a wonderful hair growth guide; a must read for newbies!

[jojo]

http://www.askdwayne.com/Downloads/Hair_G_B.pdf

Just found this on the net and think it will be of interest to us hair growth addicts, especially the new to the forum.

Enjoy!

[redneckprincess]

thanks for sharing

[Clarisse]

He is smarter than most stylists, but I disagree with him in the statements that "You need professional products" and that "you need to shampoo twice". And the fact that he doesn't warn against chemical products - "it's okay if you get a professional to do it". Yeah, right!
Apart from that, it was interesting to read. Thanks for sharing! :)

[Deimos]

It seems an interesting read!


and that "you need to shampoo twice".


I've wondered about this sometime, since it keeps popping up. Why "wash it twice"....doesn't that just mean your shampoo is bad?

[florenonite]

It's an interesting read, but I disagree with quite a lot of it. He says that fine hair is thin (not necessarily!) and that natural highlights are caused by product build-up from 'inferior' products. Er, no, my highlights are caused by the sun, and the more expensive products I've used in the past were more likely to cause build-up because they have 'cones. ETA: Oh, and the whole needing to go to the salon to grow hair. All going to the salon has ever done for me is make my hair shorter :p I don't get splits often, and when I do I cut them off myself.

[Clarisse]

florenonite: Exactly!

[dragonfrog]

I've wondered about this sometime, since it keeps popping up. Why "wash it twice"....doesn't that just mean your shampoo is bad?

Personally, I wash my hair twice because I can get my hair cleaner (and go longer between washes) and use less shampoo than I would if I only shampooed once. I use only a very tiny bit of shampoo for each time, less than half the amount that I used when I only shampooed once. The first wash hardly suds at all, but the second one always suds up nicely and gets my hair very clean. My boyfriend introduced me to shampooing twice, and I've been doing it ever since, with regular shampoo, sulfate-free shampoo, and now with very diluted, sulfate-free shampoo.

However, while I would certainly recommend shampooing twice to see if you like it, I would never say anyone NEEDS to shampoo twice. It's a personal preference, that's all.

[heidi w.]

He is smarter than most stylists, but I disagree with him in the statements that "You need professional products" and that "you need to shampoo twice". And the fact that he doesn't warn against chemical products - "it's okay if you get a professional to do it". Yeah, right!
Apart from that, it was interesting to read. Thanks for sharing! :)

I personally do believe there ARE inferior products out there and that using quality products will, over time, help with creating strong and healthy hair, no matter the length.
In the section, The Importance of Professional Products
It is important to choose the correct products for your hair because
you will be building upon this foundation, so this foundation has to be
a strong one! I think of hair care products as food for the hair. What
you feed your hair will help determine not only the hair’s appearance,
but how strong and healthy it is as well!

In the section, Product Build Up
The use of inferior products (shampoos, conditioners, foam wrap) can
lead to product build up. This is actually accurate. How many times have people come on this board, having tried adding a product or a new product based on some thought or recommendation (even from a salon stylist at times), and come in discussing their hair's odd behavior and frightened and asking what to do. Almost always the answer is to clarify, you have buildup. For the record, I spend a good chunk of change once or twice a year on bulk product, very high end products on my hair. From my personal vantage point, one of the reasons, one of the contributing elements my hair remains strong and actively growing (not quite as fast as the past, mind you) is because I have a history of using quality products. And I rarely ever need to clarify. I can't recall having clarified even once in the past 2 years.

