video: are sulfates bad?

[lapushka]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IwHU1BLRc0

It is a video by Dr Dray, a board certified dermatologist. Just her take on whether or not sulfates are bad, and why not. Thought I'd share.

[LittleHealthy]

Thankyou! :D

[spidermom]

Looking at her makes me really uncomfortable for some reason.

[Ylva]

Thanks for sharing! Haven't stumbled upon this video before. It's always good to keep up with the research and evidence. However, I am quite happy rolling with sulfate free shampoo for the most part, my scalp just likes it best. :)


Looking at her makes me really uncomfortable for some reason.

She looks crazy thin and a bit unheathy for that reason. I'm not one to judge people by looks, it just unfortunately looks unhealthy. :( Also there's something about her lips that looks off to me, but I can't quite say what. Dryness? Anyway, I really don't judge by looks, it's just upsetting to see people who don't look healthy, that's all.

[lapushka]

Looking at her makes me really uncomfortable for some reason.


She looks crazy thin and a bit unheathy for that reason. I'm not one to judge people by looks, it just unfortunately looks unhealthy. :( Also there's something about her lips that looks off to me, but I can't quite say what. Dryness? Anyway, I really don't judge by looks, it's just upsetting to see people who don't look healthy, that's all.

This says nothing about her expertise and knowledge in certain areas. :flower: I wish we could stick to the topic of the video, as we don't know whether or not she would come across this thread and be very upset about this talk on her health and personal issues.

[Ylva]

This says nothing about her expertise and knowledge in certain areas. :flower:

Absolutely not, thus the first part was included in my post. :)

[lapushka]

Absolutely not, thus the first part was included in my post. :)

Ah OK! :thumbsup:

[LittleHealthy]

So I just listened to the entire thing.
What she says is absolutely true, but I think she misses the mark on as to WHY people are avoiding SLS in their shampoos. Not everyone wants that super-stripping effect on their hair anymore and are learning that more gentle methods of ‘cleaning’ the hair seem to be better for the condition of their hair, long term. I, for instance, have discovered my hair fairs much better if I’m not stripping out all my oils every wash with a sulphate-rich shampoo.

As far as Dr. Dray’s appearance goes, nobody knows what she could be going through. Sickness, stress, or simply her genetics! I didn’t pay much attention to that - it’s not what she was there to talk about :D

[LittleHealthy]

I just listened to a fabulous video she’s made about post-partum hair loss! Thanks for sharing, Lapushka, this woman is the rose among the thorns of YouTube ‘experts’ hahaha.

[lapushka]

I just listened to a fabulous video she’s made about post-partum hair loss! Thanks for sharing, Lapushka, this woman is the rose among the thorns of YouTube ‘experts’ hahaha.

I love her videos, and I love her minimalist approach to skin care thanks to her knowing ingredients so well; appreciate that so much!

[LittleHealthy]

I love her videos, and I love her minimalist approach to skin care thanks to her knowing ingredients so well; appreciate that so much!

Also ‘thanks’ to her not trying to sell stuff to her viewers!! ;)

[renia22]

Thank you for posting! I agree with her..

Another thing that’s helped me, is some of Paula Begoun’s and science-y hair blog articles too. Basically pay attention to overall formulas, not just individual ingredients. Concentrations matter. So if something with sulfates is well formulated, or not highly concentrated, or you dilute it, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to be harsh. If something is “sulfate free”, but poorly formulated, or the cleansing agent they use are highly concentrated, or you have to use more product and therefore manipulate your hair more, or you react to some natural botanical, well then that can be the harsher of the 2. Just because something contains a sulfate doesn’t mean it’s going to be “harsh”, and just because something is „sulfate Free” doesn’t mean it isn’t. Marketing has really beaten those misconceptions to death, it seems..

[nycelle]

I haven't heard anything about surfactants being carcinogenic which seems to be what the bulk of video is about.
I just stopped using SLS simply because they irritate my scalp. The fact that my hair is less frizzy is just a plus.

But I also have very sensitive skin, nickel allergies and such. So I think some people with sensitive skin might actually benefit from sulfate free- at the very least it wouldn't hurt to try if they find their scalp is irritated, or itchy after shampoo'ing.


ETA: Did she mention how many people are sensitive to sulfates? Because if she didn't, that should of been part of the video instead of making a blanket statement about how safe they are.

[Joules]

I haven't heard anything about surfactants being carcinogenic which seems to be what the bulk of video is about.

It's been all the craze here in Russia since at least 2010 (that's as far as I've seen). I decided to read reviews on certain products I wanted to buy yesterday, huge mistake, sooo many of them touch the subject of some ingredients being either carcinogenic, or strong irritants and endocrine disruptors. It gets to the point of paranoia, back when I was 16 and just starting my hair care and ingredient research journey, I was amost getting panic attacks just reading about them. Like, you will get cancer if you use that, you will get hormonal issues if you use that, this thing definitely gets into your bloodstream and poisons you. Some of the preservatives are blamed even for the onset of psoriasis, which is the most "wtf?" moment for me (I have psoriasis and it doesn't get better or worse depending on which shampoo I use, so there's that). General public is easy to scare and manipulate with things they aren't educated about, and the bigest examples of it are politics and cosmetics.

[lucid]

Is there a way to summarize what she is saying? I'm really curious, but don't have time to see it now..

[lapushka]

Is there a way to summarize what she is saying? I'm really curious, but don't have time to see it now..

