Not washing your hair ever?

[Bryan]

I find it hard to believe that sebum doesn't fulfil *some* important function, as the article implies.

The only known role for sebum is to waterproof hair and skin.

For more on this issue of the true purpose of sebum (or lack of it), read the following passage from "Sebum Secretion and Sebaceous Lipids", Stewart et al, Dermatologic Clinics -- Vol. 1, No. 3, July 1983 (BTW, the "Kligman" they refer to in the text below is Dr. Albert M. Kligman, MD, PhD, one of the most famous names in the history of dermatology):

"Sebum is an oily substance that is secreted onto the skin surface from glands located in the dermis. Although a number of useful functions have been proposed for sebum, proof that sebum performs any of them is lacking. In furred mammals an essential function of sebum is to supply 7-dehydrocholesterol, which is converted to vitamin D by the action of sunlight and then ingested by the animal as it grooms itself. In man, however, the location of 7-dehydrocholesterol has been shown to be the epidermis rather than sebum. Sebum may act as a waterproofing agent for fur, but humans obviously have little need for this function. Kligman has specifically disproved the notions that sebum improves the barrier function of skin, that sebum helps to regulate the water content of the horny layer by forming emulsions with sweat, or that sebum on the skin surface is fungistatic or antibacterial.(21) Kligman regards the human sebaceous glands as 'living fossils' that lost their usefulness to our species as we lost our fur.(21)

(21) Kligman, A. M.: The uses of sebum? In Montagna, W., Ellis, R. A., and Silver, A. F. (eds.): Advances in the Biology of Skin. Volume 4. Oxford, Pergamon Press, 1963."

 

[Bryan]

so its through the removal of the epidermal lipids that shampoo and soap have a drying( possibly damaging) effect on skin?

Exactly. Epidermal lipids, as opposed to sebum.

Bryan

 

[theendoftheend]

I don't know about Dr. Klingon but to me it's rather obvious that sebum does slightly waterproof your hair. I notice the effect when I take a shower after a few days off. My hair just doesn't get soaked as easily.

 

[Bryan]

I can't imagine how you could really test that very accurately. Not to mention that sebum doesn't naturally coat the hair, anyway...

Bryan

 

[theendoftheend]

The effect is obvious enough that it doesn't require accurate testing on my part!

Maybe the others can chime in with their own personal experience?

 

[md2002]

Little late on this but I have said it more than once on this site. If I go a week or 2 without washing my hair it looks incredibly thick and good, if I then wash my hair it look thinning and shitty again.

Hair dressers tell clients all the time that washing your hair everyday is not good for you. Your hair needs the natural oil and grease your body produces.

Just my 2 cents

 

[powersam]

your hair dont need crap all as its dead. however your scalp and all the little follicles it contains, it needs love and affection

 

[michael barry]

http://www.oprah.com/tows/slide/200509/ ... _107.jhtml Kids, there is a pic of a woman who decide to shoot herself up with testosterone to be like a man......she quickly started balding. Shampoo is NOT WHY YOU ARE LOSING YOUR HAIR, male hormones are binding to receptors of hairs that are genetically sensitive to male hormones, initiating a process that will see hair growth slow, an inflammatory/immuno response, and eventual vellus hair growth from a former big hair follicle. Thats called Male pattern baldness. If shampoo caused it, we'd ALL have it.

 

[iamnaked]

http://www.oprah.com/tows/slide/200509/20050916/slide_20050916_107.jhtml Kids, there is a pic of a woman who decide to shoot herself up with testosterone to be like a man......she quickly started balding. Shampoo is NOT WHY YOU ARE LOSING YOUR HAIR, male hormones are binding to receptors of hairs that are genetically sensitive to male hormones, initiating a process that will see hair growth slow, an inflammatory/immuno response, and eventual vellus hair growth from a former big hair follicle. Thats called Male pattern baldness. If shampoo caused it, we'd ALL have it.

You've obviously not been keeping up with what people have been saying. This isn't a "OMFG SHAMPOO CAUSES male pattern baldness????!!!" thread. It's just possible that shampoo might affect scalp health, possibly being an exacerbating factor in male pattern baldness.

 

[powersam]

it doesnt matter how many times you state it in plain english hey, everyone has to jump on the "BUT THEN EVERYONE WOULD BE BALD" bandwagon. look this word up - exacerbate

 

[theendoftheend]

I don't see why shampoo or anything else you put on your head would EXARCEBATE male pattern baldness. I have not seen proof of this. Everything discussed so far is pure speculation.

 

[iamnaked]

I don't see why shampoo or anything else you put on your head would EXARCEBATE male pattern baldness. I have not seen proof of this. Everything discussed so far is pure speculation.

