PDA

View Full Version : Scientists call for hair extensions to be banned in the UK



akka naeda
February 5th, 2010, 06:57 AM
I just saw a link on the BBC website which said that and obviously I had to look at it

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/health/newsid_10050000/newsid_10056800/10056867.stm

Svenja
February 5th, 2010, 07:06 AM
TBH, I totally agree with this call. Especially around here it is awful how many girls wear these unprofessional extensions. Some can even be bought for home-use (not the clip-in ones but the real ones you melt into the hair). I have only recently seen a girl in a shop, who bought extensions because hers had come out. Her natural hair was terrible! It was all uneven in lengths and badly felted - because obviously combing is not easy with these extensions in - plus her natural hair was all dull and broken off. This sight made my eyes water. Ok, I am obsessed with my hair but how could you do this to your hair and scalp?
On many other occasions I have seen women/girls with extensions which did not match their original colours, with extensions where you could see the cluey bits through the ladies' natural hair. Awful.
If you want to have them done, do it, but please leave it to a professional !

Katze
February 5th, 2010, 07:10 AM
IF it only applies to glue in ones, why not!

I just braided a strand of fake blue hair into my short wispy nape hairs and am LOVING it (see old pics of these extensions in my album). I am personally a huge fan of non damaging braid- or clip-in extensions!

Unofficial_Rose
February 5th, 2010, 07:25 AM
I think the article is right. I had some expensive bonded-in ones and they pulled out about a third of my hair from the root in 3 weeks. And i don't have weakly-rooted hair, and I went to somewhere very reputable. Luckily my hair recovered, but it took about a year.

I think they have a point re the tight braids and cornrows. I've known people with LARGE amounts of scalp showing who have been wearing cornrows for years.

Liss
February 5th, 2010, 07:41 AM
That aricle had me thinking of Naomi Campbells recent-ish balding patch along her hairline. Proof that continuous harsh treatment severely damages the hair.

Dreams_in_Pink
February 5th, 2010, 09:06 AM
I lived with this kind of extensions for a month. And yes, it'd be awesome if they were banned, cause it's no fun to have a bazillion metal clips poking your scalp and continuously snagging >_< I'm glad i took them out before it gave me permanent bald spots.

Liluri
February 5th, 2010, 09:23 AM
I don't see how banning won't push it underground so people will be trying to glue extensions in their house. Education and then let people decide for themselves seems to me a better answer. By all means have some nice before and after pictures of what they can do to you.

SHELIAANN1969
February 5th, 2010, 10:06 AM
I personally think this kind of harsh treatment is damaging, I also think that people have a right to make those choices, I think each shop should have a warning sign visible to all customers, much like the Surgeon Generals warning on cigarettes, and if they choose to go forth and their hair and scalp end up damaged, they should not be allowed to sue the salon or hairdreser.

We all make choices, if we allow others to take those choices away, we are giving up our freedom. Even if these choices hurt us, we should be allowed the option, free will.... if you will.

Alun
February 5th, 2010, 10:48 AM
The only downside I can see is that if they are banned then our members will be accused of wearing illegal hair extensions!!!

embee
February 5th, 2010, 10:49 AM
Maybe next they will outlaw dye, bleach, setting lotions, permanent waves, pony elastics, various barrettes and other hair treatments and toys - those are damaging too - along with tight braids. How about teasing/backcombing?

Is that really a road we want to travel? Sigh.

Iylivarae
February 5th, 2010, 10:58 AM
I don't think they should be banned. If people want to put them in, it's their problem. In my opinion someone can perm and bleach their hair 3x a day... as long as it is not my hair, why should I care?

jivete
February 5th, 2010, 11:06 AM
Maybe next they will outlaw dye, bleach, setting lotions, permanent waves, pony elastics, various barrettes and other hair treatments and toys - those are damaging too - along with tight braids. How about teasing/backcombing?

Is that really a road we want to travel? Sigh.

I agree. If it isn't going to kill you, the government needs to bud out. Really, this is a cosmetic problem, not a life threatening one. It would be like banning tattoos because someone got a bad one. :rolleyes:

Starr
February 5th, 2010, 11:11 AM
I agree that children shouldn't have extension put in, but other that I don't think we shouldn't try to control the decisions of other adults on how they choose to look and how they achieve that. If they are willing to take the risks then let them deal the outcome.

Fethenwen
February 5th, 2010, 11:12 AM
Wow, banning it is a bit extreme, but I think it's good that information about the risks of extensions are out in the public.


The only downside I can see is that if they are banned then our members will be accused of wearing illegal hair extensions!!!
:p LOL!

catysue
February 5th, 2010, 11:18 AM
Maybe next they will outlaw dye, bleach, setting lotions, permanent waves, pony elastics, various barrettes and other hair treatments and toys - those are damaging too - along with tight braids. How about teasing/backcombing?

Is that really a road we want to travel? Sigh.

Slippery slope reasoning is a logical fallacy :flower:

Though I dislike hair extensions and agree that they are bad for the hair, I absolutely do not think they should be banned.

xoxophelia
February 5th, 2010, 02:07 PM
Extensions give me the creeps. Kind of the thought of running your fingers through someone's hair and feeling that. ehhh

I agree that what we need is better education about this. I didn't even know extensions could leave people with bald patches. But regardless though, people will continue to do it. Just like how people know bleaching too much will turn their hair into straw but they still do it in excess.