It's a little tough to summarize a video. Basically she doesn't think sulfates are bad and the studies are misinterpreted a whole bunch. That's it in a nutshell. I would recommend taking some time later. :flower:

[nycelle]

It's been all the craze here in Russia since at least 2010 (that's as far as I've seen). I decided to read reviews on certain products I wanted to buy yesterday, huge mistake, sooo many of them touch the subject of some ingredients being either carcinogenic, or strong irritants and endocrine disruptors. It gets to the point of paranoia, back when I was 16 and just starting my hair care and ingredient research journey, I was amost getting panic attacks just reading about them. Like, you will get cancer if you use that, you will get hormonal issues if you use that, this thing definitely gets into your bloodstream and poisons you. Some of the preservatives are blamed even for the onset of psoriasis, which is the most "wtf?" moment for me (I have psoriasis and it doesn't get better or worse depending on which shampoo I use, so there's that). General public is easy to scare and manipulate with things they aren't educated about, and the bigest examples of it are politics and cosmetics.

We have scare tactics here too. But most of us (at least I hope) consider the source.

These days, transparency is becoming harder to figure out though. A company selling a poison can create a fake "consumer rights" organization and publish their BS findings claiming safety under that. As consumers, we think we can trust these fidnings, but we're dead wrong. And trying to figure out who they really are becomes extremely difficult.
Hoping this changes once this POTUS is out of the White House.

[nycelle]

I'm halfway through with her Vitamin C review. She is soooo dead wrong, at least when it comes to thousands and thousands of women who have seen results using it, myself included. It is the one thing that has evened out my skin tone. So for her to say that topical vitamin C doesn't really work is absolute BS. And I'm one cynical B* when it comes to topicals, but this stuff works.

She may be a dermatologist, but that doesn't mean that all dermas agree with her.]

eta: Sorry Lapushka, I appreciate the fact that you linked it, but I think she's very biased when it comes to her videos.

She states her opinions, but ignores the fact that there are downsides to SLS (many people are allergic to them and develop irritated scalps from using harsh surfactants.) Then in her Vitamin C video, she does the same thing.. goes on and on how it doesn't work, when it fact it does and has for thousands (millions?) of people.

Her videos need disclaimers since much of what she says are her opinions, and other dermatologists would disagree.

[lapushka]

I'm halfway through with her Vitamin C review. She is soooo dead wrong, at least when it comes to thousands and thousands of women who have seen results using it, myself included. It is the one thing that has evened out my skin tone. So for her to say that topical vitamin C doesn't really work is absolute BS. And I'm one cynical B* when it comes to topicals, but this stuff works.

She may be a dermatologist, but that doesn't mean that all dermas agree with her.

Maybe you haven't seen a lot of her videos yet, but she tends to distinguish between her as a consumer and what she experiences on her skin and the research that's out there; she has said it plenty of times that there is that difference. Me? I love her videos and tend to agree with a lot of what she says. Also that there is nothing whatsoever wrong with mineral oil and silicones in skin care. Maybe you need to watch the entirety of the video. ;)

[nycelle]

Maybe you haven't seen a lot of her videos yet, but she tends to distinguish between her as a consumer and what she experiences on her skin and the research that's out there; she has said it plenty of times that there is that difference. Me? I love her videos and tend to agree with a lot of what she says. Also that there is nothing whatsoever wrong with mineral oil and silicones in skin care. Maybe you need to watch the entirety of the video. ;)

Maybe she does. I've listened to only two but that's enough for me. Personally, I think she's extremely bias in both videos.

I have a great dermatologist that I trust though, so my opinions are based on my own doctors, and what works for me.

[lapushka]

Maybe she does. I've listened to only two but that's enough for me. Personally, I think she's extremely bias in both videos.

I have a great dermatologist that I trust though, so my opinions are based on my own doctors, and what works for me.

Oh of course, always. Your own doc has precedence over any internet video. I was only talking about the sulfates video. But it's up to you to explore her channel yes/no. I didn't say anyone should do that. ;)

[elfynity]

Is there a way to summarize what she is saying? I'm really curious, but don't have time to see it now..

She first explains what surfactants are. We pretty much all know that part.

She says that sulphates especially sls have developed a negative reputation. This repuation she says is based on alot of reports from unscientific sources who make alot of false claims, like being carcinogenic, causing cataracts etc, she says that this is misinformation and misinterpretation of available studies.

She says that people aren't using SLS in their eyes, that is not how the public are using it - in reponse to cataracts etc. She kind of sarcastically puts across that who is going to be ridiculous and sit with SLS in their eyes for 14 days, and if they are doing it they should stop.

She also says SLS is not carcinogenic, and there are no studies to support it and agains points to wrong interpretation. The possibly carcinogenic substance, 14-dioxane, is usually associated with sulphate byproducts, but she says that it is not a byproduct of SLS, so SLS is not carcinogenic.

She says that saying SLS is carcinogenic to sell you a sulphate free shampoo is a cheap manouever. She says that the reality is that sulphates, particularily SLS are very good detergents and inexpensive to make, they lather well & are water loving. She says that water loving things don't accumulate in the body. She says that sulphates are also low toxicity, fully bio digradable, and not volatile, and they are produced from synthetic or organic things. She says it's not a demon thing.

She says that traditional soaps before suphates leave an insoluable calcium film on the hair shaft which makes hair unmanageable basically.

She says sulphates are very good cleansing agents.

Downside is that they can remove some of your own oils and make your scalp and hair shaft a little bit drier. She kind of recommends alternating with conditioning shampoos to balance it.

She says that there is no evidence that sls is harmful to human health and no rational reason to avoid it or exclude it from personal hair products. She reiterates that the only people who are telling you that sulphates are bad are those people who are trying to sell you products without sulphates in it.

