Black Hair Media Forum Homepage
BHM BHM BHM
Forum Home Forum Home > Natural Hair Care > Natural Hair Care
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Does long term use of silicones cause balding?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login
Angkor Cambodian Hair
 

Does long term use of silicones cause balding?

 
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 6>
It Always Begin With Beautiful Hair

Bootiful Cream



Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 6 Votes, Average 4.33  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
pinkecube View Drop Down
VIP Member
VIP Member
Avatar

Joined: Jun 02 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 6168
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (2) Thanks(2)   Quote pinkecube Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Mar 27 2014 at 11:56pm
Originally posted by exceedinggrace exceedinggrace wrote:

Originally posted by LadyAradia LadyAradia wrote:

"But baking soda, on the other hand is a gritty abrasive material almost like fine sand, which is what makes it an awesome household cleansing tool!"


baking soda dissolves tho. it even says so on the box 2 use in shampoo. My hair dsn't feel like mummy, & i've been using it... Pink's right ur fear mongering & making stuff up. She has already proven herside imo, I read everything & didn't see anything untrue there. She's not misquoting u, its a direct quote. In ur post u said baking soda strips oil from the hair, & said oils(lipids r oils) r the real moisture agents. oils don't moisturize hairErmm

You are right exceeding. I've never felt grittiness or abrasiveness when rinsing out my bakingsoda mixture. It dissolves. My hair felt soft upon rinse out, other users who tried it reported softer hair upon rinse out, you report softer hair upon rinse out, danabnatural on youtube reports softer hair (although she didn't do the rinse in conjunction w/ deep conditioning like I recommend). Lady Aradia's grasping at straws that aren't there. Not only that, when people use bakingsoda to cleanse and exfoliate, they don't add more than a couple teaspoons of water to it, otherwise it will dissolve it along with the abrasive property. Usually, they will mix it with a small amount lemon for an exfoliating effect. It forms a paste because the ratios of baking soda to water is higher,(3 parts bakingsoda, to one part water. So in 1 tablespoon of baking soda, you would put one teaspoon of water for the paste consistency. 3 tspns = 1 tbsp) and will only partially dissolve it. That's why the way you dilute it, and the quantities you use are important, and you should ignore the over-generalizations and fear mongering people try to perpetuate in a desperate attempt to prove a point they don't have.

 My mixture entails a 3rd cup of conditioner and 2-4 oz of water. Enough to water down the conditioner, but not so much that the consistency becomes too watery. As a household cleaner, it does a good job of gently lifting away grease. When mixed with water. In that state it isnt abrasive, and That is why it is called a gentle household cleaner that doesnt scratch surfaces. If it scratched the hair, it wouldn't say on the box, mix it into your shampoo. Yes, it says it on the box.


My mixture goes further to eliminate the stripping effect. You also add in your sulfate and silicone free conditioner. Not only that, but the amount of bakingsoda used can be minimized depending on how much build up you actually need to remove from the hair. If you use a oil or soft gel, you can use less. If your gel has more cast, you use more bakingsoda (2 tbspn max), and can really determine the best measurement of baking for you based on how much actually needs to be removed. Not only that, you deep condition, ghe or steam afterword. Its simple, and flexible.


Here's some info about emollients, and my so called misquote. They function the same way and even include oils, so I'm not understanding where this so called "misquote" is. I copied and pasted it that quote directly from her post where she basically talked about oils an emollients. Emulsifiers can also act as emollients, she saying the same thing in a different way. Fatty hair sebum is both an emulsifier and emollient. Many oils act as both as well, and alone they do nothing to moisturize. They can lubricate, seal, and some can act as humectants. That's why conditioners work(the ones with emollients that can be thoroughly but gently washed off, not nonwater soluable silicones), because they contain emollients while being water based.

