Help with ingredients!!

[Warda]

I hope this is in the correct place.

So I bought this shampoo and condotioner because it looked good and moisturising but I am a bit worried because I have never heard of the brand and I also cant find anything online.
So I know you guys are clever with ingredients so can you help with whats in it and things like that please?

I thought I should also mention on the botttle it says coca and shea butter (shampoo/ conditioner) 100% natural herbal exracts, super moisturizing treatment formula

Here are the ingredients

Shampoo Deionized water, ammonium lauryl sulfate, cocamidopropyl betaine lauramide dea, glycol stearate, glycerin, almond oil, cocoa butter, shea butterextract, polyquaternium 10, citric acid, methylparaben, propylparaben, tetrasodium, edta, methylchloroisothiazolinone, methylisothaizolinone, fragrance fd & c, brown#1 fd &c yellow #5


Conditioner
Water, cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, cetrimonium bromide, emulsifying wax, salvia officinalis (sage) leaf extract, panax ginseng root extract, theobroma cacao (cocoa) seed butter, butyros permun parkl (shea butter) fruit, dimethicone copolyol, methylparaben, propylparaben, methylchloroisothaizolinone, methylisothaizolinone, fragrance, yellow #5, caramel

what do you think?? Any opinions or suggestions are very welcome :)

Thank you! :)

[Leeloo]

I’m no expert but this shampoo has sulfate which could be very drying to the hair. But other ones look pretty good.

[Warda]

The other one is its matching conditoner. Maybe I should try the conditioner with my sulfate free shampoo

[Agnieszka]

The shampoo has some gently cleansing ingredients. I'm not an expert but I personally avoid parabens, just google it and decide for yourself. Parabens are in many products, especially natural (as preservative in some drugs, syrups for infants, creams) but I try to avoid it if I can. Conditioner has some silicone in it, I don't mind at all but a lots of people avoid them as they might produce product build up. Emulsifying wax might contain sulphates in it, sometimes it does sometimes it doesn't as far as I remember when researching it as my son had terrible eczema and was not allowed to use sulphates on his skin. It looks pretty gentle and has good natural ingredients. Maybe somebody else will have some more info.

[Warda]

The shampoo has some gently cleansing ingredients. I'm not an expert but I personally avoid parabens, just google it and decide for yourself. Parabens are in many products, especially natural (as preservative in some drugs, syrups for infants, creams) but I try to avoid it if I can. Conditioner has some silicone in it, I don't mind at all but a lots of people avoid them as they might produce product build up. Emulsifying wax might contain sulphates in it, sometimes it does sometimes it doesn't as far as I remember when researching it as my son had terrible eczema and was not allowed to use sulphates on his skin. It looks pretty gentle and has good natural ingredients. Maybe somebody else will have some more info.

Okay, thanks for the explanations it helped. My current conditioner is cone free and it says its paraben free but i had no idea what that means. So I'll check now and see if I want to be using it. The Emulsifying wax is what freaked me out but I had no idea the Emulsifying wax would contain sulphates at all!!

I dont have any problems with silicones but i try to avoid them because I am not using sulphates so I am trying to not end up with build up. However I thought this one is fine because I read that its water soluble. http://web.archive.org/web/20120307002937/http://forums.longhaircommunity.com/vbjournal.php?do=article&articleid=13

Thank you!

[Agnieszka]

Ups, sorry I knew that emulsifying wax had something to do with sulphates but it actually doesn't contain it according to internet info from wikipedia:
Emulsifying wax is created when a wax material (either a vegetable wax of some kind or a petroleum-based wax) is treated with a detergent (typically sodium dodecyl sulfate or polysorbates) to cause it to make oil and water bind together into a smooth emulsion. It is a white waxy solid with a low fatty alcohol odor.

So maybe it's not that bad...

[Warda]

Yeah I also got something similar to that. It said that Emulsifying wax is supposed to help mix the ingredients and keep them mixed and in order to make that work they need to add some kind of detergent. The website says to ask the supplier to know what detergent they are using. But obviously I cant do that. I suppose from the rest of the ingredients they arent using anything harsh but I dont know. What do you think

[Warda]

Here, I found what I was talking about http://www.makeyourcosmetics.com/ingredients/popper.asp?id=82

[kpzra]

What are the names of the actual products? Someone might be able to offer thoughts if it's something they use.