She says cleansing the scalp and shampooing hair shafts and removing dirt and oil is an important part of skin care. She says shampooing is not something to avoid. If we leave the oil on our hair a yeast can grow which can cause dandruff and a whole bunch of other little potential, but not hazardous little annoyances.

Noted points: She looks too thin, her skin looks very good. You can't really see the condition of her hair as it is well tied up.

[Joules]

Downside is that they can remove some of your own oils and make your scalp and hair shaft a little bit drier. She kind of recommends alternating with conditioning shampoos to balance it.

That rubbed me the wrong way. How she said to alternate with milder shampoos and "you can use a conditioner" to combat dryness caused by SLS. If just using a conditioner helped in this case, I wouldn't have had to embark on my almost a decade long journey to somewhat healthy and somewhat long hair. A journey that at some point involved ditching shampoos altogether for almost two years. I honestly hate this kind of basic and very generalised statements, it feels patronizing, just like "Oh, you have acne? Just wash your face regularly!"

Her hair is around collarbone length, maybe halfway to armpit. When my hair was that short I could get away with washing it with drugstore sulfate shampoos and forgetting to condition afterwards.

[Dark40]

Thanks for sharing! :) What she said is true. I don't see a problem using shampoos with SLS in it. I've been using them for years, and I've never had any issues with striping of the natural oils from my hair and scalp. Even though, I also believe in using sulfate-free shampoos sometimes too. That works best for me.

[nycelle]

Thanks for sharing! :) What she said is true. I don't see a problem using shampoos with SLS in it. I've been using them for years, and I've never had any issues with striping of the natural oils from my hair and scalp. Even though, I also believe in using sulfate-free shampoos sometimes too. That works best for me.

SLS is good for some, and not for others. That's what a responsible medical doctor should have said. But that's not what she said. She pretty much praised it's merits, and only listed one negative as an afterthought (the conditioner comment if it dries out your hair)
Another MD would have at least mentioned that some people have allergic reactions to it, but she didn't.

[lucid]

I honestly hate this kind of basic and very generalised statements, it feels patronizing, just like "Oh, you have acne? Just wash your face regularly!"


There is nothing patronizing in talking about the general or normal part of the populating. If you take a video or statement like this personally you need to review how you react to the world. You should not get offended by facts...

If sulfates doesn't work for you, then don't use them. The scientific results are the same even so. I can't use standard soap on my body, because it enhances my eczema, that doesn't mean soap is bad, or that doctors who say you should use soap acts patronizing - it just means I react in an untypical way.



SLS is good for some, and not for others. That's what a responsible medical doctor should have said. But that's not what she said. She pretty much praised it's merits, and only listed one negative as an afterthought (the conditioner comment if it dries out your hair)
Another MD would have at least mentioned that some people have allergic reactions to it, but she didn't.

Sulfates are generally fine, aka good for most - they are factually safe. Generalizing or talking about the normal in science is often necessary, the normal reaction is uaually more interesting - there are always exceptions. Sometimes exceptions are more important, if for example a drug can give a potential deadly adverse reaction for certain gene types, and the doctors will have to test you before administering the drug even though most people doesn't have a negative reaction.

People have potential allergies towards everything. People can even be allergic to their own sweat, that doesn't mean sweat is bad, it just means some people have untypical reactions.

[lucid]

*summary*

Thank you so much! Much appreciated! :)

[elfynity]

Thank you so much! Much appreciated! :)

Sure, no problem :D

[nycelle]

There is nothing patronizing in talking about the general or normal part of the populating. If you take a video or statement like this personally you need to review how you react to the world. You should not get offended by facts...

If sulfates doesn't work for you, then don't use them. The scientific results are the same even so. I can't use standard soap on my body, because it enhances my eczema, that doesn't mean soap is bad, or that doctors who say you should use soap acts patronizing - it just means I react in an untypical way.




Sulfates are generally fine, aka good for most - they are factually safe. Generalizing or talking about the normal in science is often necessary, the normal reaction is uaually more interesting - there are always exceptions. Sometimes exceptions are more important, if for example a drug can give a potential deadly adverse reaction for certain gene types, and the doctors will have to test you before administering the drug even though most people doesn't have a negative reaction.

People have potential allergies towards everything. People can even be allergic to their own sweat, that doesn't mean sweat is bad, it just means some people have untypical reactions.

I might agree with you if she didn't make the conditioner comment.

For a doctor to feel that was important enough to mention, but to leave out a potential reaction to an ingredient she kept saying was safe, is at the very least, irresponsible.

eta: did you watch to the entire video? or going by the synopsis that was posted?

[lapushka]

nycelle, she is only going on research studies, and those say that there is *nothing* whatsoever wrong with a sulfate containing shampoo. That is valid in and of itself. You have to be a long-standing viewer of her channel quite a bit before you know how she does her videos.

[nycelle]

nycelle, she is only going on research studies, and those say that there is *nothing* whatsoever wrong with a sulfate containing shampoo. That is valid in and of itself. You have to be a long-standing viewer of her channel quite a bit before you know how she does her videos.

I don't need to watch all her videos to form an impression on this one (or the vitamin c I saw - where many other dermatologists would disagree with her conclusions.)

She made lengthy video about how safe sulfates are, without acknowledging that they cause irritation for many. Shouldn't do that when you're a medical doctor.

[lapushka]

I don't need to watch all her videos to form an impression on this one (or the vitamin c I saw - where many other dermatologists would disagree with her conclusions.)