Fractalsofhair
February 5th, 2010, 02:20 PM
I think they should be banned for young children. I know in 8th grade, I got extensions for a breast cancer fundraiser, and several girls had already gotten extensions in their hair. Personally, I think that all chemical processes(perms, bleaching, dying) should be banned on people under age 13 or so, because it's really sad to see a 8 year old who feels like her roots are ugly and hates her natural hair color because her parents have been dying her hair ever since she was 3-4 or so and her hair changed from baby blond to normal hair, and or that her family thinks it's dangerous for women's scalps to not bleach it. I mean, maybe we could see about temporary dyes, because I do know my nephew wants to dye his hair of his own free will, but I don't think permanent hair coloring should be allowed to be done on young children, or perms and such. I get a lot of parents(even of girls in my town with maybe 2a hair.), think that the hair is unreasonably curly and they have to get it straightened to make it more manageable, but it's sad. Now, with the pink hair extensions I had, they broke off my hair a few inches from my scalp since they were always getting pulled out. I didn't have any matting or balding, but I only had them in for two weeks. Extensions are permanent, or the balding is, and I think that it's wrong for a parent to do such a thing for a young child.

For adult women, I think there should be a warning and perhaps require women to sign waivers saying they won't sue the salon if they go bald. If an adult women thinks extensions are worth that risk, it's her own choice. She should be told something along the lines of "Even the most properly applied extensions can carry a risk of balding if worn for too often. At this salon, we try to minimize that risk thru proper application and suggesting when to remove them, but the results can vary person to person. If you end up bald, you can't sue the salon for any damages.". Same deal with PPD based hair dyes. It can cause cancer, and skin damage, but it's the easiest alternative to henna and other dyes that you can't change the color of. For bleach and such, saying things like this can cause a scalp burn is a good idea. I find most salons don't do that, at least when I used to get lowlights for a while(years ago), and it would often be painful to feel the bleach on my scalp. I wasn't warned either that my hair would be dry after, which was kinda annoying...

In regards to the tight braids mentioned in the article, one of my friends has been wearing cornrows mostly since he was 13 or so, because he's African American and wanted to grow out his hair because he loves metal. His mum wasn't quite sure how to deal with a teenage guy with natural hair once it got longer(Mainly because he's a teenage guy and well, telling him to be gentle while combing is a stretch.), so she just had him get it done in cornrows so he wouldn't have to wash it as much(his hair, when he's worn it loose, does look greasy after 1 day, from what I've seen.) and thus detangle it. I've never heard him complain of it hurting, and nor have I see any balding on his head. It's somewhat of a protective style as well. Tight braids are pretty harmless, I think, if you're careful not to make them TOO tight. It's more when there's a weight on the braid or scalp that it gets worrysome. But, by the same standard, long hair exerts some weight. Extensions with the glue weigh more than long hair by itself though.

EvaSimone
February 5th, 2010, 02:28 PM
I personally think this kind of harsh treatment is damaging, I also think that people have a right to make those choices, I think each shop should have a warning sign visible to all customers, much like the Surgeon Generals warning on cigarettes, and if they choose to go forth and their hair and scalp end up damaged, they should not be allowed to sue the salon or hairdreser.

We all make choices, if we allow others to take those choices away, we are giving up our freedom. Even if these choices hurt us, we should be allowed the option, free will.... if you will.

I agree. Don't ban them, I think education is needed desperately. So many people don't understand what "traction alopecia" is and how it's caused. Their is a large portion of people who do know about it and are just in denial, I have a friend who had a weave done and she told me about a week after it was done, "Oh my gosh my head hurts so badly!" I said, "You know about traction alopecia right? If your scalp is hurting that's a bad sign." She responded, "Oh yeah I do but they're not tight enough to do that, the weave is good for my hair." :p

pelicano
February 5th, 2010, 02:42 PM
Like most things, I think it's a question of a need for greater education and awareness, not a 'we must legislate'.

MandyBeth
February 5th, 2010, 03:04 PM
As long as you are doing it to yourself or having it done to yourself by your choice, and it doesn't hurt anyone else - I don't care what you do. I like my tattoos and piercings, I don't expect that other people want them and that's fine. If it doesn't hurt anyone besides yourself - go for it, but don't come griping to me if it causes harm and you know it can.

You can buy a piercing gun at Walmart or Sally's. You can buy cigarettes at any gas station. I figure until we ban things that are worse for yourself, extensions aren't the worst thing people do.

Lisa Tregner
February 5th, 2010, 03:36 PM
UK and England generally goes for the nanny state types of laws. This is just more of the same. Would welcome comment for any UK locals about what do they think.

Unofficial_Rose
February 5th, 2010, 03:40 PM
Maybe next they will outlaw dye, bleach, setting lotions, permanent waves, pony elastics, various barrettes and other hair treatments and toys - those are damaging too - along with tight braids. How about teasing/backcombing?

Is that really a road we want to travel? Sigh.

