Teenage girl looks like alien after hair dye causes severe allergic reaction

[yufeyziqi]

A terrible story.


The link:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=558060&in_page_id=1770



Be wary with what you put on your hair!

[TheSpottedCow]

Holy cr@p.
I think they're totally lieing about the patch test thing though.

[akurah]

Holy cr@p.
I think they're totally lieing about the patch test thing though.

I don't. It's more than possible to do a patch test and be fine, then the next contact you have with PPD it nearly kills you.

PPD is a nasty allergen and you can use it for years with no problems then WHAMMO, you're in bad shape.

[lil_irish_angel]

do you really think a patch test was done

[Lixie]

Oh goodness, how horrible. Okay.. I don't know much about it (and am not blaming the victim), but is it possible that her being so young made her more susceptible to an allergic reaction?

[Anje]

Yeesh.

Of course, for many allergies, it's not the first exposure that gets you, but a subsequent one. (Not necessarily what happened here, though.) The first exposure just causes you to create memory B cells for the specific antigen, then a few weeks down the line when you're exposed again, you get a huge IgE reaction.

[coppercurls]

Patch test or not, that is horrible.:(

[AJoifulNoise]

Eek! That's downright scary!

[naomimcc]

First off...that is terrible.
Second...what a terrible headline.... :( Total sensationalism and just downright mean.

[Katze]

PPD builds up in the system, so that people who have dyed for years can suddenly have a reaction:

http://www.hennatribe.com/ppd.php

Poor girl. I've seen some similar reactions from PPD 'black henna' - this chemical should really never touch skin. And those who dye dark with chemical dyes should be warned...

[Moezland]

PPD builds up in the system, so that people who have dyed for years can suddenly have a reaction:

http://www.hennatribe.com/ppd.php

Poor girl. I've seen some similar reactions from PPD 'black henna' - this chemical should really never touch skin. And those who dye dark with chemical dyes should be warned...

I had no idea - thank you for sharing this:flower:

Poor thing:(.

[Angellen]

Oh my gosh, how frightening and terrifying!! I feel all crawly now. I hate thinking about how much bad stuff there is floating around.....

I hope she makes a full recovery soon--what a terrible experience.

[aisling]

First off...that is terrible.
Second...what a terrible headline.... :( Total sensationalism and just downright mean.

Well, it's the Daily Mail, that's pretty much as bad as it gets in the UK. When it comes to gossip for example, you should always take everything they write with more than one grain of salt.

Poor girl, it looks painful. Hair dyes really contain awful chemicals.

[MoonCreature]

It's terrible yes, but at the same time I want to point out that there are people who look like that after being in contact with crabfish or nuts. One can be allergic to so much. But you should really remember to be carefull with hair-colors etc that contain strong chemicals, especially if you are sensitive and react easily.
Poor poor girl.:(

[Sillage]

MoonCreature, I was thinking the same thing. Allergic reactions can be awful, even fatal... but this isn't going to scare me off chemical dyes anymore than shellfish allergy stories keep me from eating scallops.

[Angela_Rose]

The poor kid! Test-patch or not, i feel awful for her. 13 is such a terrible age to be 'different,' and then to have this rag make fun of her and hurt her by calling her an alien! How mean!

...yet another reason not to dye my hair, though...

[SHELIAANN1969]

Holy cow, me and the old man were just talking about these nasty chemicasl yesterday and how one member here was having bf woes who said her hair smelled like hay and my bf said, "I would rather smell henna than hair dye, its some nasty stuff"

wow, poor kid, talk about a cruddy birthday.

[lora410]

Poor girl. I know though my daughter would NOT be dying her hair at 14!!!

[Gemma]

At the risk of sounding like I support a 'nanny culture' (which I absolutely do not), does anyone else think this raises an interesting question about whether parents should allow their children access to items like hair dyes that can contain potentially harmful chemicals (particularly chemicals that can build up in the system over time)?

Would you let your children use chemical dyes? Do you think there's a sensible age limit for it?