She made lengthy video about how safe sulfates are, without acknowledging that they cause irritation for many. Shouldn't do that when you're a medical doctor.

I disagree, the premise was "are sulfates bad", and they aren't. Not from a research perspective, that was what the video was about. :)

[Dark40]

SLS is good for some, and not for others. That's what a responsible medical doctor should have said. But that's not what she said. She pretty much praised it's merits, and only listed one negative as an afterthought (the conditioner comment if it dries out your hair)
Another MD would have at least mentioned that some people have allergic reactions to it, but she didn't.

Yeah, you're right. Some others may have allergic reactions to it. Oh, whenever I use them I always use a good heavy conditioner afterwards. Especially, if it dries out my hair.

[nycelle]

I disagree, the premise was "are sulfates bad", and they aren't. Not from a research perspective, that was what the video was about. :)

Sulfates are bad for quite a bit of people. So that premise is not true to start with. But if the entire point was how it's not carcinogenic, then fine don't mention it, but don't mention the conditioner comment either. It's quite hypocritical of her.

[nycelle]

I couldn't care less who uses sulfates and who doesn't. I don't steer people towards or away from sulfates (or silicones on this forum), to each their own. But she's full of it.

When I called her out on her Vitamin C video, her response was "I said for me". That's utter BS. She couldn't have made it more clear how Vitamin C is a complete crap (for everyone.) I don't think I've ever watched a more "unsavory" character on youtube. Just ewww. Sorry Lapushka, that's the impression she left with me.

[lucid]

Sulfates are bad for quite a bit of people. So that premise is not true to start with. But if the entire point was how it's not carcinogenic, then fine don't mention it, but don't mention the conditioner comment either. It's quite hypocritical of her.

With that logic noting in the world is safe... Are oranges safe? Is brushing your hair safe? Is sleeping safe?
Yes! There are some exceptions, some people could die or get severely injured by any of those things, but they are still most definitely safe for the majority of people.

Could you link the c-vitamin one? All scientific articles I've read about c vitamin has been positive regarding it's importance, so I'm quite curious :)

[nycelle]

With that logic noting in the world is safe... Are oranges safe? Is brushing your hair safe? Is sleeping safe?
Yes! There are some exceptions, some people could die or get severely injured by any of those things, but they are still most definitely safe for the majority of people.

Could you link the c-vitamin one? All scientific articles I've read about c vitamin has been positive regarding it's importance, so I'm quite curious :)

I disagree.. but hey, we all have opinions. Still think the video was done in a half a$$ed manner

The vitamin C was ridiculous. All she kept saying was how there aren't an studies that say it works. My skin says otherwise, my dermatololgist recommends it, I've read articles where other dermatologists recommend it, but not her.. she thinks it's all BS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JxO6sVMJzM&lc=z22yelwx0tfus5ifdacdp4345ihb1h0urgxfk20gx5dw03c 010c.1534950865253244

[renia22]

^ Not sure what the issue was with the sulfate video? Regarding some people finding them irritating, some people also find “sulfate free” cleansing agents, essential oils, botanical extracts, “natural” ingredients, etc to be irritating too, but we don’t expect that to be mentioned every time someone mentions “sulfate free” or “natural” formulas? She basically was focusing on the fear mongering around this ingredient and why she believes that’s not scientifically founded?


Some more info:
https://www.paulaschoice.com/ingredient-dictionary/cleansing-agents/sulfates.html



I watched the vitamin C video too. She did say that some studies found that vitamin C showed some skin improvement, but she basically just went over the flaws in the studies. What she was saying about it’s instability, and about some companies putting out expensive products that don’t meet the requirements for stability and effectiveness is true. At the end of her video said if you find improvement in your skin, by all means use it, it just wasn’t for her. She also recommended not spending a lot of money and starting with something less expensive. Basically what I got from her message in that one is be an educated consumer, don’t waste you money.

[Joules]

There is nothing patronizing in talking about the general or normal part of the populating. If you take a video or statement like this personally you need to review how you react to the world. You should not get offended by facts...

If sulfates doesn't work for you, then don't use them. The scientific results are the same even so. I can't use standard soap on my body, because it enhances my eczema, that doesn't mean soap is bad, or that doctors who say you should use soap acts patronizing - it just means I react in an untypical way.




Sulfates are generally fine, aka good for most - they are factually safe. Generalizing or talking about the normal in science is often necessary, the normal reaction is uaually more interesting - there are always exceptions. Sometimes exceptions are more important, if for example a drug can give a potential deadly adverse reaction for certain gene types, and the doctors will have to test you before administering the drug even though most people doesn't have a negative reaction.

People have potential allergies towards everything. People can even be allergic to their own sweat, that doesn't mean sweat is bad, it just means some people have untypical reactions.

First of all, I'm not offended. I'm irritated that people still say things like that. A lot of hair care videos on youtube talk about how sulfate shampoos are drying to hair despite conditioners, and how you need stronger hair care to combat it. If she's really a cosmetologist, she should have mentioned it, because at this point it kinda is a common knowledge. The advice she gave - "just use conditioner" - is something I expect to see in a shampoo commercial on tv, and not on a youtube channel of someone who presents themselves as a professional. I liked the video from the scientific stand point, I'm glad we established that sulfates don't cause cancer and cataracts. Just don't give out hair care tips when you're clearly clueless in this department, let people decide for themselves if they still want to have sulfates in their lives or not.