I think there is a difference to damaging hair along its length and actually damaging the follicle, i.e. one's ability to actually grow hair. I've heard anecdotal evidence that some people are left with permanent thinning. Premature baldness could almost be classified as a medical problem. It would certainly be pretty psychologically damaging for a woman, at least.

But yes, the state allows us to smoke and drink ourselves to death if we choose, so I guess legislation banning it would be pretty inconsistent. I agree with those who state that wider publicity should be out there, baldy patches and everything.

Tabitha
February 5th, 2010, 03:47 PM
UK and England generally goes for the nanny state types of laws. This is just more of the same. Would welcome comment for any UK locals about what do they think.

I'd sooner all tanning parlours were closed down. Living with a wig is better than dying of malignant melanoma.

Bellalalala
February 5th, 2010, 03:52 PM
I'd sooner all tanning parlours were closed down. Living with a wig is better than dying of malignant melanoma.

Or cigarettes, or known toxins in food, or a whole list of other horrible horrible things that people willingly do to themselves.

The point shouldn't be banning extensions, it should be not allowing companies to misrepresent them as harmless to hair and include information about the possible side-effects.

Kris Dove
February 5th, 2010, 03:55 PM
They shouldn't be banned, if people want to take the risk that's their business, but I do think itshould be an informed decision and they should have to educate potential customers of the risks.

enfys
February 5th, 2010, 04:03 PM
I agree with what was said in the article:


Some hair salons do them at a bargain price and the hair is of a poor quality. I do think there should be a governing body for hairdressers which we don't have at the moment in the UK.

Anyone can set up shop and call themselves a hairdresser, then be pouring bleach over people two inches from their eyes. What about hygiene standards? Quality of services even. Most hairdressers probably don't have a portfolio of their work like a tattooist would.

A lot of professional/celebrity/award winning hairdressers are calling for regulation, but the government isn't listening to them. How many people ask for their work to be snooped on?

Regulate, don't ban.

I'm in the UK.

Alun
February 5th, 2010, 04:12 PM
UK and England generally goes for the nanny state types of laws. This is just more of the same. Would welcome comment for any UK locals about what do they think.

Hijack warning!!!

There's some truth in that. They banned handguns except for 22s. I've never owned a gun, but I used to do target shooting with my dad's handguns. 90&#37; of the time I only fired 22s anyway, but it was nice occasionally to fire a full bore handgun that actually had a kick. We only did that on rare occasions at outside ranges. Mostly we fired 22s indoors (in a firing range, LOL!). Full bore ammo is expensive unless you re-use the cases, which involves buying special equipment, and 22 ammo is cheap. Now, there's no choice, you can only have a 22 pistol, although you can still own a full bore rifle or a shotgun, and so it's not really possible to learn to handle a pistol with a kick if you aren't in the armed forces. OTOH, my mum and dad moved to Spain and we moved to the US, but ...

On the other, other hand (LOL!) the UK has the NHS, which is worth it's weight in gold. Don't complain about them, you certainly won't if you move to the US. It is LITERALLY worth more than diamonds and gold to be able to go a doctor without worrying about money. I knew at least one Brit who moved to the US who is now DEAD because of that (skin cancer, couldn't afford insurance, flew home but too late). Sorry I'm shouting, but it's very much a matter of life and death.

Hair extensions, not a matter of life and death.

Yozhik
February 5th, 2010, 04:22 PM
I had no idea that poorly-done extensions could be so damaging. Would never do it myself, though, and I also wouldn't stop other people from doing it to themselves.

Beatnik Guy
February 5th, 2010, 04:42 PM
UK and England generally goes for the nanny state types of laws. This is just more of the same. Would welcome comment for any UK locals about what do they think.
It's absolutely not going to happen. :rolleyes:

Of course, I think hair extensions should probably be banned because it's cheating. :silly:
They often look less good the closer you get too.

enfys
February 5th, 2010, 04:52 PM
It's absolutely not going to happen. :rolleyes:

Of course, I think hair extensions should probably be banned because it's cheating. :silly:
They often look less good the closer you get too.

Yes, it's fraud! That's illegal already!

I can think of many things, cosmetic included, that ought to be banned first. PAYG tanning places for starters...

pepperminttea
February 5th, 2010, 05:52 PM
I'd sooner all tanning parlours were closed down. Living with a wig is better than dying of malignant melanoma.

Agreed. If legislation about tanning can't get through, with actual medical proof behind it (besides the fact that it often makes people look like they're the love child of two packets of Wotsits :p), this suggestion about hair extensions doesn't stand a chance. I agree with those who mentioned education - perhaps a little advertising campaign and mandatory training certificates needed for hairdressers that offer it. It's not a choice I'd ever make, but others should be able to if it floats their boat and they know the potential risks, it's not going to hurt anyone around them after all.

GlennaGirl
February 5th, 2010, 06:11 PM
OMG, how silly. Are cigarettes going to be banned too? And alcohol? Those are a little bit dangerous. (Can't find the rolling-eyes emoticon.)

I can see informing people about extensions, but banning them is a little over-the-top. However, that title was a little bit sensationalist, I mean it hasn't gone to Parliament or anything. :p But still. Silly stuff......

ETA: I'm sorry. I see the "there are more important things" point was already addressed. I wasn't trying to beat a dead horse! Carry on.