I skimmed so I'm not sure what you're referencing regarding the 'shampoo twice' part -- maybe he wrote that in the shampooing section -- I'll go look again. For those with drier hair type they may not need to apply shampoo twice, but many many do need to do two applications of some version of shampoo. Here's why. If you're skipping days between hair washings this then means that some sebum is being built up, which is relatively desireable to let nature help to achieve lovely hair, but this can then form a barrier, if you will (builds up enough in so many days this then is known as SURFACE TENSION) -- an easy way to express it in writing. This means that the first shampoo application, and one doesn't need a large volume of shampoo -- just a little bit, nor more than a dime or at most a quarter dollop in the palm of the hand and then lathered in the palms and then applied to hair (or if CO washing, just a bit, or if using bars or whatever) -- anyway, the first application tends to merely break this barrier, the SURFACE TENSION, the bond that sebum, bits of skin and even dirt all tend to create. (Those with more oily hair type will notice this more than dry hair types, and those who wash daily or even several times a day, for example, for reasons of exercise, may not notice this tension quite so much. The hair will likely look a tad streaky, feel greasy, and in lighter colored hairs, appear darker.) This first application for many tends to not lather quite as much, for example, and tends to not emulsify (that is smear) quite as easily. This is breaking the SURFACE TENSION. It's the second shampooing that continues the actual cleansing of the scalp skin, in particular. It lifts the remaining debris of sebum, any skin sheets, dirt .... and carries it away. The second shampoo one can use even LESS product and achieve a nice lathering and it will emulsify well and continue to lift and remove detris off of scalp skin and leave the hair reasonably clean (even if not squeeky clean, which only in certain scalp skin conditions is this actually necessary -- hair grows best through a cleansed skin.). Remember, washing the hair as a phrase is a bit of misnomer: what we really need to achieve is the effect of good hygiene, keeping the scalp's skin in a healthy condition. Below the author explains it more simplistically, in his opening of the section Shampoos and Conditioners.

When shampooing the hair, it is mandatory that you shampoo at least
twice. The first shampoo rids the hair of dirt, oil and other residue. On
the second shampoo, you'll need less shampoo and you'll find that the
second shampoo lathers very well.

If you mean him stating how many times to wash per week, he actually explains a bit about frequency of washing during the week based on hair type (and I would add based on type of products one is using). He even discusses a kind of water-only wash for exercising but a certain amount of hair washes are needed per week even so. From the section Frequency of Shampooing/Conditioning

If your hair is naturally oily to medium you can wash your hair from
once a day to four to five times a week. If you have dry hair washing
your hair two to three times a week is recommended. As a matter of
fact, if you are truly serious about having your hair reach its full
growth potential, then I recommend washing it at least two to three
times a week.
If you have dry hair and workout on a regular basis then you may
want to do what is referred to as a no poo. This is how you want to
should go about it if you workout and wear a relaxer or if you have dry
hair.

Actually he DOES warn against chemical products. He doesn't claim outright that these should never be done -- this I'll grant you, but he is quite clear in stating that this is damaging to hair and that it is best performed by a qualified professional, and that in fact, he does state how he is aware of stylists in the industry that after years of experience still have yet to master the art of a chemical service. In fact, there's a section, Salon Visits and the Two Services You MUST Receive

Chemically treated hair feels rough and dry and in some cases may be
dull in color. It usually lacks shine, is brittle, fragile, and may contain
breakage throughout. (from an earlier section than the below quotes)

The other service, I highly advise you receive in the salon, is your
chemical services. ... Receiving chemical services is a
SERIOUS matter. If you do not know what you are doing (and trust me
YOU DON’T) do not attempt to do this at all!
...
For those that like me to bottom-line it, I will. Chemical services are
one of the most damaging services you can perform on your hair. They
should be left up to a professional to perform PEROID!

He just makes the case perhaps slightly differently, but he is clear that the process is damaging and if done very badly, will undo your best efforts at arriving at healthy hair. Much of this manual does go to acquired hair length, and he is stating that as an implied, that if one has a poor job done hair will not achieve length with a chemical service. AND he is discussing ALL chemical services, not just one type of chemical service -- anything smacking of a perm and color. In fact, for kids, he is clearly stating he is AGAINST any chemical processes on children's hair.

I think overall this man has it right. I particularly like that he discusses health and goes through nutrition for a number of pages. As I've stated in other posts, all quality stylists that I have ever studied and known, all discuss the importance of nutrition because we can do a lot to the exterior hair, the surface of hair, but the alive part of hair is under the scalp's skin -- the hair follicle.