[Warda]

Omg I thought I said that. Sorry!! Its called spanish garden. Its the cocoa and shea butter line. Its made in the USA

I also remember there was an olive oil line or something like that. I cant really remember.

[faellen]

The shampoo has a sulphate, the conditioner has a cone, both have parabens. If you're cool with those ingredients I don't see an issue - personally I use all 3!

If you're worried about build up - the dimethicone copolyol is supposedly water soluble, and the conditioner isn't chock full of cones anyway.
I'd be interested in trying those out if they were available over here.

[Warda]

The shampoo has a sulphate, the conditioner has a cone, both have parabens. If you're cool with those ingredients I don't see an issue - personally I use all 3!

If you're worried about build up - the dimethicone copolyol is supposedly water soluble, and the conditioner isn't chock full of cones anyway.
I'd be interested in trying those out if they were available over here.

Mmm thanks!

I am thinking of trying the conditioner with a sulphate free shampoo

[Firefox7275]

I hope this is in the correct place.

So I bought this shampoo and condotioner because it looked good and moisturising but I am a bit worried because I have never heard of the brand and I also cant find anything online.
So I know you guys are clever with ingredients so can you help with whats in it and things like that please?

I thought I should also mention on the botttle it says coca and shea butter (shampoo/ conditioner) 100% natural herbal exracts, super moisturizing treatment formula

Here are the ingredients

Shampoo Deionized water, ammonium lauryl sulfate, cocamidopropyl betaine, lauramide dea, glycol stearate, glycerin, almond oil, cocoa butter, shea butterextract, polyquaternium 10, citric acid, methylparaben, propylparaben, tetrasodium, edta, methylchloroisothiazolinone, methylisothaizolinone, fragrance fd & c, brown#1 fd &c yellow #5


Conditioner
Water, cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, cetrimonium bromide, emulsifying wax, salvia officinalis (sage) leaf extract, panax ginseng root extract, theobroma cacao (cocoa) seed butter, butyros permun parkl (shea butter) fruit, dimethicone copolyol, methylparaben, propylparaben, methylchloroisothaizolinone, methylisothaizolinone, fragrance, yellow #5, caramel

what do you think?? Any opinions or suggestions are very welcome :)

Thank you! :)

Nothing with harsh sulphate surfactants (red) can truly be moisturising, they damage the skin at concentrations as low as 1%. That polyquat, the butters and the silicone can all build up for some people, but they are necessary with harsh surfactants, four is too many preservatives (blue), the only genuinely moisturising ingredient is the glycerin (potent humectant), a couple of conditioning agents/ emollients (turquoise), co-surfactant/ foam booster (purple).

The conditioner looks distinctly average, fatty alcohols/ cationic surfactants (red) which are basic emollients/ softeners/ lubricants, cheap e-wax instead of an active natural emulsifier like lecithin, butters than cannot penetrate and could build up, four is too many preservatives (blue).

Maybe it's nicer in use but I would not buy it, the moisturising and treatment claims are misleading IMO.

[Warda]

Nothing with harsh sulphate surfactants (red) can truly be moisturising, they damage the skin at concentrations as low as 1%. That polyquat, the butters and the silicone can all build up for some people, but they are necessary with harsh surfactants, four is too many preservatives (blue), the only genuinely moisturising ingredient is the glycerin (potent humectant), a couple of conditioning agents/ emollients (turquoise), co-surfactant/ foam booster (purple).

The conditioner looks distinctly average, fatty alcohols/ cationic surfactants (red) which are basic emollients/ softeners/ lubricants, cheap e-wax instead of an active natural emulsifier like lecithin, butters than cannot penetrate and could build up, four is too many preservatives (blue).

Maybe it's nicer in use but I would not buy it, the moisturising and treatment claims are misleading IMO.