The following are Lady Aradia's own cited quotes from chemists. I am really not contradicting what they are saying at all:

"Even if you did block your hair from absorbing moisture, the silicone would act like a moisturizing agent because it would plasticize and lubricate your hair."
http://thebeautybrains.com/2007/02/16/does-silicone-suffocate-hair/

 Silicone is an emollient. It does not moisturize the hair. Only water can do that. It works in conjunction with water, the real moisturizer hence why they are considered moisturizing agents. They do not, however, directly moisturize hair on their own. fact. At best, it can give the appearance of shinier hair, and will lubricate the hair. But emollients have to work with water to be effective moisturizing agents. So if they are coating the strand they are blocking a significant amount of water from entering the shaft. Working against moisture. Enough for it to be considered a "hydrophobic coating" and to "reduce the porosity of your hair". If it didn't function in some way to hinder moisture, people wouldn't report, "hangtime" like lady aradia said, and a chemist wouldn't consider it water proof. It isn't completely permeable, otherwise it wouldn't be considered, a hydrophobic coating. It doesn't matter if it's permeable, because not only are most emollients permeable to some degree, and also most films created on the hair are never perfect, but they can build up and significantly hinder moisture from entering the cuticle. It's the same thing I experienced with mineral oil. Even though I was spritzing my hair everyday, since I already sealed with it,  the moisture just sat on my hair. Did I get shrinkage? Of course! But my hair felt like straw, and was frizzy, and undefined, becuase that is not the ideal way to reintroduce moisture to the hair.

"Some silicones do leave a heavy coating on the hair that can be hard to wash off."
http://thebeautybrains.com/2007/01/23/what-do-silicones-do-for-your-hair/

"water insoluble silicones can build up on hair, that much is true. And if you over-use products like this everyday, it is possible to end up with hair that feels weighed down and limp."
http://thebeautybrains.com/2007/02/16/does-silicone-suffocate-hair/

"silicones work by covering hair with a thin hydrophobic (water-proof) coating. This coating serves several purposes: it helps reduce the porosity of the hair which makes it less likely to absorb humidity; it helps reduce moisture loss from the inside of the hair; and it lubricates the surface of the hair so it feel smoother and combs easier."
http://thebeautybrains.com/2007/01/29/are-silicones-bad-for-your-hair/

by the way, the argument, the only real argument I see is that even though its blocks humidity, majority of our hair doesn't absorb water from the atmosphere anyway. But african american hair generally is dry and it would never be enough to rely on the atmosphere to our hair. That is why I say reintroducing moisture, as in, applying water and conditioner(which is water based) directly to your hair.

If I spritzed my hair and I already had a heavy oil blocking my cuticles, my hair would not define, it would not be moisturized, and that water from conditioner would evaporate in a few hours, leaving my hair as dry as before. The order you layer is extremely important. Oil is a barrier to water. They do not mix. The LOC method is flawed in this sense. It makes no sense to expect moisture to be sealed in when you apply it to the outside. Conditioner is water based, and is a moisturizer. The best method is LCO or even LCOC. But the softness achieved from spraying water or moisturizer on top of an oil is temporary



exactly what I have been saying, oils and emollients lubricate, not moisturize. They need to work with water, and they have already admitted it can build up on the hair, be difficult to remove. And what is is going to do, it will form a "plastic and lubricating" barrier. However, this is not true moisture, and does nothing to really benefit the hair except in high poros hair to fill in the hair cuticle. Low porosity doesn't need that.



http://blackhairmedia.com/hair-care/silicones-in-hair-products-good-or-bad/

"While there are two categories of silicones, one type is not better than the other because silicones do not actually benefit the hair in any way.   In fact, silicones only give the “appearance” of healthier hair.   Silicones coat the hair to make it appear sleeker, frizz free and healthier. "

"The use of silicone depends on how your hair reacts to it.   If your hair doesn’t have a bad reaction, there is nothing wrong with using water soluble silicone products."

^What I have been saying this whole time

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/182953.php

"An emollient is a humectant, lubricant and occluder. Occlusion provides a layer of oil on the skin's surface, thus slowing down water loss. A humectant enhances the surface of the skin's capacity to hold water. A lubricant reduces friction when anything rubs against the skin."

Occlusion=seal. Lubricant= Lubricant. Humectant= glycerin, which can actually pull moisture out of the hair in dry climates, environments, and seasons. Also not water soluable. (Also, when they do pull in water, they pull water towards the surface. Actual absorption isn't guaranteed.) Emollients need to work with water, they do not directly moisturize and in some cases can act against water absorption. It's the exact reason build up causes dry hair. otherwise oil build up would moisturize hair. I hope you won't try to write this off as a misquote, Lady Aradia because it isn't.