[ladystar]

OMg this is shocking Poor girl.

[Loviatar]

Gemma, interesting point. I was allowed to use Toners and Glints when I was aged 13-16, but over 16 I was allowed to use permanent black dye (Boots own band, which eventually trashed my hair.) But I never got a PPD allergy.

The girl in the paper is so unfortunate. :(

I left a comment on the site. Poor girl. I do hate the Daily Mail though - they are so sensationalist and nasty to people.

[Gemma]

Gemma, interesting point. I was allowed to use Toners and Glints when I was aged 13-16, but over 16 I was allowed to use permanent black dye (Boots own band, which eventually trashed my hair.) But I never got a PPD allergy.

The girl in the paper is so unfortunate. :(

I left a comment on the site. Poor girl. I do hate the Daily Mail though - they are so sensationalist and nasty to people.

I don't think I started using chemical dyes until I was 16, and then it was very sporadic. Of course, I was totally reckless and never did an allergy test. *thwacks self*

The Daily Mail really should just call itself 'The Daily Hate' and have done with it.

[Pegasus Marsters]

Oh goodness, how horrible. Okay.. I don't know much about it (and am not blaming the victim), but is it possible that her being so young made her more susceptible to an allergic reaction?


Nope. I've been dyeing my hair since I was younger than her and never had a reaction atall. I doubt age has much to do with it. I dyed for years and then at 16 used bleach... at home with no previous experience with it. I really don't think age is the issue that caused the reaction.

I doubt they did a patch test. I never have. Who can really be bothered? And it's a bit dumb to blame Loreal for the reaction as her mother seemed to at the bottom of the page by saying they must use "really strong ingredients". Honestly, how many thousands of people have used Loreal dyes WITHOUT A reaction? I've not used the casting creme gloss but I've frequently used thier other dyes and it's always been fine.

It's not the fault of Loreal what happened, and it really is just a shame. People react to hairdye sometimes, some worse than others.

But yeah I really doubt they did a patch test. Imagine how bad they'd look if they'd been like "Lulz we didn't do one" ... everyone would reply "Well then the allergic reaction is your own damn fault." Really, what teenager can be bothered with a patch test?

[squiggyflop]

i saw on the discovery channel a show that said that its usually not the first contact with a substance that ends with a severe allergic reaction and that during the first contact the body doesnt attack it because its trying to figure out what it is but the second contact it thinks it knows what it is and has all the wrong antibodies and goes nuts. its been a while since ive seen the program so i cant remember everything.. but this program was about bee alergies... maybe its true for this too?
i think the program was called body story

[ajr]

I'm sure it is. Thats whats so scary about having an allergic reaction the first time your exposed to something. Because then you know the next time might be much worse.

[Pegasus Marsters]

For what it's worth guys, I've done some checking up online... the dye she used didn't even contain PPD! So everyone screaming of the evils of PPD needs to realise that that's not the only allergen in hairdyes and not all hairdyes contain PPD. (Yes, I specifically looked up the ingredients to see if it had PPD in it and it didn't!) Everytime something goes wrong with chemicals everyone will cry "ZOMG PPD TEH EVILZ" Without even checking if the product in question contains PPD.

[Shell]

At the risk of sounding like I support a 'nanny culture' (which I absolutely do not), does anyone else think this raises an interesting question about whether parents should allow their children access to items like hair dyes that can contain potentially harmful chemicals (particularly chemicals that can build up in the system over time)?

Would you let your children use chemical dyes? Do you think there's a sensible age limit for it?

I agree that 14 is young, but I'm glad she had her mother's permission and oversight. A 13 year old I know wanted to dye her hair, and her mother wouldn't even discuss it with her (I warned her mom that this was not the right approach). The girl got her dad (parents divorced) to buy her Sun-in, and she bleached her hair with it. The girl had dark, dark brown hair. Needless to day, it turned orange. What a mess. Now, her mom had to listen, and they had to dye it brown again. So much easier to go slowly, and maybe get some salon highlights (or I would have done them), than the Sun-in disaster. :twocents:

[Loviatar]

Pegs, that makes my comment on the Daily mail site a bit redundant then :lol:

Does it have cobalt chloride?