Wow I am a bit scared now. Maybe I should stay away from the shampoo? I had no idea it was that harsh.
Do you think maybe I can try the coditioner or just stick with the ones I use. What do you recommend??

Thank you so much Firefox, this was very beneficial!

[Warda]

I am trying the conditioner today. I have some coconut oil on my hair now so I'll let it sit for a few hours then wash it out. I CWC so maybe its better to use the cone free conditioner for the first C? I dont know if I should also try the shampoo or not. I am scared of giving an effect that its good but its really too harsh so it might be damaging over time. Maybe I'll just start by trying the coditioner to see how it works. Any one has any suggestions?

[Dorothy]

Can someone tell me if the Nature's Gate shampoo and condish contain cones? I'm not very good at the science thing.

[LadyLongLocks]

This is an excellent guide for looking up ingredients in hair products.
:eye:Ingredients Dictionary for Hair Care Products (http://www.tightlycurly.com/ingredients/)

[Firefox7275]

Can someone tell me if the Nature's Gate shampoo and condish contain cones? I'm not very good at the science thing.

Silicones are suffixed -cone, -conol or -xane. If you can remember that (or put a note in your mobile phone or suchlike) you don't have to remember or identify the full gobbledegook names.

[Dorothy]

Thanks for that info about the cones, Firefox7275, it solved my problem - no cones.

[IsisMoon]

This is an excellent guide for looking up ingredients in hair products.
:eye:Ingredients Dictionary for Hair Care Products (http://www.tightlycurly.com/ingredients/)

Wow I must be paranoid as hell because that guide, at least for me, isn't good. It states most carcinogens as okay. What kind of a misleading website is that? I just checked phenoxyethanol and BHT as they popped in my head and it says okay. I know it might be carcinogenic mostly if ingested but I don't care. I wouldn't use it on anything on my body anyways.

[faellen]

Wow I must be paranoid as hell because that guide, at least for me, isn't good. It states most carcinogens as okay. What kind of a misleading website is that? I just checked phenoxyethanol and BHT as they popped in my head and it says okay. I know it might be carcinogenic mostly if ingested but I don't care. I wouldn't use it on anything on my body anyways.

It's a good guide IMO. Could do with a bit of updating in parts, but on the whole it is informative. If you don't want to use a product, fair enough, but the guide isn't misleading anyone.

[IsisMoon]

It's a good guide IMO. Could do with a bit of updating in parts, but on the whole it is informative. If you don't want to use a product, fair enough, but the guide isn't misleading anyone.

Yup, that's why I said -at least for me-. :)

And ok, you're right. It's not misleading. I used a wrong word. It says, for example, that a certain ingredient is ok for curly hair. Which is fine. It's just not fully informative because it doesn't warn people if the ingredient is a known carcinogen. That's what I was trying to say. :)

[Firefox7275]

Yup, that's why I said -at least for me-. :)

And ok, you're right. It's not misleading. I used a wrong word. It says, for example, that a certain ingredient is ok for curly hair. Which is fine. It's just not fully informative because it doesn't warn people if the ingredient is a known carcinogen. That's what I was trying to say. :)

If something is a possible carcinogen only when ingested but no evidence exists for it being so when applied to dead hair or a few molecules to even living skin (an effective semi permeable barrier) in the amounts used in products then IMO it would be misleading, irresponsible and frankly fearmongering to simply label it a carcinogen. The only way you could be fully informative is to link to every relevant study ever published and let the reader logically assess the scientific evidence.

Many ingredients natural or otherwise have deeply unpleasant effects at certain concentrations - for example strong acids or alkalis can cause horrific chemical burns, but they don't do so when used as a pH adjustor, some are found naturally in the body. Various ingredients are allergens, penetration enhancers or irritants depending how they are used and by whom. If you avoided them all you wouldn't actually use anything - not even olive oil (studies suggest oleic acid is a penetration enhancer, irritant, comedogenic) or tap water ('wetting' can flush out the skin's Natural Moisturising Factors, chlorine and fluoride can irritate).