Edited by pinkecube - Mar 28 2014 at 10:13am
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
pinkecube View Drop Down
VIP Member
VIP Member
Avatar

Joined: Jun 02 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 6168
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (2) Thanks(2)   Quote pinkecube Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Mar 28 2014 at 1:19am
Originally posted by OhMyCurlz OhMyCurlz wrote:

"Silicones will not make your hair fall out. "


That either way cannot be said unequivocally. Everyone's individual situation and circumstances is different.

Originally posted by OhMyCurlz OhMyCurlz wrote:

"The silicone protein scare is propaganda spread by natural hair companies as well as those profiting off of the curly hair community (ie Curl Girl book). I know this for a fact.....I owned a natural hair care line and we advertised the same "no-silicones" ploy as a selling point. It's bunk. That's why chemists have no clue where this scare even came from because it's baseless. ...it's also why we can get away with selling a "natural conditioner" to you for $16.99 for 8 oz, where as a product with actives and silicones that will provide the same level of performance and better slip costs much less."


I used a lot quotes from several reliable sources that backed up what I say. Read them, please. Secondly you don't know for a fact which kind of conditioner the woman with bald spots used. I honestly think you need to be using a high concentration of silicones and also be only cowashing for that to happen. I'm not trying to spread silicone bald spot propaganda, although I do believe it is possible, the same way it is possible to get bald spots from proteins, which i have directly experienced and experimented with different gels.

 Back when I was relaxed, I used to use proclaim protein styling gel. My hair had zero problems. When I used ecostyler, the first gel I used when becoming natural it started to thin out my hair. Then, I even got a bald spot. I experimented with the gel under different conditions, different hair styles and the result was the same. I tried to use other gels (I went back to using the proclaim) My hair still was getting thinner. I wasn't on any bandwagon, this was just my experience, and i even went to further lengths to reason why the bald spot were occuring. Was it headbands? No, I rarely wore them, and even they weren't tight, nor did they pose problems before use of the gel. Was it my conditioner? No, It never caused me hair loss before. It's the gel. Why? I experimented using different gels. I eventually identified protein to be the problem. But was still confused as to why it hadn't caused me problems in my relaxed days.

I eventually realized I could not treat my relaxed hair the same way I treat my low porosity type 4 hair. Relaxed hair has alot of the bonds broken from the chemical treatment, resulting in more poros strands. Silicones and proteins are beneficial because the high porous hair wants those bonds filled. Low porosity already has a setback when it comes to absorbing moisture. To get maximum moisture retention, it's best to eliminate products that further block the cuticle. It doesn't want more of these. If these silicones did not have a significant effect on the amount your moisture your hair gets, they wouldn't result in "hang time" like Lady Aradia said. Reversion wouldn't be limited or slowed. The coating my be permeable but for it to form a coating and for a chemist to call is "hydrophobic/water proof" and say it helps "lower the porosity of the hair" mentioning that is permeable is a bit redundant to what I have been saying. it does make water increasingly difficult for
low porous hair to absorb. Also almost anything that coats on the hair is permeable to some degree. This is because the film is never perfect, there are gaps. Hair even shrinks with mineral oil. That means mineral oil is permeable, correct? But it is also proven to be extremely drying for many hair types. It gets increasingly difficult as the silicones are allowed to build up on the hair, and these non-water soluable silicones are difficult to remove without sulfates. They aren't like most products that build up on the hair in that way.  This let me know that silicones, because of the way they behave, are not compatible for certain hair types. This doesn't necessarily mean you'll get bald spots, but in can contribute to hindered moisture retention. The main point is that your hair's porosity and type have a significant impact on your hair's compatibility to products. This is what I keep emphasizing.

Originally posted by OhMyCurlz OhMyCurlz wrote:

"There is less than stellar "information" about behentrimonium methosulfate and cetearyl alcohol too...but those are the emulsifiers in your "natural conditioner". If used in very high percentages that can also cause "build up" as these are "naturally derived" wax pellets."