Copasetic
February 5th, 2010, 06:18 PM
I think the idea of banning extensions is kind of ridiculous. Anyone seeking hair extensions should be informed of the risks by their hair dresser, but if someone wants to wear extensions, thats their business. You can't make "proper" hair care an obligation.

MandyBeth
February 5th, 2010, 06:40 PM
I think another point against banning is damaging to who?

Under the idea that we should potentially ban all things that damage hair and the scalp - whose hair should we base that on? What is damaging to my hair and scalp isn't what is damaging to the next persons. I will have a serious reaction to a PPD dye, should we ban that also? If we do, do we plan to ban gasoline next? How about ink pens?

Can't regulate stupidity.

If extensions are banned for cheating, well, I can think of other cheating methods that are more hazardous....

Beatnik Guy
February 5th, 2010, 06:42 PM
Yes, it's fraud! That's illegal already!
Exactly. I might think someone was cool, but really they're just masquerading that they have patience when instead they're just a seeker of immediate and temporary longhair gratification. :rolleyes:

Lamb
February 5th, 2010, 07:02 PM
Of course, I think hair extensions should probably be banned because it's cheating. :silly:
They often look less good the closer you get too.

Ollalla! :eek: There go the padded bras, shapewear, and corsets. :silly:

Banning extensions is a ridiculous idea. Regulating hairdressers' shops, and educating the public, particularly the high school crowd, would actually make sense. Of course, it also requires a bit more effort than screaming "ban it!". :rolleyes:

Ursula
February 5th, 2010, 07:37 PM
That is a very odd article. The one fellow is called a "hair scientist" but it gives no information on what sort of degree he has, where he studied, or anything else about what makes him qualified on the issue. "The Trichological Society" is left pretty much unidentified, and it doesn't say who founded it, what requirements there are for membership, or anything else about it.

I'm inclined to call shenanigans on the article, and the "controversy." I suspect that there is an agenda hear that is being left unspoken.

Lamb
February 5th, 2010, 07:54 PM
That is a very odd article. The one fellow is called a "hair scientist" but it gives no information on what sort of degree he has, where he studied, or anything else about what makes him qualified on the issue. "The Trichological Society" is left pretty much unidentified, and it doesn't say who founded it, what requirements there are for membership, or anything else about it.

I'm inclined to call shenanigans on the article, and the "controversy." I suspect that there is an agenda hear that is being left unspoken.
There is a link to the Trichological Society on the right. (hairscience.org). ;) Of course, it doesn't add to the article's credibility that they also link to another article about banning the sale of laxatives in supermarkets. :hmm: Someone's obviously gotten on a banning-spree.

natorade
February 6th, 2010, 12:44 AM
If I had a nickel for everytime a hairdresser told me that the bonded extensions were not damaging, I would be rich. I once had extensions weaved in, and when they were removed half my hair was gone. These were the ones that were sewn on a couple of braided tracks. When I did some research on this type extension, i read that your braids should not be done so tight that it causes you pain, well, mine were tight, the hair dresser even told me after she was done that I would probably have to take some tylenol for the pain, I didn't know any better at the time and thought that was normal, but from what I read it was not normal. I also had to help my best friend remove her bonded extensions that she had left in her hair for 5 months. Her hair underneath was in dreadlocks. We were having to cut and yank these things out of her hair. Half of her hair was gone too. She now wears the clip in extensions as do I. But, I still think that it should be up to the individual as to whether they want these type of extensions, and they should not be lied to in regards to the damage that they can and will cause. There should be a warning posted at the salon.

christine1989
February 6th, 2010, 01:04 AM
Banning hair extentions is sort of like banning smoking- sure it is bad for you but the choice lies in the hands of the consumer. If you are old enough to get extentions then you are old enough to do some research and consider the risks. Hair extentions (when done right) can look really good. Besides, if they are banned then more people will try the do-it-yourself method and do even MORE damage.

ericthegreat
February 6th, 2010, 01:21 AM
Banning hair extentions is sort of like banning smoking- sure it is bad for you but the choice lies in the hands of the consumer. If you are old enough to get extentions then you are old enough to do some research and consider the risks. Hair extentions (when done right) can look really good. Besides, if they are banned then more people will try the do-it-yourself method and do even MORE damage.

I completely agree. I mean, smoking and drinking are legal and by this point everyone in the world knows about the potential dangers of doing both of those things. However, actually calling for a ban on these things is really taking away our civil liberties. Everyone should be allowed the choice to decide for themselves if they want to do something or not. Remember the Prohibition? That was a complete failure because right away, underground speakeasies opened up everywhere and even the police knew about them and instead of shutting them all down, they actually looked the other way because they themselves wanted a drink or were paid off.

I think any individual that is aware of the potential dangers of doing anything but still decides to go ahead is not a victim whatsoever. Yes, hair extensions can often be harmful to your real hair, but anyone who regularly uses extensions will no doubt eventually realize this when they notice that their actual hair is getting thinner and thinner. And there are many people who actually do know full well the potential harm that extensions do to their hair and they still go ahead and do it. I'm thinking of many famous celebrities like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, who are unashamed at showing their real bob length hair one day and then long, waist length extensions the next day. They openly admit to using extensions and are very happy with them, and I'm sure many regular people who use extensions also feel the same way.