[IsisMoon]

If something is a possible carcinogen only when ingested but no evidence exists for it being so when applied to dead hair or a few molecules to even living skin (an effective semi permeable barrier) in the amounts used in products then IMO it would be misleading, irresponsible and frankly fearmongering to simply label it a carcinogen. The only way you could be fully informative is to link to every relevant study ever published and let the reader logically assess the scientific evidence.

Many ingredients natural or otherwise have deeply unpleasant effects at certain concentrations - for example strong acids or alkalis can cause horrific chemical burns, but they don't do so when used as a pH adjustor, some are found naturally in the body. Various ingredients are allergens, penetration enhancers or irritants depending how they are used and by whom. If you avoided them all you wouldn't actually use anything - not even olive oil (studies suggest oleic acid is a penetration enhancer, irritant, comedogenic) or tap water ('wetting' can flush out the skin's Natural Moisturising Factors, chlorine and fluoride can irritate).

Why is trying to inform people about the dangers fearmongering? BHT, BHA, phenoxyethanol, disodium edta, ethoxylated chemicals, alkoxykated chemicals (MEA, DEA, TEA etc.) synthetic alcohols (butylene glycol, propylene glycol) and others are in tons of cosmetic products and are carcinogens and/or dangerous even when put on the skin. Just do the research if it's your will. I know it's not good to be paranoid, but nowadays one needs to be informed because profit run companies don't give a dang about us.

I know olive oil is comedogenic, but I'd rather have a few zits than what those chemicals can do to me.

[faellen]

If something is a possible carcinogen only when ingested but no evidence exists for it being so when applied to dead hair or a few molecules to even living skin (an effective semi permeable barrier) in the amounts used in products then IMO it would be misleading, irresponsible and frankly fearmongering to simply label it a carcinogen. The only way you could be fully informative is to link to every relevant study ever published and let the reader logically assess the scientific evidence.

Many ingredients natural or otherwise have deeply unpleasant effects at certain concentrations - for example strong acids or alkalis can cause horrific chemical burns, but they don't do so when used as a pH adjustor, some are found naturally in the body. Various ingredients are allergens, penetration enhancers or irritants depending how they are used and by whom. If you avoided them all you wouldn't actually use anything - not even olive oil (studies suggest oleic acid is a penetration enhancer, irritant, comedogenic) or tap water ('wetting' can flush out the skin's Natural Moisturising Factors, chlorine and fluoride can irritate).

Great post; agree with everything you've said.

IsisMoon, telling Firefox to do research is amusing really, as I find her knowledge on product ingredients to be very good. Personally I think it's important to differentiate between actual, confirmed dangers and possible dangers (and I don't know about you, but I don't ingest my hair products). :p

[IsisMoon]

Great post; agree with everything you've said.

IsisMoon, telling Firefox to do research is amusing really, as I find her knowledge on product ingredients to be very good. Personally I think it's important to differentiate between actual, confirmed dangers and possible dangers (and I don't know about you, but I don't ingest my hair products). :p

I said they're dangerous and/or carcinogenic even when put on the skin.

Yes, companies are going to confirm dangers and lose their profit. Come on. :p There's plenty of independent research out there that warns people, but in the end everone has to decide for themselves if they're going to risk it or not. Plus, my mom is a pharmacist. She only uises 100 percent organic. So that speaks volumes on its own.

Last time I try to warn anyone, that's for damn sure.

[Firefox7275]

Why is trying to inform people about the dangers fearmongering? BHT, BHA, phenoxyethanol, disodium edta, ethoxylated chemicals, alkoxykated chemicals (MEA, DEA, TEA etc.) synthetic alcohols (butylene glycol, propylene glycol) and others are in tons of cosmetic products and are carcinogens and/or dangerous even when put on the skin. Just do the research if it's your will. I know it's not good to be paranoid, but nowadays one needs to be informed because profit run companies don't give a dang about us.

I know olive oil is comedogenic, but I'd rather have a few zits than what those chemicals can do to me.