[prosperina]

I agree that she probably didn't do a patch test. No one does. When I was dying my hair from ages 17-26, I really couldn't be bothered. However, I do think that I should have given my susceptibility to allergies. Other than PPD, there can be all sorts of stuff in those dyes that won't agree with some people. Poor thing. And for the record, she called herself an alien, so I don't think the newspaper was making fun of her.

[Pegasus Marsters]

Pegs, that makes my comment on the Daily mail site a bit redundant then :lol:

Does it have cobalt chloride?


Nope. Yay for my sleuthing skills at finding ingredients lists.

[akurah]

For what it's worth guys, I've done some checking up online... the dye she used didn't even contain PPD! So everyone screaming of the evils of PPD needs to realise that that's not the only allergen in hairdyes and not all hairdyes contain PPD. (Yes, I specifically looked up the ingredients to see if it had PPD in it and it didn't!) Everytime something goes wrong with chemicals everyone will cry "ZOMG PPD TEH EVILZ" Without even checking if the product in question contains PPD.

Niiice. Now I'm highly curious as to the offending ingredient! I'll have to practice some googlefu later.

[Sinnamon]

O my! My first reaction to the photo is laughter. But offcourse this is terrible! I hope the allergic reaction faded fast. They allways advice making a test on your skin first, so it's on her own count ofcourse, but no one expects this to happen with a simple hair dye!

[CitznMag]

Just sent this to my husband. Don't know if it's related to what happened to him, but for years I have been trying to discourage him from using "Just for Men" hair dye. Don't remember if he had used it prior to the below happening and he didn't have sores but definitely was itchy.

A few weeks ago he wakes me up at 2:30 am to take his blood pressure. Half asleep and in dim light I took it and it was normal. With blurry eyes I asked him why he wanted me to take it and he says, "look at me". His entire head and neck was swollen, eyes swollen shut, skin stretched and shiny. I had this impression that it was just going to blow up. We rushed to the hospital and similar to the girl in the article, he was given steroids, antihistamines and also antibiotics. He stayed for 4 days. He has other health issues, leukemia, hep C and is a diabetic and Doc's just could figure out where the head swelling came from. (For anyone who watches HOUSE, I need me a Dr. House, lol.) So any who, he recovered and can wear his baseball cap (looked a little funny with it just sitting on top of his head, lol).

[goodenough]

My 2cents--I don't think I would let my daughter dye her hair on my watch. What she chooses to do as an adult is her responsibility. I have dyed my hair by the way, so I'm not anti-dye. Even with bleach, you have to be so careful--I got sores all over my head once from bleach. It was an incompetent hairdresser. (To his credit, he pretty much told me taking me from brown to blond was pretty much out of his league, and I insisted.)

[MissHair]

This is actually not that uncommon. From what I know, they usually warn on box that people who've got allergies to hair colouring should not use it.

[Nevermore]

Gemma: Most of us allow our kids to drink tap water, to eat veggies and fruits grown with pesticides and sometimes seafood from our polluted waters. Lots of commercial hair dyes aren't obviously not the safest things to use, but plenty of other things have dangerous ingredients and the possibility of allergic reaction. I fully believe that even young kids should be allowed to dye their hair (in the safest way possible) because it gives them a way of being different, having fun or a way of being closer to their mental picture of themselves with a fairly low risk of things going badly wrong. Letting them have their dark brown dyed hair, second lobe piercings, funny haircut or blue streaks is safer than them feeling that they need to rebel to be themselves, the consequences of which can be severe.

I'm 18, btw, so I've been there, done that in recent years.

It's terrible about the girl in the article. She probably did do a patch test and didn't have any reaction at the time, it's not uncommon. People have similar experiences with tattoo ink sometimes after hours of work. Patch tests aren't perfect because not everyone is the same, because they only cover a small area instead of the whole head, because sensitization occurs over time and other reasons. Patch test or no, it wasn't her fault and I don't disbelieve her on the test just because she had a reaction to the dye the second time she came in contact with it.