Nothing wrong with speculation. All good scientific experiments start with a hypothesis. A lot of people seem to think that scalp health matters. You can't consider the health of a hair without considering the health of what it grows out of; i.e. the follicle, and anecdotes that people have come out with on this thread confirm that it's not a completely crazy idea.

And considering that the same chemical can affect different individuals in a variety of different ways, it's surely not such an improbable thing that one of the chemicals in shampoo could be bad news for some people.

The whole "If shampoo was a factor we would all be bald" thing is flawed. A bit like telling a peanut allergy sufferer that if peanuts were harmful we'd all be dead.

 

[Z]

(The Truth about Sodium Lauryl Sulfate)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you enjoy a shampoo with a rich lather? A shaving cream that really foams? How about relaxing in a tub full of bubbles? These may seem like some of life’s simple, innocent pleasures…until you look at WHAT is causing all that foam and lather. Once you find out, you may decide it’s not so simple or pleasurable after all.

Check the labels of your shampoo, soap, facial cleanser, shaving cream, body wash, or shower gel: Do you see either Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS) or Sodium Laureth Sulfate (SLES) listed? Or one of their cousins: Ammonium Lauryl Sulfate, Sodium Myreth Sulfate, etc.? Most manufacturers use these anionic detergents because they produce a lot of foam very inexpensively. But SLS is so strong that it’s also used to scrub garage floors. And the American College of Toxicology says SLS stays in the body up to five days. Other studies show it easily penetrates the skin and enters and maintains residual levels in the heart, liver, the lungs, and the brain. Yet SLS is found in most cleansing, foaming products—even in some toothpastes! (Note: SLS may be disguised in pseudo-natural cosmetics with the parenthetical explanation "comes from coconut." Let's save the coconut from defamation of character!)

One woman who examined labels found that all the shampoos she checked had SLS—even health food store brands. Many listed Sodium Laureth Sulfate as the first ingredient on the label, meaning it’s the single most prevalent ingredient. So this lady called one company to complain that their product contains a substance that will cause people to have cancer. Their response was, “Yeah, we knew about it, but there’s nothing we can do about it because we need that substance to produce foam." Try contacting some manufacturers yourself: The typical responses might be:

Denial: “It’s completely safe."

Avoidance: "You'll have to talk to someone else" or "We can't talk about that."

Ignorance: "I've never heard about that."

Most people selling products with this and other harmful ingredients really just don't know. The FDA has a GRAS list (Generally Regarded As Safe), and almost everything is on there, so most people selling these products just focus on the marketing hype and what the product is supposed to do for skin (clean it, make it feel soft, etc.). Sadly, of the 7000 ingredients used on the skin, only 5-6 have been tested for LONG-TERM safety, and none have been tested TOGETHER. Currently, 125 are strongly suspected carcinogens, 20 cause adverse nervous system reactions, and 25 are connected to birth defects.

So why exactly is SLS so bad? Here are what tests show about Sodium Lauryl Sulfate:

SLS PENETRATES EYES AND TISSUES. Tests show that SLS can penetrate into the eyes as well as systemic tissues (brain, heart, liver, etc.) and shows long-term retention in those tissues. Especially when used in soaps and shampoos, there is an immediate concern relating to the penetration of SLS into the eyes and other tissues. This is especially important in infants, where considerable growth is occurring, because a much greater uptake occurs by tissues of younger eyes, and SLS changes the amounts of some proteins in cells from eye tissues. Tissues of young eyes may be more susceptible to alteration by SLS[1]

SLS FORMS NITRATES: When SLS is used in shampoos and cleansers containing nitrogen-based ingredients, it can form carcinogenic nitrates that can enter the blood stream in large numbers. They can cause eye irritations, skin rashes, hair loss, scalp scurf similar to dandruff, and allergic reactions.[2]

SLS PRODUCES NITROSAMINES (potent carcinogens that cause the body to absorb nitrates at higher levels than eating nitrate-contaminated food like hot dogs or lunch meat): Dr. David H. Fine, the chemist who uncovered NDELA contamination in cosmetics, estimates that a person would be applying 50 to 100 micrograms of nitrosamine to the skin each time he or she used a nitrosamine-contaminated cosmetic. By comparison, a person consuming sodium nitrate-preserved bacon is exposed to less than one microgram of nitrosamine. [3]

SLS STRIPS MOISTURE AND OIL FROM THE SKIN. According to the Journal of Investigative Dermatology, SLS produced skin and hair damage, including cracking and severe inflammation of the derma-epidermal tissue. Skin layers may separate and inflame due to its protein-denaturing properties.[4]

SLS IRRITATES SCALP AND MAY PROMOTE HAIR LOSS[5]

SLS CAN DAMAGE DNA IN CELLS—according to Japanese studies.[6]

CONCLUSION: SLS and all its cousins are very harsh detergents that strip the skin's moisture barrier (which is linked to immunity and skin health) and causes serious health problems during testing on animals. It is linked to harming children's eyes, denaturing protein (thereby possibly contributing to hair loss or thinning), and combines with DEA, MEA and TEA (often found in the same shampoo) to form nitrosamines, a potent carcinogen. Since it is only included in products because of its potent foaming action, the question you must consider is:

What’s more important: the foam or your health?