I have worked in healthcare for over two decades: originally qualified in hospital pharmacy, worked in research labs, currently in lifestyle healthcare. I am more than capable of reading published papers, thank you. Being informative is a different ballgame entirely to throwing highly emotive terms such as 'carcinogenic' and 'dangerous' at lay readers without proper explanation, that is fearmongering in my book. Again we are talking about dead hair, the number of residual molecules that might later contact the skin are not proven to be dangerous and not proven to cause cancer.

As I said oleic acid is a penetration enhancer and irritant not simply comedogenic, please don't cherry pick the property you find least concerning. TBH I am saddened you would dismiss a disease that affects some sufferers very deeply indeed as 'a few zits'. Oleic acid is implicated in both clinical acne and seborrhoeic dermatitis both of which the body's largest organ is damaged, the critical barrier function is disrupted and there is inflammation, often chronic, present. You may think those conditions are less important but those who are willing to resort to horrendous treatments like isotretinoin (ask your mother about the severity and frequency of the side effects) or even suicide may not agree with you.

Consider what oleic acid is enhancing penetration of from people's routines or environment, possible carcinogens? This is what you get if you highlight the scariest words and sentences

"On the other hand, application of unsaturated fatty acids, oleic acid, and palmitoleic acid induced scaly skin, abnormal keratinization, and epidermal hyperplasia. Application of triglycerides and saturated fatty acids on cultured human keratinocytes did not affect the intracellular calcium concentration ([Ca2+]i), whereas unsaturated fatty acids increased the [Ca2+]i of the keratinocytes. Moreover, application of oleic acid on hairless mouse skin induced an abnormal calcium distribution in the epidermis. These results suggest that unsaturated fatty acids in sebum alter the calcium dynamics in epidermal keratinocytes and induce abnormal follicular keratinization."
http://www.nature.com/jid/journal/v124/n5/full/5602810a.html

"Oleic acid was able to stimulate also the production of cytokine-induced neutrophil chemoattractant in inflammation 2 alpha/beta (CINC-2alpha/beta). This pro-inflammatory effect of oleic and linoleic acids may speed up the wound healing process."
http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Elaine_Hatanaka/publication/5927265_Effect_of_oleic_and_linoleic_acids_on_the_ inflammatory_phase_of_wound_healing_in_rats/links/0fcfd506c6c7c4fe4e000000.pdf

"Investigation of the toxic Malassezia free fatty acid metabolites (represented by oleic acid) reveals the component of individual susceptibility."
http://www.nature.com/jidsp/journal/v10/n3/full/5640230a.html

"Permeation enhancers (PE) are frequently used in the field of dermal research and for the development of transdermal delivery products. However, their influence on skin epidermal Langerhans cells (LC) has not yet been investigated. In this work we studied the effect of four PE, oleic acid (OA), propylene glycol (PG), ethanol, and diethylene glycol monoethyl ether (DGME), and an iontophoretic treatment on the morphometric parameters of epidermal Langerhans cells (LC). Retinoic acid (RA) was used as a positive control... Treatment with 10% OA in ethanolic solution caused a severe decrease in LC density (-69.0%, P<0.01), accompanied by a decrease in dendricity as measured by the changes in SF. Ethanol had no statistically significant effect on the LC morphologic parameters tested. All other PE had a mild, if any, effect on LC morphology. SEM micrographs of the skin of IOPS hairless rats demonstrated that 24 h in vivo treatment with 10% OA in ethanolic solution resulted in the generation of pores on the surface of epidermal corneocytes."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11943383

"Oleic acid (OA) is well-known to affect the function of the skin barrier. In this study, the molecular interactions between OA and model stratum corneum (SC) lipids consisting of ceramide, cholesterol, and palmitic acid (PA) were investigated with Langmuir monolayer and associated techniques ... Results indicate that lower concentrations of OA preferentially mix with and disorder the ceramide-enriched domains, followed by perturbation of the PA-enriched domains and disruption of SC lipid domain separation at higher OA levels."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23517601

Much as I am no fan of the cosmetic giants, it's Proctor & Gamble who have done much of the research on oleic acid and SD, Shiseido linking oleic acid to abnormal keratinisation and comedogenicity, Johnson & Johnson are in on the act too.