I am not against either of those ingredients. Just like I'm not against olive oil. ALL oils are emollients, and many are emulsifiers. Hair's sebum is an emulsifier. Anything can build up on the hair, including hair sebum. But not everything requires sulfates to properly remove the residue and build up. The resistance to removal is one the main problems with nonwater soluable silicones
.

Originally posted by OhMyCurlz OhMyCurlz wrote:

"Your hair may not respond well to a formula or the amount of an ingredient used, but to isolate one ingredient in an entire formula as the culprit of why your hair responded badly when it is very low on an ingredient list is a tad ridiculous. "

"A product made of 99% silicone is different from a product with 0.5% silicone in it. "

The cone in her conditioner is within the top 5 ingredients. That is a significant amount to hinder moisture on some levels. Generally if you are avoiding a product, you identify the first 5 ingredients. And we don't yet know how much cones were in the woman who had bald spot's conditioner.

Originally posted by OhMyCurls OhMyCurls wrote:

"Not everyone who is claiming "silicone sensitive" is actually "silicone sensitive" they are just band wagon hoppers. People need to do their own research from a reputable source and use common sense. "


that's your opinion
, not a fact. There are plenty of testimonies where people have observed their hair doesn't like it. It isn't fair to try and undermine them all as bandwagoning.  next thing you'll be claiming sulfates are mearly a marketing ploy. The chemist naturally curly they hire tells it like it is. She's a credible scientist. Pharasutical companies hire scientist to make sure a drug is safe. They are still privatized and make money, but does that mean the basic science should be undermined? No. Honestly that same argument can be used to describe many companies that pitch silicones as unequivocally good for everyone's hair. Are they not hiring scientists as well to market their product? This is done with many things. Everything you are saying is subjective.

Originally posted by OhMyCurlz OhMyCurlz wrote:

]
"Silicones do not form an impenetrable barrier over the hair. "


They form enough of a barrier to be considered water soluable and to lower the porosity of the hair. No barrier is impenetrable, but that doesn't mean my hair is getting as much moisture as it needs to feel hydrated. I also identified that silicones are permable in my post. However, it still blocks enough moisture to cause a problem in hair that is already low porosity.



Edited by pinkecube - Mar 28 2014 at 8:32am
Back to Top
LadyAradia View Drop Down
VIP Member
VIP Member
Avatar

Joined: Feb 25 2013
Location: usa
Status: Offline
Points: 7057
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote LadyAradia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Mar 28 2014 at 10:11am
Originally posted by OhMyCurlz OhMyCurlz wrote:

Silicones will not make your hair fall out. LOL

The silicone protein scare is propaganda spread by natural hair companies as well as those profiting off of the curly hair community (ie Curl Girl book). I know this for a fact.....I owned a natural hair care line and we advertised the same "no-silicones" ploy as a selling point. It's bunk. That's why chemists have no clue where this scare even came from because it's baseless. ...it's also why we can get away with selling a "natural conditioner" to you for $16.99 for 8 oz, where as a product with actives and silicones that will provide the same level of performance and better slip costs much less. 

There is less than stellar "information" about behentrimonium methosulfate and cetearyl alcohol too...but those are the emulsifiers in your "natural conditioner". If used in very high percentages that can also cause "build up" as these are "naturally derived" wax pellets. 

Your hair may not respond well to a formula or the amount of an ingredient used, but to isolate one ingredient in an entire formula as the culprit of why your hair responded badly when it is very low on an ingredient list is a tad ridiculous. Not everyone who is claiming "silicone sensitive" is actually "silicone sensitive" they are just band wagon hoppers. People need to do their own research from a reputable source and use common sense. 

A product made of 99% silicone is different from a product with 0.5% silicone in it. 

Silicones do not form an impenetrable barrier over the hair. 

Thank  you SO MUCH  Oh my Curlz. The natural hair product companies could not compete with the big companies. This is an advertising campaign to scare the customers into paying whatever the new small companies ask. I was told the same exact thing by my contacts who are still in the industry.
Let them pay outrageous prices.  They are sheep and they are falling right in line  with the campaigns being waged against their wallet. Let them. It's their own fault if they fall for it when we are telling them what is going on.