My hair guru was much like this man's advice. While I would NEVER advocate that if you want length to go get a chemical service, I would DEFINITELY support this man's position that if one decides to do so, to have it performed by a clearly qualified stylist (by this I mean a true artist in this, and not just anyone). If it's color, see a person who ONLY does color, specializes in color. The fact is that most stylists do not understand chemistry, even if they get some training in school (or a lot), or have some experience under their belts.

I particularly also like his pointers on how to find a stylist for you, to look for the same hair type and discuss things first.

heidi w.

[starlights]

i enjoyed reading this ebook! i shampoo my hair twice because it makes my hair feel "cleaner" . I also dont feel going to a salon is essential but i guess the author is just trying give the best option to those who are new to the hair growth scene. I enjoyed it anyway, thanks jojo for being kind and sharing!

[heidi w.]

It's an interesting read, but I disagree with quite a lot of it. He says that fine hair is thin (not necessarily!) and that natural highlights are caused by product build-up from 'inferior' products. Er, no, my highlights are caused by the sun, and the more expensive products I've used in the past were more likely to cause build-up because they have 'cones. ETA: Oh, and the whole needing to go to the salon to grow hair. All going to the salon has ever done for me is make my hair shorter :p I don't get splits often, and when I do I cut them off myself.

Hmmm. I didn't get this from the read at all.
Fine hair is thin (sometimes limp) and is usually soft to the touch. It
has the smallest diameter of the three textures. This texture of hair is
said to not be able to “hold curl” well.

Everything in this above quote is about interpretation of the word "thin". He doesn't mean thin because there isn't enough volume per square inch about the head (although it can be). He means thinness in diameter, per strand. He elaborates his point when he explains about the smallest of diameter. What he doesn't get into detail about is that fine hair, unlike the other textures, is missing what's known as the medulla (if I have that right spelling?). It's not a big deal to have it or not have it. This only affects the diameter of the specific hair strand. I am a very fine hair type. Indeed, if you hold a single strand up in regular light, it's so narrow it's very hard to even see. Yet it is strong, and long. This hair type, when he mentions hold curl potential is meaning the older way of saying that typically it lacks body, although that's not always the case. Yet my hair, as a fine hair type and stick straight, has no hint of body whatsoever, no matter what length I've ever been at. However, plenty of fine hair types DO possess body, or curl power.


I think this is the quote about the highlights section you are speaking of.
This build up will prevent your hair from receiving the necessary moisture that it will need (especially in the case of chemically treated hair). Over time this will cause the hair to change color (first you may see a grayish tint on
your hair then you can experience your hair getting lighter and
lighter). Side Note: People that think that they have “natural
highlights” really need to examine the types of products they are using
for hair care. Next, product build up can cause your chemicals not to
process evenly, or process at all!

He is actually accurate that if one allows buildup to persist it can cause issues with products working well (Exhibit A, the , and over quite some time, affect the appearance of hair's color. He is also stating, that particularly in the instance of a chemical process, that buildup on hair can cause a lot of interference in the success of the process. There are products that are inferior quality that can mess with hair color, especially in the instance of buildup. I'm not up on all the products out there, but I'm a big believer in using a quality product, especially as it concerns conditioner. The thing he's really getting at here that isn't clearly stated at all is that a lot of people have a lot of misinformation about hair, including things about natural highlights. I have had since babyhood one particular streak of much lighter hair, yet, over time, and most recently, it's slightly changed color - -but I am slowly becoming 50--so I know that this idea of some strips of hair being naturally higher color is in the spectrum--he isn't saying there's never a case of natural highlights, just that not all people who think it's natural it is actually natural. Here at LHC we have a population of folks educated and knowledgeable more than the average citizen out there, by a fair amount. Whenever I diatribe into all things hair, people are stunned and repeat at least 2-3 times, "OH, I never knew that." However, it's my understanding that a protocol in the salon is to clarify the hair before a chemical service is performed, to remove the potential of any buildup interfering with the performance of a chemical process. We are all aware of various ingredients included in hair care products that may not be so swell for our hair.

As for highlights being from the sun, some professionals would declare that this then, while 'natural' is not a good plan. This can have a drying effect on the hair, overexposure to sun. For example, the GM system warns to wear a hat or scarf, (or one could use an umbrella) to protect hair from overexposure in the sun. It can change hair's color.