Drying (and irritating for that matter) qualities of sulfates, like I already said, are far too typical and common to completely ignore them. Eczema and soap is a bit different. She at least could have given a warning that there are such a list of potential side-effects, like it's always the case with medications. Making generalised statements about anything when you're trying to recommend it to a lot of people at once is ridiculous. Even ordinary girls who make hair care videos always give disclaimers like "it might not work for you".

[lucid]

I disagree.. but hey, we all have opinions. Still think the video was done in a half a$$ed manner

Half assed because you got offended by it or didn't agree with her? But sure, you are entitled to have your own opinion.



The vitamin C was ridiculous. All she kept saying was how there aren't an studies that say it works. My skin says otherwise, my dermatololgist recommends it, I've read articles where other dermatologists recommend it, but not her.. she thinks it's all BS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JxO6sVMJzM&lc=z22yelwx0tfus5ifdacdp4345ihb1h0urgxfk20gx5dw03c 010c.1534950865253244

I saw the entire video, and I have no idea how you manage to view her video like you do.

She uses scientific results to explain why this ingredient isn't justifiable to her. She didn't say that it wasn't any studies that found that it helped, but she pointed out flaws in the studies (sample size, self evaluation, non reproducable results) and the instability in topical form.

It's clearly specified that this is a personal video, not any recommendations and she even says you should continue using it if you find that it helps.

I don't agree with her interpretation of the studies. In my opinion, as long as you get a stable product, the results are good enough for it to be worth trying. The studies find that it may help, and to me that's good enough when it comes to a product with only minimal potential side effects, even tho many of the studies have obvious flaws.That said, its nothing wrong with her interpretation either, people have have different risk/reward ratio.

[nycelle]

Half assed because you got offended by it or didn't agree with her? But sure, you are entitled to have your own opinion.

I saw the entire video, and I have no idea how you manage to view her video like you do.

She uses scientific results to explain why this ingredient isn't justifiable to her. She didn't say that it wasn't any studies that found that it helped, but she pointed out flaws in the studies (sample size, self evaluation, non reproducable results) and the instability in topical form.

It's clearly specified that this is a personal video, not any recommendations and she even says you should continue using it if you find that it helps.

I don't agree with her interpretation of the studies. In my opinion, as long as you get a stable product, the results are good enough for it to be worth trying. The studies find that it may help, and to me that's good enough when it comes to a product with only minimal potential side effects, even tho many of the studies have obvious flaws.That said, its nothing wrong with her interpretation either, people have have different risk/reward ratio.


Half assed because she's a doctor that failed to mention that they're not safe for everyone. Like I said, she found it important enough to mention using conditioner, but left out the fact that SLS is also an irritant.
And the same can be said for you - I have no idea how you and some others view it any other way.. and yet.. you do.

The Vitamin C video..lol.. The entire premise was how topical vitamin C doesn't work. The fact that she threw in how it might work for some was clearly an afterthought.

[lapushka]

I watched the vitamin C video too. She did say that some studies found that vitamin C showed some skin improvement, but she basically just went over the flaws in the studies. What she was saying about it’s instability, and about some companies putting out expensive products that don’t meet the requirements for stability and effectiveness is true. At the end of her video said if you find improvement in your skin, by all means use it, it just wasn’t for her. She also recommended not spending a lot of money and starting with something less expensive. Basically what I got from her message in that one is be an educated consumer, don’t waste you money.

Exactly. I don't think she could have said more than that. :shrug:

What I don't get is how this entire thread managed to get turned into a personal attack towards someone who "only" makes YT videos. :hmm:

[nycelle]

Exactly. I don't think she could have said more than that. :shrug:

What I don't get is how this entire thread managed to get turned into a personal attack towards someone who "only" makes YT videos. :hmm:

I didn't personally attack her (her appearance that is.) I just didn't like her videos and said she rubs me the wrong way. We're all different and not everyone will agree with what she said or how she presents it. But I don't understand why those of us that disagree with her are being questioned over and over..

[elfynity]

Exactly. I don't think she could have said more than that. :shrug:

What I don't get is how this entire thread managed to get turned into a personal attack towards someone who "only" makes YT videos. :hmm:


The way the lady puts her video across is already very tricky because she is dealing with an already controversial topict. I am not surprised she is coming against strong debate. I usually notice that most times you can't mix strong opinions without attracting lovers and haters too.

[lapushka]

The way the lady puts her video across is already very tricky because she is dealing with an already controversial topict. I am not surprised she is coming against strong debate. I usually notice that most times you can't mix strong opinions without attracting lovers and haters too.

Probably, yes. ;)

[lapushka]

I didn't personally attack her (her appearance that is.) I just didn't like her videos and said she rubs me the wrong way. We're all different and not everyone will agree with what she said or how she presents it. But I don't understand why those of us that disagree with her are being questioned over and over..

I think the video should stand on its own. That's all. After all, that is all that the thread is about. :) Whether or not sulfates are "bad" for you, and they aren't.

Allergy and people not agreeing with sulfates wasn't even discussed. Buuut, if you wanna go there, it's up to you. Of course. :flower:

ETA: I am a big fan of her, and eagerly await every new video every evening. I guess we're all different. :shrug:

[nycelle]

Lapushka- If my dermatologist presented sulfates the way she did, without any mention that they're known irritants (and they are), then I used a shampoo heavy in sulfates and had a reaction, would my dermatologist not have any fault in this?
I think he would since he left out a very important detail when talking about how "safe" they are.

But, had he said the same thing she said, that sulfates pose no risk for cancer etc. however, they have been known to irritate, then it's up to me to decide if I want to take the chance or not. That's what I expect from responsible medical professionals, that's all.