Edited by LadyAradia - Mar 28 2014 at 10:26am
Back to Top
pinkecube View Drop Down
VIP Member
VIP Member
Avatar

Joined: Jun 02 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 6168
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (2) Thanks(2)   Quote pinkecube Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Mar 28 2014 at 10:19am
Originally posted by LadyAradia LadyAradia wrote:

Originally posted by OhMyCurlz OhMyCurlz wrote:

Silicones will not make your hair fall out. LOL

The silicone protein scare is propaganda spread by natural hair companies as well as those profiting off of the curly hair community (ie Curl Girl book). I know this for a fact.....I owned a natural hair care line and we advertised the same "no-silicones" ploy as a selling point. It's bunk. That's why chemists have no clue where this scare even came from because it's baseless. ...it's also why we can get away with selling a "natural conditioner" to you for $16.99 for 8 oz, where as a product with actives and silicones that will provide the same level of performance and better slip costs much less. 

There is less than stellar "information" about behentrimonium methosulfate and cetearyl alcohol too...but those are the emulsifiers in your "natural conditioner". If used in very high percentages that can also cause "build up" as these are "naturally derived" wax pellets. 

Your hair may not respond well to a formula or the amount of an ingredient used, but to isolate one ingredient in an entire formula as the culprit of why your hair responded badly when it is very low on an ingredient list is a tad ridiculous. Not everyone who is claiming "silicone sensitive" is actually "silicone sensitive" they are just band wagon hoppers. People need to do their own research from a reputable source and use common sense. 

A product made of 99% silicone is different from a product with 0.5% silicone in it. 

Silicones do not form an impenetrable barrier over the hair. 

Thank  you SO MUCH  Oh my Curlz. The natural hair product companies could not compete with the big companies. This is an advertising campaign to scare the customers into paying whatever the new small companies ask. I was told the same exact thing by my contacts who are still in the industry.
Let them pay outrageous prices.  They are sheep and they are falling right in line  with the campaigns being waged against their wallet. Let them. It's their own fault if they fall for it when we are telling them what is going on.


Oh please Lady Aradia. Trader Joes tea tree tingle costs $4. Trader Joes ph balancing conditioner, $3. Tresemme Naturals Radiant Volume Conditioner  $5. Give it a rest already with the straw grasping and fear mongering.

like i said to Oh My Curls. that's your opinion, not a fact. There are plenty of testimonies where people have observed their hair doesn't like it. It isn't fair to try and undermine them all as bandwagoning.  next thing you'll be claiming sulfates being drying are mearly a marketing ploy. The chemist naturally curly they hire tells it like it is. She's a credible, professional scientist and chemist, just like the ones from the examples you posted above earlier. Pharmaceutical companies hire scientist and chemists to make sure a drug is safe. They are still privatized and make money, but does that mean the basic science should be undermined? No. Honestly that same argument can be used to describe many companies that pitch silicones as unequivocally good for everyone's hair. Are they not hiring scientists as well to market their product? This is done with many things. Everything you are saying is subjective.


Edited by pinkecube - Mar 28 2014 at 11:12am
Back to Top
LadyAradia View Drop Down
VIP Member
VIP Member
Avatar

Joined: Feb 25 2013
Location: usa
Status: Offline
Points: 7057
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LadyAradia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Mar 28 2014 at 10:26am
There was a video posted on here recently by a product manufacturer speaking to students at a beauty school explaining how these campaigns by product manufacturers  work. He used the example of how Clairol had total control of the hair color market. The advertising company for L'Oreal  was desperate to try to get some of the market from Clairol but they could not compete with Clairol's low price. So they decided to get a BLONDE actress, Cybill Shepherd who was hot in the show Moonlighting at the time. They had her to say "It''s expensive. But I'm worth it"

The gullible patrons came in groves to pay more for the hair color which the manufacturer said was the same formula as Clairol in a different box. They did this because of this advertising campaign designed to toy wi th the minds of the consumers to allow L'Oreal to compete with Clairol. 