My read of him did not include at all that he's saying one must go to a salon to grow long hair. He has a chapter on the two services he strongly advocates be performed in a salon, proper trimming and chemical services. I agree with you that trimming can be done at home just fine, but so many people really do NOT know how to do this. Remember, you and I are conversing in a forum concerning all things hair, and this book is targeted for the general populace that is not here. What you and I know is not the norm for the majority of the population. The majority of the population receives their info from ads and friends and magazine articles. We've all witnessed interesting statements on various websites on the internet concerning hair care. His text is committed to educating the majority that is uninformed. Despite the large membership of LHC, the majority of the population is very uninformed on hair, as a whole topic, particularly on the various services a salon provides. I mean, even stylists themselves that I've met over the years even have some interesting understandings that they share with their clients. My personal fave remains trim the hair frequently, and it will grow. Well, yes and no. Depends how much is trimmed and how frequently compared to that individual's rate of growth. But hair doesn't grow from the bottom. It grows from the follicle.

heidi w.

[heidi w.]

It seems an interesting read!



I've wondered about this sometime, since it keeps popping up. Why "wash it twice"....doesn't that just mean your shampoo is bad?

No, read above.

ETA: To be quick about it, the hair, if one is skipping days between hair washes, or even a week, the scalp skin secrete sebum via the sebacious gland near hair follicles. This builds, along with any dirt and along with any skin sheets from the skin and forms a bond, if you will, a kind of barrier. The first shampoo and second application of a cleaning agent need not be a lot -- a little is fine -- but the first application breaks up the surface tension of all this gumminess. This is why this first wash is less for actual cleansing and has less lathering and less emulsification (it doesn't spread or smear as well). It's the second application that more effectively cleans the scalp skin since the surface tension is broken.

heidi w.

[Pear Martini]

Thanks, jojo. This will be added to my favorites :D

[mommat04]

THanks for the link.

[jojo]

Heidi what you said was spot on; I totally agree on all accounts.

Glad you all enjoyed it!

[Clarisse]

Heidi - Well, I have A level chemistry and B level physics in the danish "gymnasium". It's not really high school and not really college - I can't really explain what it is :P It's after elementary school but before university.
A level is the highest level you can have a subject on, B level comes after A, C comes after B and so on... Perhaps what we learn isn't rocket science or anything, and I don't know whether or not you have had more science than me, but we are told that whenever the surface tension is broken, it's broken. And sebum doesn't really have surface tensions. The soap (or whatever cleansing agent you use) is "bipolar" (I lack the right enlish expression here :P). One end of the molecule bonds with the fat (sebum) while the other end bonds with the water. This makes it possible to rinse out fat with water. Applying shampoo twice is perhaps an easier way to get the scalp 100% clean - but applying a sufficient amount of shampoo once should do the trick.

I'm happy that you have found a product that works for you, and you sure does have an amazing mane, but I don't think that high-end products are necessary to grow a long and healthy mane, and I don't think that any high-end shampoo or conditioner can make hair grow faster - unless they contain rather nasty stuff :P Minoxidil and such...
You just need to read the ingredients list carefully, and then choose products that will clean and moisturize the hair.

Visiting a salon isn't necessary either. Trimming your ends with a good pair of scissors will keep hair healthy.

Considering what many stylists tells us, and what most people believe about hair for general, this is super good stuff. I do consider the LHC-wisdom a tad better, though. :)

[BonnyJ]

Nice read, some good info but I personally am in the no trimming club.

[florenonite]

Hmmm. I didn't get this from the read at all.
Fine hair is thin (sometimes limp) and is usually soft to the touch. It
has the smallest diameter of the three textures. This texture of hair is
said to not be able to “hold curl” well.

Everything in this above quote is about interpretation of the word "thin". He doesn't mean thin because there isn't enough volume per square inch about the head (although it can be). He means thinness in diameter, per strand. He elaborates his point when he explains about the smallest of diameter.