The issue here seems to be semantics- what we consider safe. I don't consider irritants to be safe, regardless of whether or not they're carcinogenic.

[lucid]

Half assed because she's a doctor that failed to mention that they're not safe for everyone.

Almost nothing in this world is safe for everyone...there are always exceptions....

[lapushka]

Almost nothing in this world is safe for everyone...there are always exceptions....

Yes also she clearly wanted to "defend" one viewpoint as the upheaval around using sulfates is so "big". What on earth is wrong with that, that we can't do that anymore, even doctors.

[lucid]

And yes, it's a known irritant - for prolonged exposure (hours and often 24+ in most of the studies I've read). For short use (normal use is typically seconds to minutes) it is considered to be safe. There is no corrosion even for extended exposure, in other words, no permanent damage.

There are tons of things considered safe in normal doses that are dangerous or deadly in large doses. There are even things that are healthy and good for you in normal doses that are deadly in large doses. Things aren't deemed unsafe just because they're unsafe in large doses.

That's why scientific results can be difficult to interpret, and that's why scare tactics in commercials and media in general are so common.

[renia22]

^lucid- exactly.

She was talking about finished products. The toxicity of a consumer product is dictated by the formula as a whole, not by individual ingredients. Those studies on sulfates take them as individual ingredients, at higher concentrations, and are left on for 24 hours like lucid said. At a lower concentration, formulated with ingredients that offset irritation, and rinsed off, is a whole difference scenario.

This is also true of some natural ingredients like essential oils. Some used neat/ directly on the skin can irritate or burn, but if you use a proper ratio, of essential oil to carrier oil, it can be fine. Concentrations and finished products matter.

As far as her mentioning using conditioner, well that’s true of any shampoo. It depends on the overall formula and how cleansing it is. All shampoos clean hair of dirt, oil, etc- that’s what they are supposed to do! Some are more cleansing, some are more conditioning. Anyone who ever used a sulfate free shampoo can attest to the fact that you need conditioners with those too. I’ve used some sulfate free formulas that turned my hair into a rat’s nest. Still needed conditioner.

But bottom line , overall formulas and concentrations matter.

[*Wednesday*]

Thank you Lapushka. I just subbed to her. Great information on the sulfates. I'll be cruisen her vids over the coming days. ☺

[littlestarface]

I don't like threads like this at all. Why can't the OP just use what she likes and not try to throw it in peoples throats and that's that. I use what I use and I dont go making threads saying look whatever I use isn't bad at all. Like who cares.

If OP didn't post this thread no one would be making any "attack" on a person who makes youtube videos here. But making videos comes with the territory and just cuz someone doesn't agree with them doesn't mean they're attacking them lol.

[cathair]

I'm halfway through with her Vitamin C review. She is soooo dead wrong, at least when it comes to thousands and thousands of women who have seen results using it, myself included. It is the one thing that has evened out my skin tone. So for her to say that topical vitamin C doesn't really work is absolute BS. And I'm one cynical B* when it comes to topicals, but this stuff works.

She may be a dermatologist, but that doesn't mean that all dermas agree with her.]

eta: Sorry Lapushka, I appreciate the fact that you linked it, but I think she's very biased when it comes to her videos.

She states her opinions, but ignores the fact that there are downsides to SLS (many people are allergic to them and develop irritated scalps from using harsh surfactants.) Then in her Vitamin C video, she does the same thing.. goes on and on how it doesn't work, when it fact it does and has for thousands (millions?) of people.

Her videos need disclaimers since much of what she says are her opinions, and other dermatologists would disagree.

I've only stumbled across the idea of vitamin C in face creams, so I'm making no judgement about them.

However if a topical cream, like for example an anti-wrinkle cream actually worked in any substantial way, it would have to be classified as a drug not a cosmetic. Then bought on prescription.

This book goes into why:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18596986-it-s-ok-to-have-lead-in-your-lipstick

So for that reason, I remain skeptical. As I do of all face creams.

Haven't watched the video too long, so not commenting on that either.

[cathair]

I don't like threads like this at all. Why can't the OP just use what she likes and not try to throw it in peoples throats and that's that. I use what I use and I dont go making threads saying look whatever I use isn't bad at all. Like who cares.

If OP didn't post this thread no one would be making any "attack" on a person who makes youtube videos here. But making videos comes with the territory and just cuz someone doesn't agree with them doesn't mean they're attacking them lol.

She wanted to discuss hair stuff she was interested in, on a hair discussion board, because she's passionate about hair care. She's not throwing it down anyone's throat. No one forced you to click and read.

[nycelle]

I don't like threads like this at all. Why can't the OP just use what she likes and not try to throw it in peoples throats and that's that. I use what I use and I dont go making threads saying look whatever I use isn't bad at all. Like who cares.

If OP didn't post this thread no one would be making any "attack" on a person who makes youtube videos here. But making videos comes with the territory and just cuz someone doesn't agree with them doesn't mean they're attacking them lol.

So on the mark with this post. Amen.

At the end of the day, no video is going to change anyones mind on sulfates. Of course those of us with don't agree with Dr. Dray's presentation are going to say something.
No different than Lapushka saying over and over, and over and over, and over how she loves sulfates and no one bats an eye. But if you disagree with the video .... oh no.. :rolleyes:

[nycelle]

I've only stumbled across the idea of vitamin C in face creams, so I'm making no judgement about them.

However if a topical cream, like for example an anti-wrinkle cream actually worked in any substantial way, it would have to be classified as a drug not a cosmetic. Then bought on prescription.

This book goes into why:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18596986-it-s-ok-to-have-lead-in-your-lipstick

So for that reason, I remain skeptical. As I do of all face creams.