[Celebrian]

For what it's worth guys, I've done some checking up online... the dye she used didn't even contain PPD! So everyone screaming of the evils of PPD needs to realise that that's not the only allergen in hairdyes and not all hairdyes contain PPD. (Yes, I specifically looked up the ingredients to see if it had PPD in it and it didn't!) Everytime something goes wrong with chemicals everyone will cry "ZOMG PPD TEH EVILZ" Without even checking if the product in question contains PPD.

Can you post the ingredients list? I can't find it anywhere! Thanks.

[Áine]

First off...that is terrible.
Second...what a terrible headline.... :( Total sensationalism and just downright mean.

I agree. I was just about to say something as such. That had to have been VERY scary for her.

[happylynngilmer]

Nearly 14...as if we don't have enough self esteem issues at that age. :{

ETA:

Everytime something goes wrong with chemicals everyone will cry "ZOMG PPD TEH EVILZ"

LOL, pegs!

[Alaskanheart]

At the risk of sounding like I support a 'nanny culture' (which I absolutely do not), does anyone else think this raises an interesting question about whether parents should allow their children access to items like hair dyes that can contain potentially harmful chemicals (particularly chemicals that can build up in the system over time)?

Would you let your children use chemical dyes? Do you think there's a sensible age limit for it?

No I wouldnt let my children dye at that age, maybe 16-17, but theres no age law against it, and its a very common thing to do. I dont think the mother did anything wrong, nor the daughter, nor Loreal.People have allergies to lots of things, and you never know until you come in contact with the allergen, sometimes many times before anything happens.

I agree with the shellfish analogy someone else mentioned.

[Nightshade]

Yeesh.

Of course, for many allergies, it's not the first exposure that gets you, but a subsequent one. (Not necessarily what happened here, though.) The first exposure just causes you to create memory B cells for the specific antigen, then a few weeks down the line when you're exposed again, you get a huge IgE reaction.


That was my understanding of it, but would the Memory B cells be developed within 24 hours? That to me seems unlikely. I would expect one treatment to be fine, and then another a week or two later to trigger a reaction, so no dispute there. I'm just doubting she did a patch test based on the short time recommended between patch test and full application.



At the risk of sounding like I support a 'nanny culture' (which I absolutely do not), does anyone else think this raises an interesting question about whether parents should allow their children access to items like hair dyes that can contain potentially harmful chemicals (particularly chemicals that can build up in the system over time)?

Would you let your children use chemical dyes? Do you think there's a sensible age limit for it?

I've been dying my hair since I was 11 :shrug: And for the first few years my mom helped. In her opinion "it was only hair" and I never had a reaction (and yes, I did patch test the first time with each new brand, but not each time I dyed). Over the almost 13 years I chemically dyed my hair I did start to get sensitive to it, though nothing like this. I just had an itchy scalp for a few days.

Thing is, most people assume that if you buy it in a store, it's safe. The way mom is having a fit about this in the article 1) I doubt there was a patch test because 2) I doubt the mother even knew about the dye until it was too late.

I know I'm reading into the article a bit here, but I can very easily see a situation where mom said, "No" to her dying her hair, and then 14 year old did it anyway. Note that it was MISS Queen (not Mrs, the mother, Queen) who went to the store and bought the dye, and then dyed her hair. There is no mention of the mother at all until after the reaction. In order to not look like a bad mother she's probably gave the story of, "Of COURSE we patch tested."

In a roundabout way...uhm, if a parent says no, and a kid is REALLY determined, they're going to do it anyway :o

[Druid of Alba]

Oh dear! That's horrible. Poor girl... Well, this certainly re-enforces my opions against hair dye (except for henna, of course :))! Thank you for sharing.