Perhaps it's just because I've got fine and thick hair, but it really irks me when people use "thin" and "thick" as descriptors of "fine" and "coarse". Because "thin" and "thick" mean something completely different in terms of hair, I don't think they should ever be used to describe fineness or coarseness unless it explicitly states it. In this case, I would expect it to say "fine hair is thin IN DIAMETER", not simply thin, as that means something different entirely.

I don't think he's meaning to be misleading, it's just that so many people IRL get confused about the distinction between fine/thin and coarse/thick that as someone writing about it he should make it very clear that fine doesn't necessarily correlate with thin, nor coarse with thick.



This build up will prevent your hair from receiving the necessary moisture that it will need (especially in the case of chemically treated hair). Over time this will cause the hair to change color (first you may see a grayish tint on
your hair then you can experience your hair getting lighter and
lighter). Side Note: People that think that they have “natural
highlights” really need to examine the types of products they are using
for hair care. Next, product build up can cause your chemicals not to
process evenly, or process at all!

He is actually accurate that if one allows buildup to persist it can cause issues with products working well (Exhibit A, the , and over quite some time, affect the appearance of hair's color. He is also stating, that particularly in the instance of a chemical process, that buildup on hair can cause a lot of interference in the success of the process. There are products that are inferior quality that can mess with hair color, especially in the instance of buildup. I'm not up on all the products out there, but I'm a big believer in using a quality product, especially as it concerns conditioner. The thing he's really getting at here that isn't clearly stated at all is that a lot of people have a lot of misinformation about hair, including things about natural highlights. I have had since babyhood one particular streak of much lighter hair, yet, over time, and most recently, it's slightly changed color - -but I am slowly becoming 50--so I know that this idea of some strips of hair being naturally higher color is in the spectrum--he isn't saying there's never a case of natural highlights, just that not all people who think it's natural it is actually natural. Here at LHC we have a population of folks educated and knowledgeable more than the average citizen out there, by a fair amount. Whenever I diatribe into all things hair, people are stunned and repeat at least 2-3 times, "OH, I never knew that." However, it's my understanding that a protocol in the salon is to clarify the hair before a chemical service is performed, to remove the potential of any buildup interfering with the performance of a chemical process. We are all aware of various ingredients included in hair care products that may not be so swell for our hair.

I'm not denying that build-up can and does occur, and that it can have detrimental effects on hair. I just think it can happen with quality products as much as cheap ones, depending on the ingredients. For instance, my 50p 'cone-free conditioner causes less build-up than an expensive salon-brand 'coney one. In other respects, the expensive one might be better, but it's the one more likely to cause build-up.



As for highlights being from the sun, some professionals would declare that this then, while 'natural' is not a good plan. This can have a drying effect on the hair, overexposure to sun. For example, the GM system warns to wear a hat or scarf, (or one could use an umbrella) to protect hair from overexposure in the sun. It can change hair's color.

Oh, I know it's not good for hair, and to be honest I hate my natural highlights. I'm just saying that there are many of us, myself included, whose hair bleaches incredibly easily and I'm not concerned enough about my appearance to miss out on things I enjoy for the sake of my hair. I often wear a hat if I'm outside, but that's not possible when I'm swimming, and sometimes it's awkward for other things.

I wasn't arguing whether or not they're good for the hair, just that IME if you've got highlights that you didn't do chemically, it's more likely to be from the sun than from build-up.



My read of him did not include at all that he's saying one must go to a salon to grow long hair. He has a chapter on the two services he strongly advocates be performed in a salon, proper trimming and chemical services. I agree with you that trimming can be done at home just fine, but so many people really do NOT know how to do this.

However, he's also perpetuating the myth that you need to have your hair trimmed regularly. I'm sure this is the case for some people, but not everyone. I've never met a single person IRL who actually gets their hair cut every 6-8 weeks, and their hair doesn't suffer for it. I would have agreed with him if he said that trimming is important a couple times a year, for instance, but I'm pretty sure he pulls out the 6-8 weeks.

I do think that overall the information he provides is useful and factual. However, these things are just things with which I disagree quite strongly, and I really don't think it's just because I don't heat-style or chemically-process my hair, or because I know a lot about hair. I think he's generalising a bit too much, mostly.