He said that Clairol has never been able to recover its majority of the market from L'Oreal because everyone wanted to be "worth it" like the blonde actress

This case is almost  identical textbook case for advertisers. The curl companies can not compete with the big guys in manufacturing so in this case they appeal to FEAR instead of VANITY. I have taken classes in Marketing at  University. It is quite interesting how marketers and advertiser toy with consumer's fragile minds. LOL


PS: Get over yourself and stop trying to make this all about you.  HA who are you?. This is not about you pink and you are nothing to me to discredit or otherwise.  This is about the OP wanting opinions on a product.  


Edited by LadyAradia - Mar 28 2014 at 11:31am
Back to Top
pinkecube View Drop Down
VIP Member
VIP Member
Avatar

Joined: Jun 02 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 6168
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (2) Thanks(2)   Quote pinkecube Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Mar 28 2014 at 10:37am
Originally posted by LadyAradia LadyAradia wrote:

There was a video posted on here recently by a product manufacturer speaking to students at a beauty school explaining how these campaigns by product manufacturers  work. He used the example of how Clairol had total control of the hair color market. The advertising company for L'Oreal  was desperate to try to get some of the market from Clairol but they could not compete with Clairol's low price. So they decided to get a BLONDE actress, Cybill Shepherd who was hot in the show Moonlighting at the time. They had her to say "It''s expensive. But I'm worth it"

The gullible patrons came in groves to pay more for the hair color which the manufacturer said was the same formula as Clairol in a different box. They did this because of this advertising campaign designed to toy wi th the minds of the consumers to allow L'Oreal to compete with Clairol. 

He said that Clairol has never been able to recover its majority of the market from L'Oreal because everyone wanted to be "worth it" like the blonde actress

This case is almost  identical textbook case for advertisers. The curl companies can not compete with the big guys in manufacturing so in this case they appeal to FEAR instead of VANITY. I have taken classes in Marketing at  University. It is quite interesting how marketers and advertiser toy with consumer's fragile minds. LOL

 Good try, but I'm not seeing a contradiction with the examples i put and what i said, in regards to this marketing explanation you are giving. LOL I said the exact same thing!  What you are doing right now could be considered a form of marketing for silicones. Many companies will market whatever is in their product and that applies to hair companies that use silicones too. It's all subjective. Marketing is marketing and every profit making company does it.

Many of the quotes and explanations I gave are based on many of the chemists and scientists, you purported to be "the only ones capable of educating on this topic." In the end, I found that none of the information they give directly contradicts what I am and have been saying. In fact, everything I have said has been in line with the scientific and chemical explanations, they support my logically and scientifically reasoned analysis. It's very clear to me you read none of it.

 Trader joes and tresseme naturals are obviously able to compete. They aren't even singularly curl companies. They don't contain those ingredients, and their prices are cheap! Newer, smaller businesses will always have to raise the price of their product. I have taken business, and business law classes, so you aren't going to pull the wool over my eyes here. You essentially proved what i was saying. What product it happens to contain doesn't really make a difference in that aspect. Marketing is marketing no matter what. You can't say it only applies to silicone free marketing.

next thing you'll be claiming sulfates being drying are merely a marketing ploy.  Pharmaceutical companies hire professional scientists and chemists to make sure a drug is safe. They are still privatized and marketing and business, but does that mean the scientists with degrees and chemists are wrong? no. I've well proven my reasoning that all throughout this post. I even used links directly from chemist websites, and from you own credible scientific quotes by the only people "qualified" to speak about this (that's what you said).  to prove what I'm saying is logical. You obviously are just trying to undermine everything I'm saying in anyway you can, but in the end
most you are saying is subjective and overgeneralized.


Edited by pinkecube - Mar 28 2014 at 11:13am
Back to Top
kwicherbichen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: Sep 25 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1804
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (4) Thanks(4)   Quote kwicherbichen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Mar 28 2014 at 11:58am
The science says that silicones act as a barrier. If your hair is not in healthy condition to absorb and release moisture well, having your hair constantly coated sounds like a BAD idea!!!

It makes sense to me that if your hair is chronically brittle and dry, constant use of a silicone without washing it out sounds awful. 

