board here who never knew that these chemicals could cause any problems, and those were the people meant to benefit from the post.
Again, even some of the hair loss companies that we all currently buy from are acknolwedging the benefits of fully-informed product forumlating.

 

[Pondle]

We have to consider the safety of different compounds on a case by case basis, weighing the balance of scientific evidence accumulated thusfar.

If ingested, or applied topically in large enough doses and/or for a sufficient length of time, many common cosmetic ingredients probably exhibit some degree of toxicity. But that's very different to occasional application of low concentrations for a matter of seconds.

The record for SLS on the National Library of Medicine Hazardous Substances Data Bank states, "SLS has shown only slight, acute, subchronic, and chronic toxicity when administered orally to experimental animals. SLS caused mild eye irritation at concentrations of 1.3 to 15.0%, and moderate to severe eye irritation at 17.5 to 30.0%. SLS at 30 and 60% caused severe skin irritation. In rabbits, SLS caused no skin irritation when tested at concentrations of 5.0 to 5.6%, minimal irritation at 6.0 to 10.0%, and severe irritation when tested at 25.0%. SLS was a sensitizing agent in guinea pigs. SLS did not induce reproductive toxicity or carcinogenicity in experimental animals. The Expert Panel concluded that on the basis of the data for SMS and SLS, SMS is safe as a cosmetic ingredient as presently used."

If the balance of scientific opinion changes, I'll be happy to eat my words and ditch my SLS products. But I wouldn't rely on views expressed by companies offering SLS-free or PPG-free products. They have a commercial incentive to exaggerate the potential 'harm' attributable to these compounds. We cannot necessarily trust them as sources of unbiased medical advice.

 

[Bryan]

Let me ask you this - if you had a completely healthy head of hear - and took the minoxidil out of Rogaine -- would you pour the remainder on your head twice a day? Would you douse your healthy hair in PPG and alcohol?

It's interesting, isn't it, that the twice-daily application of the Rogaine vehicle (with alcohol and propylene glycol, but no minoxidil) for 96 weeks in Vera Price's 1999 study with topical minoxidil showed no detectable effect at all on either haircounts or hairweights (compared to the group that received no treatment at all)?

If alcohol and PG are indeed harmful to hair follicles, it must be so slight that it's not even worth worrying about.

Bryan

 

[Jacobo]

JamesVegas. you are mixing up everything. Trans fat are proved to be bad. You just bring a a link to a crappy web that says nothing relevant, and then you tell us that we are some sort of morons because we don't believe it. And Coca cola chairman is laughing because is poisoning us and we pay him...I think that is the opposite, is thanks to people easy to impress like you why are so many pseudo doctors and pseudo scientists getting rich.

Of course smoking is bad, trans fat are bad and my brother is very bad. So what?

 

[Old Baldy]

James wrote in part:

My headline was an attention getter. I'm only saying that slathering chemical cocktails on our heads is probably making our problem worse. I'm not saying it'll make you go bald. Yes, the beneficial chemicals might have some effect, but they are certainly not enhanced by cheap and known toxic detergents and fillers.

Well, if you hadn't said these commonly used ingredients KILL follicles I wouldn't have said anything for Godsakes.

Yes, it was "an attention getter". :lol:

I won't argue about the irritation, etc., caused by some common ingredients used in soaps and cosmetics because, for some people, irritation does occur.

But what you say now is a FAR CRY from saying these commonly used cosmetic or soap ingredients KILL follicles. You scare people when you say that and there is no scientific proof of that claim.

For me, what Pondle posted provides the conclusion reached by professionals who researched and tested SLS. I'm not in a position to refute them. Same for alcohol and PPG.

You can't argue (IMHO) with what Bryan said about Price's study and the opinion given by Jacobo.

Jacobo's opinion is a little extreme on this but I can't argue with him because these alternative ingredient merchants are trying to make a buck also. :wink:

 

[Jacobo]

Old Baldy,

My last line sounds extreme, of course. And yes I think that consumers have to be really aware of health issues. Probably in the future a number of products of common use now will be banned. And the corporate world will not react without external pressure (cigarrettes, etc). But then, websites like that threaten with cancer, etc, covering themselves with maybes and couldbes. That is a dirty game. And then, the supperiority complex of somebody (JamesVegas) who laugh at us because we just act rationally.