[IsisMoon]

But chemicals are also absorbed through the scalp, enter the bloodstream and accumulate in the body. Hence the need for shampoo and conditioner to be safe ingredient wise.

I understand about the oleic acid. I apologise if I sounded insensitive, but as someone whose dad died of cancer, I kinda don't even think of other health issues as that serious. But I should.

I still agree with what someone said....how if you can't eat it, it shouldn't be put on your body.

[faellen]

But chemicals are also absorbed through the scalp, enter the bloodstream and accumulate in the body. Hence the need for shampoo and conditioner to be safe ingredient wise.

I understand about the oleic acid. I apologise if I sounded insensitive, but as someone whose dad died of cancer, I kinda don't even think of other health issues as that serious. But I should.

I still agree with what someone said....how if you can't eat it, it shouldn't be put on your body.

Did you miss this bit:

Again we are talking about dead hair, the number of residual molecules that might later contact the skin are not proven to be dangerous and not proven to cause cancer.

Your original issue was that some ingredients are not listed as known carcinogens on that website, which is relating to hair products. Ingestion and absorption are not the same thing. We'll use your example of phenoxyethanol as you brought it up - even the EWG doesn't see it as a high risk for cancer. In the EU it's only classed as being harmful in products used around the mouth and lips. It's also been observed to be not readily absorbed through the skin in amounts high enough to be toxic. And we're back to ingestion =/= absorption.

So your suggestion that it be listed as a carcinogenic on that website would be, I have to agree with Firefox, fearmongering. You're entitled to your own opinions but I disagree that the website's information should be changed.

I'd also have to disagree with your "if you can't eat it, it shouldn't be put on your body" opinion too. I dread to think how many people with horrible skin conditions and fungating wounds would that would still be in pain if your suggestion was conventional practice.

[Firefox7275]

But chemicals are also absorbed through the scalp, enter the bloodstream and accumulate in the body. Hence the need for shampoo and conditioner to be safe ingredient wise.

I understand about the oleic acid. I apologise if I sounded insensitive, but as someone whose dad died of cancer, I kinda don't even think of other health issues as that serious. But I should.

I still agree with what someone said....how if you can't eat it, it shouldn't be put on your body.

There are major differences between the skin barrier (largely evolved to keep things out) and the intestinal barrier (largely evolved to be permeable). Many many medications or substances cannot pass across the skin but can easily be absorbed when taken orally, that is why so few systemic drugs are available in topical form, often penetration enhancers are required or other trickery. There are many substances you can eat that have no business being applied to the skin, for example alkaline baking soda, irritant chilli sauce. My favourite lipid source/ emollient ingredient for the skin is medical grade lanolin which I wouldn't eat by choice (tho admittedly I use it in lip balm).

I am very sorry to hear that you lost your father this way - I have had two close relatives diagnosed as well two dear family friends - but cancer simply isn't as simple as avoiding all possible carcinogens, diet plays an enormous role. Again we are not talking about the skin we are talking about dead hair, I can't imagine how I would cleanse my hair and scalp without using substances that I have no intention of eating (yes I use sulphate free toothpaste): that pretty much leaves me with eggs or baking soda.

[IsisMoon]

So your suggestion that it be listed as a carcinogenic on that website would be, I have to agree with Firefox, fearmongering. You're entitled to your own opinions but I disagree that the website's information should be changed.

I'd also have to disagree with your "if you can't eat it, it shouldn't be put on your body" opinion too. I dread to think how many people with horrible skin conditions and fungating wounds would that would still be in pain if your suggestion was conventional practice.

I'm definitely taking into account what you said, but I still think the guide should include more info on ingredients...at least have "risky" or something, so that people research it on their own. You can't just say it's okay. In my opinion, anyways. And I did say I found the guide incomplete, as far as I'm concerned. So yes, that's just my opinion and I'm glad I'm entitled to it. :)

As far as the if you can't eat it thing, I understand some people can't do that. But those who can, should look into it or at least try to go as natural as possible.