You CAN choose healthful alternatives:
Dare To Care What Touches Your Skin and Hair!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References for above information:

[1] Green, Dr. Keith. Detergent Penetration into Young and Adult Eyes. Department of Ophthalmology Medical College of GA, Augusta GA

[2] Hampton, Aubrey. Dictionary of Cosmetic Ingredients. Organica Press Metarasso, or Hampton, Aubrey. Natural Organic Hair and Skin Care. Organica Press, Tampa FL

[3] ibid.

[4] Journal of Invest. Dermatology, 32-581, 1959 "Denaturation of Epidermal Keratin by Surface Active Agents"

[5]Wright, Camille S. Shampoo Report. Images International, Inc. 1989

[6]Vance, Judi. Beauty to Die For. Promotion Publishing, San Diego, CA 1998. Page 23.

 

[michael barry]

http://www.oprah.com/tows/slide/200509/ ... _107.jhtml Look at that picture again kids. She got tesosterone injections, and went bald in the male pattern baldness fashion in a few years. A balding woman in the male pattern baldness fashion. She shampooe'd before, shampoo's now. Whats different? The testosterone.

Nizoral, which can regrow a little hair has SLS.

Dr. Proctor, a hairloss expert, includes SLS in his NANO shampoo.

Bryan, another hairloss expert, has stated that he shampoos without worry with Proctor's shampoo (which has SLS).

Kids, the only environmental thing you may be doing to accerate your male pattern baldness is eating too much saturated animal fat and intaking too much sugars (the body will convert excess sugars to fats). If you left pure SLS on your scalp for a few DAYS. It might penetrate and do a little damage, but its a SURFICANT, not designed to PENETRATE your scalp.

Stop blaming YOURSELVES for inheriting male pattern baldness guys. We can delay it, even beat it if we start soon enough. Its not YOUR fault. Its just nature. People have always went bald. Ancient Egyptians had baldness remedies as early as 1500 BC. Ive seen a valise from Crete from 1400's BC depicting a hippocratically bald fisherman. Its always been with us.

 

[powersam]

overwashing will always be harmful to skin, and anything harmful to skin is harmful to hair. once again, we are not saying shampoo causes baldness, but that overwashing your hair (and scalp) could worsen the condition to some degree. this is speculation as is the following,

michael barry - Kids, the only environmental thing you may be doing to accerate your male pattern baldness is eating too much saturated animal fat and intaking too much sugars (the body will convert excess sugars to fats).

 

[Bryan]

michael barry - Kids, the only environmental thing you may be doing to accerate your male pattern baldness is eating too much saturated animal fat and intaking too much sugars (the body will convert excess sugars to fats).

In general, I've always been rather skeptical of dietary factors having any influence on male pattern baldness, but I'm doing my best to keep an open mind. However, one thing I do feel more strongly about is the frequent attempt to draw a distinction between simple sugars and more complex carbohydrates. They both have pretty much the same effect, other things being equal. If you need to avoid sugar for whatever reason(s), you'd also need to avoid ALL carbs. They're pretty much the same.

Bryan

 

[powersam]

bryan now you made it look like i said that not michael barry.

i have to disagree with you on one thing there. If an individual has glucose control problems, then certain forms of carbs and sugars become potential hazards due to the spikes in blood glucose levels they can cause. sugars and simple carbs do this, complex carbs do not as they get digested far slower.

 

[wookster]

As one is standing upright near the shower faucett, anything on the top of their head will feel the downward force of gravity and will be absorbed into the top scalp-skin more readily than on the sides of the scalp, where gravity would pull it away from being absorbed by the scalp-skin.

Basically, it is Newton's law of gravity. Then, if scalding hot water is forced onto the top scalp-skin to rinse off the sodium lauryl sulfate, it probably burns the already damaged scalp-skin and hair follicles even worse.

This is just speculation on my part though :hairy:

 

[Bryan]

i have to disagree with you on one thing there. If an individual has glucose control problems, then certain forms of carbs and sugars become potential hazards due to the spikes in blood glucose levels they can cause. sugars and simple carbs do this, complex carbs do not as they get digested far slower.

No they don't. Complex carbs are digested and absorbed at about the same speed as, say, sucrose. You're a little behind the times, Sam.

Bryan

 

[Britannia]

Z that was a great post.