(javascript: leoHighlightsIFrameClose();)

maria_asa
February 6th, 2010, 02:37 AM
I personally think this kind of harsh treatment is damaging, I also think that people have a right to make those choices, I think each shop should have a warning sign visible to all customers, much like the Surgeon Generals warning on cigarettes, and if they choose to go forth and their hair and scalp end up damaged, they should not be allowed to sue the salon or hairdreser.

We all make choices, if we allow others to take those choices away, we are giving up our freedom. Even if these choices hurt us, we should be allowed the option, free will.... if you will.

I totally agree with this. :agree:

Liss
February 6th, 2010, 08:07 AM
I agree with all who have said that the real information should be out there, yet banning is not the answer.

I have seen plenty of people with hair extensions, but the only people I know personally who have had them done have been older ladies trying to cover up age related hair thinning and loss. This is quite sad in the fact that one of the most popular solutions for covering hair loss is a procedure that damages and reduces it further.

embee
February 6th, 2010, 09:57 AM
I am not quite clear on the "balding" part. Sure, if things are done too tight, hair can be pulled out, updo or extensions or any other procedure. But it doesn't eliminate the follicle, does it? Won't new hair grow in? Otherwise we'd all be bald in places where we made our updo too tight.

Also, extensions would not let shed hairs actually shed, more or less like dreadlocks, right? So when they are removed there's a *lot* of hair "lost"... all that hair that would have been lost over the time of the extensions or dreads. So it would look like the end of the world, baldness coming on suddenly. But it's really not.

The same thing we see if we leave our hair in an updo/braid for several days, the shedding seems really bad when we take it down.... it's several days of shedding all at one time.

Maybe someone can explain this to me better?

Fiferstone
February 6th, 2010, 10:15 AM
Hi Embee, I did an article a few years ago on traction alopecia (I was a production editor for a medical journal publisher), and on black women, the pressure of the extensions over time can cause loss of blood to the follicle, which will cause the follicle to "die" in essence, making it non-productive of hair. That's how the permanent bald spots result. And the author of the article was a derm who specialized in scalp disorders, especially among black clients, and he was speaking specifically of the type of extensions that are sewn onto a tightly-woven braid of natural hair.

ETA: I found the link to the abstract for the article I was thinking of: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15113284?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed _ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=40

freznow
February 6th, 2010, 10:21 AM
:lol: Outlawing something because it's "poor quality", "a bad decision", even, yes, "can cause baldness." I'm laughing at this hoopla - it's silly. We may as well ban lightbulbs because changing them yourself might lead to electrocution if you're not careful. Then let's ban bicycles, people can fall over or get run over by a car. Then (if only!) lets ban cars, those are troublesome. Yeah, right. Give the people a break. Non-restrictive limitations, maybe - like tattoo parlors typically can't tattoo or pierce anyone of a certain age. But that's my only serious consideration of this.

Embee, extensions have caused traction alopecia - they have caused actual damage to hair follicles that prevent hair from growing after they are removed. It's not the minor tug of an updo, but the constant, uneven tug of glue for weeks.

tralalalara
February 6th, 2010, 10:47 AM
alerting people of the dangers should be enough. I mean, they're paying good money for something that they want.

Comparing it to smoking and drinking is overkill, because those hurt the people around you when abused. extensions wont hurt anyone but yourself.

There should just be licensing for the stylists and maybe a waiver signed so that they don't get into any legal trouble if the customer doesn't comb their hair correctly. A full ban isn't necessary because if enough people have problems with it, it will just go out of style.

Demetrue
February 6th, 2010, 11:27 AM
Personally, I have ONLY done hair extensions at home and because I researched all the different methods and read hundreds of stories and reviews, I knew what I was getting into and knew which methods I was willing to try and which I would never use. I would not use the metal links because they have been known to shear off your natural hair at the root. Do-it-yourself extensionists have come up with lots of innovative methods that are less damaging than what is often offered at the beauty salon. I used one method with a soft wax that did not damage my natural hair at all. If the extension wefts you use are hand-tied, then they are very, very light and thin and if you distribute them all across the back of you head, they do not pull on certain specific points so they do not pull out your hair. I would only buy extension hair from a reputable dealer with an excellent track record.

adventuring
February 6th, 2010, 06:07 PM
Anyone can set up shop and call themselves a hairdresser, then be pouring bleach over people two inches from their eyes. What about hygiene standards? Quality of services even. Most hairdressers probably don't have a portfolio of their work like a tattooist would.

A lot of professional/celebrity/award winning hairdressers are calling for regulation, but the government isn't listening to them. How many people ask for their work to be snooped on?

Regulate, don't ban.

I'm in the UK

Look, that's just not true. You need a license to do anything but braid another person's hair for money, and hair salons get inspected regularly just like restaurants.

Eta: Never mind, I see you said you're in the UK, and I have no idea about the laws there.

Ursula
February 6th, 2010, 07:45 PM
Anyone can set up shop and call themselves a hairdresser, then be pouring bleach over people two inches from their eyes. What about hygiene standards? Quality of services even. Most hairdressers probably don't have a portfolio of their work like a tattooist would.