The best thing to do is to experiment with your hair. I personally have very dry brittle hair. I've found that ONE application of silicone is enough. Constantly putting silicone on my hair actually made my hair more DRY than if I just had that one application. And the one application was as effective as a non-silicone conditioner that I would pile on. I found, for me personally, if I did NOT wash the silicone out, my hair was dry. But I could continue to pile on the silicone-free with no issue. 




Edited by kwicherbichen - Mar 28 2014 at 12:07pm
Back to Top
pinkecube View Drop Down
VIP Member
VIP Member
Avatar

Joined: Jun 02 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 6168
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (2) Thanks(2)   Quote pinkecube Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Mar 28 2014 at 12:16pm
Originally posted by LadyAradia LadyAradia wrote:


PS: Get over yourself and stop trying to make this all about you.  HA who are you?. This is not about you pink and you are nothing to me to discredit or otherwise.  This is about the OP wanting opinions on a product.  


Wow, you will really just say anything in order to win an argument, won't you. You are all over the place with your explanations, desperately grasping straws and filling this thread with misconstrued facts and lies. It doesn't matter who I am, and i do not care what you think about me. I've pretty much lost all respect for your so called qualifications in this debate. The facts and the information i put together speaks for itself, as well as your conduct during this discussion speaks for itself.

You claim not to lie or use pseudo science but you do, and then hypocritically and falsely accuse people of engaging in pseudo science, under the guise that you are a cosmotogist. I don't care what your career is, doesn't mean you can't lie and misinform people. you have proven that in this post. Now your argument has been completely degraded to using fear tactics, condescension, getting emotional, using lies, pseudo science, contradictions with professional chemists evidence, and even name calling. Wacko

I think we all know who has lost their credibility in this debate here. The OP didn't give any information about her hair type or the hair type of the woman who had bald spots. That is why, I gave that information in regards to low porosity type 4 hair, to help her identify whether the product would work for her. All science, all common sense. Every thing I have said has been supported by scientific facts and logical reasoning. Not by my emotions and not by pseudo science. I didn't misquote anything, like you tried to falsely accuse me of.

She can determine her own hair type, I didn't say anywhere that when someone with low porous hair type 4 uses silicones, they would go bald. I agreed with majority of the scientific evidence posted here, because it supported what i was trying to explain.

Who am I? Who cares, this is an open forum, and I'm allowed to speak what I have proven is true, and share information from my perspective. You do not own this forum, and you do not own me. Good day




Edited by pinkecube - Mar 28 2014 at 12:22pm
Back to Top
pinkecube View Drop Down
VIP Member
VIP Member
Avatar

Joined: Jun 02 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 6168
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinkecube Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Mar 28 2014 at 12:24pm
Thank you, kwicherbichen. Smile
Back to Top
kwicherbichen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: Sep 25 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1804
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (5) Thanks(5)   Quote kwicherbichen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Mar 28 2014 at 12:33pm
LadyAradia:

You posted great information, but NOTHING YOU HAVE POSTED de-bunks the information pinkecube has posted. You continue to debate based on rhetoric. Up your logic and actually ADDRESS the rebuttals pinkecube has posted -- otherwise you sound like a marketing campaign, yourself. 

You use silicone in your salon but you are seeing clients -- what? Once a week at the most? And you likely use a sulfate-shampoo which will wash it out. You are not doing daily co-washes for these clients... 

The OP agrees with you. You have convinced the OP using the "them vs. reality" tactic. But I'm not convinced. No one disagrees that silicones are GREAT and have great applications, but for a AFRO-TEXTURED WOMAN WHO WANTS TO USE IT AS A CO-WASH it makes no sense.

You also offer no explanation for why someone would believe silicones caused them to go bald. Granted, we have no seen the video -- but if someone is making claims like that, how about putting that claim to bed if you believe its unfounded.


the question is not "are silicones bad?" the question is "ARE SILICONES APPROPRIATE FOR DAILY CO-WASHING?"
Back to Top
Get Longer Healthier Faster Growing Hair
Get Healthier Stronger Longer Hair
Glam Twinz
Weave Connection
Little Black Scarf
Human Hair Wigs
Wefting Training
Brazilian Hair
Brazilian Hair
Wig and Hair Extension on Amazon
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 6>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down