Haven't watched the video too long, so not commenting on that either.

Actually, I'm not sure of what gets classified as a drug, vs cosmetic, vs over the counter here. I know with many formulations, it's not about the actual ingredient as it is the percentage used that changes how it's classified. But again, I can't say for certain as I'm not very familiar with it.

Vitamin C has worked for me though. Nothing I've tried has evened out my skin tone the way this product has. So there's definitely something there. But like with everything, YMMV.

[littlestarface]

She wanted to discuss hair stuff she was interested in, on a hair discussion board, because she's passionate about hair care. She's not throwing it down anyone's throat. No one forced you to click and read.

And I clearly understand that but when someone posts a topic they shouldn't be surprised when someone else has an opposing view especially on a video they post.

[*Wednesday*]

Actually, I'm not sure of what gets classified as a drug, vs cosmetic, vs over the counter here. I know with many formulations, it's not about the actual ingredient as it is the percentage used that changes how it's classified. But again, I can't say for certain as I'm not very familiar with it.

Vitamin C has worked for me though. Nothing I've tried has evened out my skin tone the way this product has. So there's definitely something there. But like with everything, YMMV.

Vitamin C worked for me too, nycelle. I have some spot malasma and was recommended for me. I use Derma E with Vitamin C Intense Night Cream. I have had great results. Another one recommended, Kojic? However I'm not sure of any results from people personally.

[lucid]

So on the mark with this post. Amen.

At the end of the day, no video is going to change anyones mind on sulfates. Of course those of us with don't agree with Dr. Dray's presentation are going to say something.
No different than Lapushka saying over and over, and over and over, and over how she loves sulfates and no one bats an eye. But if you disagree with the video .... oh no.. :rolleyes:

What's even the point in discussing topics if your mind is already locked and made up?

I always keep an open mind. If new information arises I change my view if necessary. There is no point in even watching anything new or anything that goes against what you believe if you go in with an attitude that it's not going to change your view anyway.


This is a discussion board, people share topics about stuff that interests them. I find it mind baffling that littlestarface and you actually thinks lapushka is trying to force her opinion on you. She shared a video that she found interesting that would be relevant for most in this forum, knowing how common sulfates are. If you guys would rather have this forum be all about compliments, sharing of personal experiences, feel good posts and chit chat, then that's ok, only enter those threads. But complaining about discussion topics being posted at a discussion forum is beyond strange...


Why would anyone bat an eye if lapushka loves sulfates? No one cares if people can't use sulfates, silicones or whatever either... people are different. Sulfates work for most, but not for all, and that is respected on this forum. People are way to sensitive and all up in their emotions, and are not actually reading what people are saying... If you can't handle having your views challenged, then don't enter a discussion. It is as simple as that.

I've seen lapushka write that if x-product doesn't work you shouldn't use it, and that ymmv (she writes this more than anyone!). So this attack on her is so out of place.

[Stray_mind]

And I clearly understand that but when someone posts a topic they shouldn't be surprised when someone else has an opposing view especially on a video they post.

You can present your opposing view without being Rude as all hell though... ^^

I don't think sulfates are any worse than "natural" shampoos and conditioners.
Hair care products include many different ingredients so if your scalp gets irritated it isn't necessarily the sulphates that cause it imho..

In my own experience, many natural shampoos make my scalp itch and flake, so do many sulphate ones.

I had to try a lot of different brands to find the one that suits my scalp.

[lapushka]

This is a discussion board, people share topics about stuff that interests them. I find it mind baffling that littlestarface and you actually thinks lapushka is trying to force her opinion on you. She shared a video that she found interesting that would be relevant for most in this forum, knowing how common sulfates are. If you guys would rather have this forum be all about compliments, sharing of personal experiences, feel good posts and chit chat, then that's ok, only enter those threads. But complaining about discussion topics being posted at a discussion forum is beyond strange...


Why would anyone bat an eye if lapushka loves sulfates? No one cares if people can't use sulfates, silicones or whatever either... people are different. Sulfates work for most, but not for all, and that is respected on this forum. People are way to sensitive and all up in their emotions, and are not actually reading what people are saying... If you can't handle having your views challenged, then don't enter a discussion. It is as simple as that.

I've seen lapushka write that if x-product doesn't work you shouldn't use it, and that ymmv (she writes this more than anyone!). So this attack on her is so out of place.

Exactly, lucid. I don't see why this all comes tumbling down on me all of a sudden. If you don't like sulfates, fine, no one is pushing them on you (the idea!) :rolleyes: but this was a nice, freely sharable, informative video on why sulfates shouldn't be put in the naughty corner with all the sulfate-free hypes going around these days. No more, no less. Hope this explains it better.

[Chromis]

Please treat posts or sections of posts in grey as a visible deletion and do not respond further to them.

Attacking people for posting hair things on a hair forum is not KNIT, do not do this things folks! Use that ignore feature if you need to. Likewise, attacking the YouTube presenter's appearance is off-bounds. Do not do this thing.

Debating their science or the content itself - 100% fine. Be respectful, but yes you may do that thing! This particular presenter is quite divisive in the skincare community as well, and many people have debated her science (Ditto with Paula B. and with pretty much everyone out there)

Do we need a KNIT review? I think we do:


"I came for the hair care advice, but I stayed for the friends."

It has been said more than once that TLHC is one of the nicest sites on the 'net. That's because we have exceptional members who genuinely care about each other and terrific moderators who strive to make sure everyone has the best experience possible. The feeling created is very much like an extended family.