There are major differences between the skin barrier (largely evolved to keep things out) and the intestinal barrier (largely evolved to be permeable). Many many medications or substances cannot pass across the skin but can easily be absorbed when taken orally, that is why so few systemic drugs are available in topical form, often penetration enhancers are required or other trickery. There are many substances you can eat that have no business being applied to the skin, for example alkaline baking soda, irritant chilli sauce. My favourite lipid source/ emollient ingredient for the skin is medical grade lanolin which I wouldn't eat by choice (tho admittedly I use it in lip balm).

I am very sorry to hear that you lost your father this way - I have had two close relatives diagnosed as well two dear family friends - but cancer simply isn't as simple as avoiding all possible carcinogens, diet plays an enormous role. Again we are not talking about the skin we are talking about dead hair, I can't imagine how I would cleanse my hair and scalp without using substances that I have no intention of eating (yes I use sulphate free toothpaste): that pretty much leaves me with eggs or baking soda.

I agree about the diet. Definitely very important. I'm a recovering sugar addict. Always ate tons of it because I'm skinny, but it started to ruin my health and then I started looking into the organic food and all that jazz.

I'll look into the whole absorption thing some more then.



Thanks to both for putting up with me!

[Firefox7275]

I'm definitely taking into account what you said, but I still think the guide should include more info on ingredients...at least have "risky" or something, so that people research it on their own. You can't just say it's okay. In my opinion, anyways. And I did say I found the guide incomplete, as far as I'm concerned. So yes, that's just my opinion and I'm glad I'm entitled to it. :)

As far as the if you can't eat it thing, I understand some people can't do that. But those who can, should look into it or at least try to go as natural as possible.

I agree about the diet. Definitely very important. I'm a recovering sugar addict. Always ate tons of it because I'm skinny, but it started to ruin my health and then I started looking into the organic food and all that jazz.

I'll look into the whole absorption thing some more then.

Thanks to both for putting up with me!

The experts determine if a substance is safe, based on reviewing the high quality evidence, then certain sites report on that. Perhaps it would be helpful if they link to these reports too? For example for one of my favourite skincare ingredients aloe vera
http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Herbal_-_HMPC_assessment_report/2009/12/WC500017830.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17613130

Sorry if this makes me sound like up myself but IME most people don't do their own thorough research, they don't have the background to distinguish between a good and a poor source of information. There is so much 'nutrition' and cosmetic advice out there that is absolute pseudoscience and fearmongering, emanating from the cosmetic giants and the alternative health field alike. Some commercial books and articles are fairly convincing, I've been sucked in myself on occasion. And then there is the Chinese Whispers effect - it's been stated so many times on beauty forums that emu oil and jojoba oil are like sebum it has become 'fact', actually if you hunt down the source of that information and look up the lipid/ wax profile it's utter nonsense.

Thanks to you too for engaging in the discussion - it's good to be challenged, certainly makes me think about my views and opinions.

[IsisMoon]

The experts determine if a substance is safe, based on reviewing the high quality evidence, then certain sites report on that. Perhaps it would be helpful if they link to these reports too? For example for one of my favourite skincare ingredients aloe vera
http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Herbal_-_HMPC_assessment_report/2009/12/WC500017830.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17613130

Sorry if this makes me sound like up myself but IME most people don't do their own thorough research, they don't have the background to distinguish between a good and a poor source of information. There is so much 'nutrition' and cosmetic advice out there that is absolute pseudoscience and fearmongering, emanating from the cosmetic giants and the alternative health field alike. Some commercial books and articles are fairly convincing, I've been sucked in myself on occasion. And then there is the Chinese Whispers effect - it's been stated so many times on beauty forums that emu oil and jojoba oil are like sebum it has become 'fact', actually if you hunt down the source of that information and look up the lipid/ wax profile it's utter nonsense.

Thanks to you too for engaging in the discussion - it's good to be challenged, certainly makes me think about my views and opinions.

Yes, I agree, they should link those reports too. Thanks for those links on aloe. I just bought some yesterday. Definitely gonna be reading those. :)

I'll definitely do more research on everything we spoke about here. Maybe I really have been totally misled.

Thanks again!