A lot of professional/celebrity/award winning hairdressers are calling for regulation, but the government isn't listening to them. How many people ask for their work to be snooped on?

Regulate, don't ban.

I'm in the UK.

It depends on where you live.

In the US, things like hairdressing are regulated on the state level. For example, the requirements in New York are listed here: http://www.dos.state.ny.us/lcns/professions/appearance/appear.htm The regulation focuses on hygiene and basic techniques, with different standards for different specialties.

I could see where, if improper application of extensions was causing health problems for the population such as bald spots from loss of circulation, they might add a special certification for applying extensions.

And an organization that represented high-end hairdressers might push for more regulation, requiring hairdressers to pay for training and exams, in order to push less expensive competition out of the market.

"Ban extensions" would push the Overton window on the issue of hairdressing regulation to the side so that more extensive regulation would seem like a reasonable compromise.

Hudar
February 6th, 2010, 10:50 PM
omg wow. ive never been a fan of those fusion hair extensions.
i currently wear the clip on hair extensions.
whenever i get bored of waiting for my hair to grow, it makes me excited seeing how longer hair will look on me in a year or so of growing my hair
lol

Lorien
February 9th, 2010, 07:44 AM
It's another one of those superb 'quick fixes' we're all better off without..

BlackfootHair
February 9th, 2010, 07:48 AM
The only downside I can see is that if they are banned then our members will be accused of wearing illegal hair extensions!!!

Oh no. Extensions could never be that beautiful! :p

Belisama
February 9th, 2010, 08:39 AM
I thought this was a rather interesting article.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/health/newsid_10050000/newsid_10056800/10056867.stm

I remember when I was getting my hair done for Nightshade's wedding. As we were paying, a woman entered with longish hair, between BSL and waist. We overheard a couple of the employees saying that she had just had hair extensions put in a couple weeks ago for her wedding and now that everything was over with, she was having them removed.

I could only shake my head. All that money so she could look unlike her usual self on one of the biggest days of her life.

Svenja
February 9th, 2010, 08:41 AM
http://forums.longhaircommunity.com/showthread.php?t=41906

We have the same one here ;)

Belisama
February 9th, 2010, 08:43 AM
Ah, thank you. I did a search, but I must have read right over that.

enfys
February 9th, 2010, 08:45 AM
It depends on where you live.

In the US, things like hairdressing are regulated on the state level. For example, the requirements in New York are listed here: http://www.dos.state.ny.us/lcns/professions/appearance/appear.htm The regulation focuses on hygiene and basic techniques, with different standards for different specialties.

I could see where, if improper application of extensions was causing health problems for the population such as bald spots from loss of circulation, they might add a special certification for applying extensions.

And an organization that represented high-end hairdressers might push for more regulation, requiring hairdressers to pay for training and exams, in order to push less expensive competition out of the market.

"Ban extensions" would push the Overton window on the issue of hairdressing regulation to the side so that more extensive regulation would seem like a reasonable compromise.

I did say I'm in the UK and this topic was specific to scientists asking for extensions to be banned in the UK. I understand other places have different laws and that's probably why this call is being made in the UK, not elsewhere. Some level of regulation would reduce these problems and generally raise standards. In the UK there is no regulation or organisation that checks you have any skills that qualify you as a hairdresser. Yes, smaller companies would suffer but that's their loss. If they are good they will get the business and afford any costs regulation should inccur.

Svenja
February 9th, 2010, 08:45 AM
No need for thank yous ;)

BlackfootHair
February 9th, 2010, 09:23 AM
Hijack warning!!!

There's some truth in that. They banned handguns except for 22s. I've never owned a gun, but I used to do target shooting with my dad's handguns. 90% of the time I only fired 22s anyway, but it was nice occasionally to fire a full bore handgun that actually had a kick. We only did that on rare occasions at outside ranges. Mostly we fired 22s indoors (in a firing range, LOL!). Full bore ammo is expensive unless you re-use the cases, which involves buying special equipment, and 22 ammo is cheap. Now, there's no choice, you can only have a 22 pistol, although you can still own a full bore rifle or a shotgun, and so it's not really possible to learn to handle a pistol with a kick if you aren't in the armed forces. OTOH, my mum and dad moved to Spain and we moved to the US, but ...

On the other, other hand (LOL!) the UK has the NHS, which is worth it's weight in gold. Don't complain about them, you certainly won't if you move to the US. It is LITERALLY worth more than diamonds and gold to be able to go a doctor without worrying about money. I knew at least one Brit who moved to the US who is now DEAD because of that (skin cancer, couldn't afford insurance, flew home but too late). Sorry I'm shouting, but it's very much a matter of life and death.

Hair extensions, not a matter of life and death.