[Shell]

In a roundabout way...uhm, if a parent says no, and a kid is REALLY determined, they're going to do it anyway :o

Yep, that's why I think if your kid wants to dye, it's best to help, rather than find out later, and need to clean up the disaster.

[Riot Crrl]

I couldn't find an ingredient list for this either. In fact, I couldn't find evidence of the existence of a shade "Chocolate Brown" other than this one article. There is "Iced Chocolate," but I could not discover ingredients.

[Delilah]

My mother let me use temporary colors on my hair starting at 12. It's true, if I hadn't been allowed to then I would have done it myself, likely bought the wrong type/left it on too long/picked a terrible shade/ etc. I had babysitting jobs at that age and had my own spending money.

I don't think the mother in this story (if it is true) did anything wrong. She dutifully did a patch test (which very few people actually do) and kept an eye on her daughter.

I hope the girl recovers soon. Allergic reactions like that are no fun at all!

[Pegasus Marsters]

Ok guys, here's the ingredient list for the colour "Iced Chocolate" (as "Chocolate Brown" isn't even an existing colour in the range she claimed to have dyed with)

Ingredients: Creme Colourant: Aqua, Cetearyl Alcohol, Propylene Glycol, Deceth 3, Laureth 12, Ethanolamine, Oleth 30, Lauric Acid, Polyquarternium 6, Glycol Distearate, Hexadimethirine Chloride, Silica Diemthyl Silylate, CI 77491/Iron oxides, CI 77891/Titanium doixide, 2,4 Duanubiogebixtetgabil HCI, p-Aminophenol 2-Amino-3- Hydroxyprydine, Acsorbic Acid, Mica, Thiolatice Acid, Toluene 2,5-Diamine, 2-Methylresorcinol, 2-Methyl-5- Hydroxyethylaminophenol, Pentasodium Pentetate, Carbomer, Resocrinol, Fragrance.

Developer: Aqua, Hydrogen Peroxide, Cetearyl Alcohol, Sodium Stannate, Tridceth-2 Carboxamide MEA, Pentasodium Pentetate, Ceteareth-30, Tetrasodium Pyrophosphate, Glycerin.

Nutri Shine Conditioner: Aqua, Cetearyl Alcohol, Behentrimonium Chloride, PEG-180, Amodimethicone, Cetyl Esters, Hydroxyethyylcellulose, Tridceth-12, Chlorhexidine Dihydrochloride, Limonene, Camellia Sinensis/Camellia Sinensis Leaf Extract, Linalool, Aloe Barabadensisn Propylene Glycol, Methylparaben, Citric Acid, Cetrimonium Chloride, Citronellol, Hexyl Cinnamal, Amyl Cinnimal, Fragrance.

And I'm glad to be of amusement to some of you out there ;)

[Celebrian]

Ok guys, here's the ingredient list for the colour "Iced Chocolate" (as "Chocolate Brown" isn't even an existing colour in the range she claimed to have dyed with)

Ingredients: Creme Colourant: Aqua, Cetearyl Alcohol, Propylene Glycol, Deceth 3, Laureth 12, Ethanolamine, Oleth 30, Lauric Acid, Polyquarternium 6, Glycol Distearate, Hexadimethirine Chloride, Silica Diemthyl Silylate, CI 77491/Iron oxides, CI 77891/Titanium doixide, 2,4 Duanubiogebixtetgabil HCI, p-Aminophenol 2-Amino-3- Hydroxyprydine, Acsorbic Acid, Mica, Thiolatice Acid, Toluene 2,5-Diamine, 2-Methylresorcinol, 2-Methyl-5- Hydroxyethylaminophenol, Pentasodium Pentetate, Carbomer, Resocrinol, Fragrance.

Developer: Aqua, Hydrogen Peroxide, Cetearyl Alcohol, Sodium Stannate, Tridceth-2 Carboxamide MEA, Pentasodium Pentetate, Ceteareth-30, Tetrasodium Pyrophosphate, Glycerin.