On occasion, however, a quarrel will occur, or a bit of snark will creep into people's messages, and this note is a gentle reminder that the best antidote for that is for everyone to monitor their own posts. Using the Report Button is a great help to the moderators by alerting us to problems, but prevention is a way that everyone can help maintain that warm community spirit. So, as we like to say, KNIT before you post.

Before you hit the "Submit" button, review what you're about to say.

Is it Kind?

Is it Necessary?

Is it Informative?

Is it True?

Read your words as if someone else were saying them to you. How would you receive them? Would you be offended, hurt or angry? If your post doesn't pass those tests, try again. If you simply can't compose something, let the thread go, and maybe try again later.

Every once in a while, there will be something that you cannot agree with. No one expects there to be a complete meeting of minds on every single topic discussed here. In those cases, we ask for tolerance - not acceptance, but tolerance. The other person is always worthy of respect. If you post, do not attack. Agree to disagree, and let your words be civil and even as kind as possible.

Thank you, everyone, for making this such a wonderful community.

[nycelle]

Vitamin C worked for me too, nycelle. I have some spot malasma and was recommended for me. I use Derma E with Vitamin C Intense Night Cream. I have had great results. Another one recommended, Kojic? However I'm not sure of any results from people personally.

I have very dry skin - is the Derma E with C very moisturizing? I like my routine now but either I need to lower my C dosage, or get a more moisturizing cream as my skin is starting to feel a bit drier.

[*Wednesday*]

I have very dry skin - is the Derma E with C very moisturizing? I like my routine now but either I need to lower my C dosage, or get a more moisturizing cream as my skin is starting to feel a bit drier.

It delivers moisture but probably not enough if your skin is overly dry. The one I use isn't geared to any specific skin type. My skin is very oily. It is is good fade cream but I won't recommend if you need extra moisture. If you use it, would need to add a good moisturizer. It cost me $25 in Ulta. They have a VC Renewing Moisterizer but I haven't tried it. It seems to have good reviews on Amazon.

[nycelle]

It delivers moisture but probably not enough if your skin is overly dry. The one I use isn't geared to any specific skin type. My skin is very oily. It is is good fade cream but I won't recommend if you need extra moisture. If you use it, would need to add a good moisturizer. It cost me $25 in Ulta. They have a VC Renewing Moisterizer but I haven't tried it. It seems to have good reviews on Amazon.

Thanks.
Unfortunately, there's no Ulta near me so if it doesn't work, I can't return it easily.

But, Sephora started their 20% off sale today, so I ordered a heavy moisturizer. If it doesn't work, I have 2 Sephora's within walking distance so easy returns. Hoping it does though.. want to continue using the C.

[LadyLongLocks]

So I just listened to the entire thing.
What she says is absolutely true, but I think she misses the mark on as to WHY people are avoiding SLS in their shampoos. Not everyone wants that super-stripping effect on their hair anymore and are learning that more gentle methods of ‘cleaning’ the hair seem to be better for the condition of their hair, long term. I, for instance, have discovered my hair fairs much better if I’m not stripping out all my oils every wash with a sulphate-rich shampoo.

As far as Dr. Dray’s appearance goes, nobody knows what she could be going through. Sickness, stress, or simply her genetics! I didn’t pay much attention to that - it’s not what she was there to talk about :D

Totally agree with you LittleHealthy. I stopped using sulfate rich shampoo regularly in 2010 and only use them once every 8 shampoos to clarify.
I watched the video.

[*Wednesday*]

Thanks.
Unfortunately, there's no Ulta near me so if it doesn't work, I can't return it easily.

But, Sephora started their 20% off sale today, so I ordered a heavy moisturizer. If it doesn't work, I have 2 Sephora's within walking distance so easy returns. Hoping it does though.. want to continue using the C.

I like Sephora. They have good products.

[lapushka]

Totally agree with you LittleHealthy. I stopped using sulfate rich shampoo regularly in 2010 and only use them once every 8 shampoos to clarify.
I watched the video.

I *wish* I could go sulfate-milder and then clarify on the odd occasion, but alas, that would be my ideal scenario, but my scalp protests when the shampoo is too mild a detergent. So I for one am glad not every brand jumped on the big bandwagon to go sulfate-free.

[MoonRabbit]

Finally got around to watching the video and I actually found it quite refreshing. It is nearly impossible to watch a hair related video that doesn't say how harmful sls is but never going any further as to why they believe it is so bad. But I fell for this as well when I started my journey, I read what to look out for in products and did my best to avoid them without really knowing why I was avoiding them in the first place.

[Natalia_A00]

I guess it depends on the person
I just bought a SLS free shampoo (it has sodium coconut sulfate tho) just out of curiosity, to see how it works. I don't think I'm going to see much difference, but it's okay to try, it was extremely cheap!

[nycelle]

^^ I went SLS (and these days SLES) free because that specific ingredient irritates my scalp. The first thing I noticed was no more irritation or itchiness. Took years to figure out though, just always thought I had a dry scalp and washing it caused irritation. In other words, I thought it was normal.

But I didn't notice a difference in my hair until months later when I went silicone free too. Not sure if going silicone free along with sulfate free caused the change in my hair, or it just took months of no harsh detergents that made a difference. But these days my hair is barely frizzy, and very soft. So if you have dry hair, and don't notice a difference initially, just give it a few months then decide what's best for you.

[Starchild494]

She is very informative and I am looking forward to watching more of her videos in the future. Thank you Lapushka!

I do wash my hair with reg shampoo with sulfate to get everything off my hair and scalp.... I do this once a month or so.