As a Proud US citizen I find your statement highly offensive. It's fine to have your opinions on NHS, and if you don't like the US healthcare as is, that's fine too. There are alot of things about the US government that I don't agree with. But, to say the guy you knew is now dead because he moved to the US and couldn't afford insurance...how is that the US's fault. It's no secret we don't have "free" health care. He moved to the US. He flew back home too late. There are a lot of dynamics between the start and end. Skin cancer has a high cure rate. From what I've heard is the main time it kills is when it metastasizes to the rest of the body. His choices lead to his outcome. He chose to move to a country with no NHS. He found insurance available to him too expensive and therefor didn't buy it. He left the US too late. Simply saying the US health care is responsible for his death is an offensive, sweeping statement. Personally, I live in the US and hope we never have nationalized health care where the government makes all the decisions on spending. I personally don't have health insurance, and that's my choice. If I get bumped to full time where I work, I will, and that's fine. But if, GOD FORBID, I got cancer between now and then and couldn't afford treatment and then died, that would be my choice. My choice for not choosing to carry health insurance beforehand. MY choice. MY fault. Not the US. Just because you have health insurance doesn't mean your guaranteed survival either. My mother was getting all recommended treatment and meds for her pancreatic cancer and still passed away. She had health insurance because she worked 5, sometimes 6 days a week in a factory. She worked hard, got paid well, and had company supplied health insurance. It paid a HUGE chunk of her medical bills. I miss her.... :(

Kris Dove
February 9th, 2010, 09:33 AM
I remember when I was getting my hair done for Nightshade's wedding. As we were paying, a woman entered with longish hair, between BSL and waist. We overheard a couple of the employees saying that she had just had hair extensions put in a couple weeks ago for her wedding and now that everything was over with, she was having them removed.

I could only shake my head. All that money so she could look unlike her usual self on one of the biggest days of her life.I can kind of understand her thinking here! If my hair wasn't already between BSL and waist, I'd seriously consider getting extensions, for my wedding and honeymoon.(although knowing what I know now about hair damage and often unethical sourcing of human hair, I'd probably get clip-in acrylic ones!)

Women spend loads on a wedding dress that's only worn one day, or false nails or having their makeup done specially, or just having their hair done somehow, and that's all seen as normal.

I have a vision of myself as being a long-haired person, I had really long hair as a girl and always imagined that if I ever got married I'd be a long haired bride... I've only ever chopped my hair shorter to get rid of black dye, and perm damage the time before that with the full intention of growing my hair out afterwards.
So for me, if I'd been getting married during the time I was growing out then I'd be seriously considering hair extensions, and buying a cheaper dress so I could afford the extensions, and if they were a pain to look after, especially when getting ready for work in the morning, I'd probably want them removed shortly after the honeymoon too so I could get back to growing my real hair.

naereid
February 9th, 2010, 09:47 AM
Bah, sensationalism. News these days are barely worth reading. It's just all drama and little substance.


It's another one of those superb 'quick fixes' we're all better off without..
Exactly.

I've gotten some strange comments from people when I tell them I'm growing my hair out. They don't understand why I want to sit around and wait for my own hair to grow when I could just get extensions done in no time! :roll: It's silly, but I feel a little insulted when so many girls walk around with their "long hair" and I'm stuck waiting for my own... I have to remind myself that real is always better than fake.

There's a thread on a local hair forum about extensions. It's filled with people who at first gush about them, then cry over spilt milk once they realize their hair has been completely ruined. Yet they all pat each other on the back and continue putting their extensions in. Because of course once your hair is a mess you have to cover that mess up somehow... it's a neverending circle. :no:

florenonite
February 9th, 2010, 09:56 AM
I don't think they should be banned. However, I think that hair extensions should be regulated more rigidly and that people should be given better information before committing to them.


I'd sooner all tanning parlours were closed down. Living with a wig is better than dying of malignant melanoma.

At least they're finally starting to regulate those coin-operated ones, at least in Scotland (I think in the rest of the UK, too).


Hijack warning!!!

There's some truth in that. They banned handguns except for 22s. I've never owned a gun, but I used to do target shooting with my dad's handguns. 90&#37; of the time I only fired 22s anyway, but it was nice occasionally to fire a full bore handgun that actually had a kick. We only did that on rare occasions at outside ranges. Mostly we fired 22s indoors (in a firing range, LOL!). Full bore ammo is expensive unless you re-use the cases, which involves buying special equipment, and 22 ammo is cheap. Now, there's no choice, you can only have a 22 pistol, although you can still own a full bore rifle or a shotgun, and so it's not really possible to learn to handle a pistol with a kick if you aren't in the armed forces. OTOH, my mum and dad moved to Spain and we moved to the US, but ...

Actually, you're not allowed .22s anymore, either, after a man murdered 17 people in Dunblane Primary School in 1996 with a gun. I don't really consider this to be "nanny state" legislation, though. IMO the whole nanny state thing is the government trying to protect us from ourselves or, in the case of children, loving parents. Things like children forced to wear goggles to play conkers and my granny's sheltered housing not being allowed to throw potluck parties anymore in case someone eats something to which they're allergic. Bear in mind these are adults without any mental disabilities, they're just elderly people who can't physically care for themselves anymore.

In short, Health & Safety is teh evil.

Apparently the UK shooting team has to practice in France because of the restrictions, though, and there's a lot of politicking that'll need to go on in order for the London 2012 games to occur legally with the gun restrictions.