Nutri Shine Conditioner: Aqua, Cetearyl Alcohol, Behentrimonium Chloride, PEG-180, Amodimethicone, Cetyl Esters, Hydroxyethyylcellulose, Tridceth-12, Chlorhexidine Dihydrochloride, Limonene, Camellia Sinensis/Camellia Sinensis Leaf Extract, Linalool, Aloe Barabadensisn Propylene Glycol, Methylparaben, Citric Acid, Cetrimonium Chloride, Citronellol, Hexyl Cinnamal, Amyl Cinnimal, Fragrance.

And I'm glad to be of amusement to some of you out there ;)


Actually, she used a genuine color in the range called Chocolate 535 (you can see a clear picture of the box in the newspaper article). I think it must be particularly new...

I could only find Iced Chocolate 415 - which has your ingredients list, but adds this at the end (ingredients listed at Radius Pharmacy, New Zealand on the Ferrit website):

Warnings: The developer creme contains hydrogen peroxide. The creme colourant contains Diaminotoluenes and resorcinol.

What exactly are Diaminotoluenes?...

[Riot Crrl]

Thanks for the ingredient info.


What exactly are Diaminotoluenes?...

It looks like they are considered to be a problem like PPD is when used on skin (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11115163).

[AshleyP]

I've been dyeing my hair since I was 13, never had any problems from it. Started by using SunIn. Went from medium brown to a blonde color pretty easily, but I do live in south Florida and at that time, it was summer and the sun was out in full bloom and I did it everyday for a couple of weeks - the colored over that with a blonde dye to even it out - was fine. Pretty much dye it every two months for the last 8 years. My mother should be a certified hair colorist after all shes done LOL.

I've seen this before though. Well, not this girl, but a very similar girl:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=443813&in_page_id=1770
According to daily mail, her head "swells up like Elephant Woman". :rolleyes:

[Ohio Sky]

I don't think skin tests are reliable at all. Dumping something on your head in huge amounts and letting it sit there for an hour is obviously going to have a much different affect than putting something on one of the least sensitive areas on your body for 5 minutes.

[TheSpottedCow]

I've been dying my hair since I was 13. It's really not a big deal, IMO.

[Delilah]

Theres a possibility it could be a discontinued shade bought at a bargain store, the kind that liquidate all kinds of goods from other stores. If so, it may have been discontinued for the reason that it is unsafe.

[yogachic]

I'm glad I don't dye my hair!

[Pegasus Marsters]

Celebrian, they may have just used the first picture they found of the casting creme gloss... it could have either been the chocolate or iced chocolate.. they weren't too clear. Cant find an ingredient list for the one they have pictured though.

As for the suggestion she could have got it from one of those cheap shops that gets cast offs... I highly suspect she did. I used to live in Mottingham where she does and I know the shops round there pretty well. There aren't any up-market sort of shops in the villiage and most of them probably do get the cast offs of hair dyes.

[k_hepburn]

To be honest, I've never done a patch test before dyeing my hair. I guess I was rather casual about it from the start (quite contrary to my usual attidude) because for the first few years, if I got my hair coloured (which was just off and on) I would have always gotten it done at a hairdressers salon. And they never ever even suggested that I needed to do an allergy check beforehand. Based on that, when I first studied the leaflet in a home hair colouring set and came across the passage on patch tests, I thought "Oh, I've had dyes in the past - I'll be fine." And yes, I was lucky so far, since I haven't had any problems with commercial dyes, home or salon colourants, so far.

However, having gotten a little more informed on the subject since, I do wonder if those recommendations for patch test actually provide any security against allergic reactions at all.

For one thing, the manufacturers keep changing the formula, don't they? So really, what the packet should advise you to do is to perform a patch test each time you use the dye, even if it's a brand and number you have used before. The same goes since people do frequently develop allergies at a certain point in their life when they had been exposed to before and had never had a problem with the substance that they are now allergenic to. So again, strictly speaking one probably ought to ensure that one is not allergic before each application.

Of course, as a number of people have already pointed out in this thread, a lot of (all?) allergic reactions occur only on second contact to the substance, and, as Anje and Nightshade have suggested, probably require some kind of an incubation period. So really shouldn't the advice be to patch test twice, with at least x days (weeks?) in between, before applying the dye, ensuring that you are using dye from the same batch each time. Repeat this each time before you dye your hair! Yeah right!

The whole procedure would be so medical and cumbersome that people would either give up the idea of using the dye at all, or decide to just chance it.

So I guess I won't have to feel to bad about never having performed a patch test in the first place (unless, of course, I develop an allergic reaction at some point...).

Greetings

katharine

[Pegasus Marsters]

For one thing, the manufacturers keep changing the formula, don't they? So really, what the packet should advise you to do is to perform a patch test each time you use the dye, even if it's a brand and number you have used before. The same goes since people do frequently develop allergies at a certain point in their life when they had been exposed to before and had never had a problem with the substance that they are now allergenic to. So again, strictly speaking one probably ought to ensure that one is not allergic before each application.




Emphasis mine

They do advise that. Every dye I've ever used advises that.

[Riot Crrl]

Another problem with patch tests is that applying 1/8 TSP or so of the product to the arm, is a whole different exposure level than applying to the whole scalp. The scalp is a decent amount of real estate, and it's populated with many blood vessels which are very close to the surface.

Getting stung by one bee is just not the same as 50 bees.

[Pegasus Marsters]

Way I see it this was one girl out of many thousands of us who have used hair dye. One girl who had a reaction.

Peanut allergies are far more common, but I don't see any of us like "OMGZ I WILL NOT EAT TEH PEANUTZ INCASE I REACTZ"... ya know?

[k_hepburn]

Originally posted by Pegasus Marsters:

Originally Posted by k_hepburn http://forums.longhaircommunity.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.longhaircommunity.com/showthread.php?p=56498#post56498)
For one thing, the manufacturers keep changing the formula, don't they? So really, what the packet should advise you to do is to perform a patch test each time you use the dye, even if it's a brand and number you have used before. The same goes since people do frequently develop allergies at a certain point in their life when they had been exposed to before and had never had a problem with the substance that they are now allergenic to. So again, strictly speaking one probably ought to ensure that one is not allergic before each application.



Emphasis mine

They do advise that. Every dye I've ever used advises that.

You're right. I just checked the packet of dye I happen to have sitting in my bathroom for my next touch-up, and it does in fact read "Test patch for allergic reactions 48 hours before every use..." (translated from German, emphasis added)
I tend to remember that when I first started using home colourings (about four years ago) the text only advised to patch test before you used a colour you hadn't used previously, but I may have gotten that wrong (or else they have changed their advise since then). Anyway, you are obviously correct as to what is the current advise - which still leaves me to wonder what percentage of their costumers they actually expect to be following their advice.

Greetings

katharine

[rx queen.]

that is a nightmare!

[Pegasus Marsters]

You're right. I just checked the packet of dye I happen to have sitting in my bathroom for my next touch-up, and it does in fact read "Test patch for allergic reactions 48 hours before every use..." (translated from German, emphasis added)
I tend to remember that when I first started using home colourings (about four years ago) the text only advised to patch test before you used a colour you hadn't used previously, but I may have gotten that wrong (or else they have changed their advise since then). Anyway, you are obviously correct as to what is the current advise - which still leaves me to wonder what percentage of their costumers they actually expect to be following their advice.

Greetings

katharine

I think they mostly put the warning there because they have to but if you have a reaction to the dye and HAVEN'T followed the exact instructions provided with the dye then it's one of those "It's your own damn fault" things. But if the company didn't tell you you're meant to they'd get sued for negligence.

[Riot Crrl]

Yeah, especially for a company like L'oreal's products which seems to be pretty notorious for just constantly reformulating everything.

[jojo]

poor little girl, how awful. Ive read about this before and also people think it wont happen to them as they have been using the same dye for years, it can happen all a sudden after years of use.

The title could have been thought about a bit more, that was darn insensitive