ITA on the NHS, though. I have never met a person who lives in Britain who thinks we should do things totally differently. Yeah, they might complain about waiting times or think more money should go towards x, but fundamentally everyone I know agrees that it's a good system. Of course, I tend to socialise with left-wing university students, so that might have something to do with it ;)


There is a link to the Trichological Society on the right. (hairscience.org). ;) Of course, it doesn't add to the article's credibility that they also link to another article about banning the sale of laxatives in supermarkets. :hmm: Someone's obviously gotten on a banning-spree.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the links to related articles on the BBC are just computer-generated. Some of them seem to relate directly to the article whilst others have nothing to do with it.

Lorien
February 9th, 2010, 09:58 AM
Bah, sensationalism. News these days are barely worth reading. It's just all drama and little substance.


Exactly.

I've gotten some strange comments from people when I tell them I'm growing my hair out. They don't understand why I want to sit around and wait for my own hair to grow when I could just get extensions done in no time! :roll: It's silly, but I feel a little insulted when so many girls walk around with their "long hair" and I'm stuck waiting for my own... I have to remind myself that real is always better than fake.

There's a thread on a local hair forum about extensions. It's filled with people who at first gush about them, then cry over spilt milk once they realize their hair has been completely ruined. Yet they all pat each other on the back and continue putting their extensions in. Because of course once your hair is a mess you have to cover that mess up somehow... it's a neverending circle. :no:

When your hair has grown, which really isn't that long unless you're sitting there waiting for it ;) You will be glad you waited.

I wonder what this will lead to eventually, an epidemic of bald 30 year old women.

You'll be glad you waited ;)

naereid
February 9th, 2010, 10:03 AM
When your hair has grown, which really isn't that long unless you're sitting there waiting for it ;) You will be glad you waited.

I wonder what this will lead to eventually, an epidemic of bald 30 year old women.

You'll be glad you waited ;)
I'm sure I will! After all, if all of you guys can do it, so can I! :boxer:

Alaia
February 9th, 2010, 10:16 AM
Ugh the UK government sticks its hands into too many pots.

Regulation? Yes, agreed, that is needed.
Banning? Absolutely not. The list of things banned in this country is absolutely astounding.



Apparently the UK shooting team has to practice in France because of the restrictions, though, and there's a lot of politicking that'll need to go on in order for the London 2012 games to occur legally with the gun restrictions.

ITA on the NHS, though. I have never met a person who lives in Britain who thinks we should do things totally differently. Yeah, they might complain about waiting times or think more money should go towards x, but fundamentally everyone I know agrees that it's a good system. Of course, I tend to socialise with left-wing university students, so that might have something to do with it ;)


Yes that is absolutely true about the shooting team. They might end up holding the events in another country :p

Re the NHS, yes I have met people who violently disagree with it. I'm not ashamed to admit that in some respects I have fairly right-wing views, BUT in this respect I couldn't disagree with people who want the NHS abolished more. I just think it requires more funding so that the NHS staff aren't required to work such long, busy hours with such terrible rates of pay.

elina333
February 9th, 2010, 11:01 AM
Interesting! I thought about having extensions for quite some time but never did (thank God :pray:).

I do own clip-ins though but I never use them. Nowadays Im really loving my own hair as it is :D

Teufelchen
February 9th, 2010, 11:25 AM
I don't see how banning won't push it underground so people will be trying to glue extensions in their house. Education and then let people decide for themselves seems to me a better answer. By all means have some nice before and after pictures of what they can do to you.

I am totally with you on that. If you do it at home or so, it is even worse. Because nobody can controll that it is done properly.


As long as you are doing it to yourself or having it done to yourself by your choice, and it doesn't hurt anyone else - I don't care what you do. I like my tattoos and piercings, I don't expect that other people want them and that's fine. If it doesn't hurt anyone besides yourself - go for it, but don't come griping to me if it causes harm and you know it can.

You can buy a piercing gun at Walmart or Sally's. You can buy cigarettes at any gas station. I figure until we ban things that are worse for yourself, extensions aren't the worst thing people do.

I think banning it is the worst route to take. Banning it would make it really interesting for young people so inform people what extensions can do and let them decide themselves.

Belisama
February 9th, 2010, 11:30 AM
Dress is one thing, nails are one thing. They don't really change what you look like. You still look like you if you are in a white dress. But if you suddenly go from having just above shoulder length hair 12 months prior to your wedding and BAM, the day of your wedding you have a hairdo that requires 2 more feet of hair than you have ever had in your life, that's what I don't understand. I definitely understand wanting to look nice and your best at your wedding, I certainly do for mine in June, but I don't understand why someone would want to totally change what she looks like for the cameras for that one day.

Now if you do extensions a lot, that is something else entirely, but just to have long hair for that one day and have the extensions removed a week or so later, that comes across as a woman who isn't happy with how she looks and is in a way, lying in her photos as if she only did hair extensions for her wedding, I doubt she is going to do them ever again.

I think I'd raise a brow to a woman showing off her wedding photos with a massive head of hair pinned up and in every other photo of her life she is chin length hair.

Just my 2 cents. :)

Syaoransbear
February 10th, 2010, 02:01 AM
Good thing this will never be taken seriously.

Prettychild
February 10th, 2010, 06:49 AM
Well, I put on extensions for a party. My hair was thinning and hubby and I were invited to this company black tie do. I had to look nice for it. However, when I took the extensions off my hair was fried. Wish I had worn a party hat instead. :(