<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Natural Bias on the Beauty Brains?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thebeautybrains.com/2008/06/18/natural-bias-on-the-beauty-brains/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thebeautybrains.com/2008/06/18/natural-bias-on-the-beauty-brains/</link>
	<description>Cosmetic chemists answer your beauty product questions!  We are a group of cosmetic scientists who understand what the chemicals used in cosmetics really do, how products are tested, and what all the advertising means.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 05:27:39 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: machine</title>
		<link>http://thebeautybrains.com/2008/06/18/natural-bias-on-the-beauty-brains/comment-page-1/#comment-43804</link>
		<dc:creator>machine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:33:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebeautybrains.com/?p=2523#comment-43804</guid>
		<description>@Fuzz: I rinse my hair with acetic acid solution (1:1) every day. It&#039;s awesome!

@Janis: Tobacco doesn&#039;t kill. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uSDbfj7v3E&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;It&#039;s the smoke that kills.&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Fuzz: I rinse my hair with acetic acid solution (1:1) every day. It&#8217;s awesome!</p>
<p>@Janis: Tobacco doesn&#8217;t kill. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uSDbfj7v3E" rel="nofollow">It&#8217;s the smoke that kills.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sukhi</title>
		<link>http://thebeautybrains.com/2008/06/18/natural-bias-on-the-beauty-brains/comment-page-1/#comment-36035</link>
		<dc:creator>Sukhi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2009 06:43:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebeautybrains.com/?p=2523#comment-36035</guid>
		<description>Thank you for such a wonderful article. The work that you guys are doing is very much so appreciated. I was one of the people that fell into the trap of thinking that chemical ingredients were poisoning me. When I realized that the &quot;natural&quot; products and the regular ole&#039; stuff actually contained the same ingredients, listed usually the SAME way, or (even better)the &quot;natural&quot; stuff ended up being harsher on my skin, I figured that I was being duped. I followed up on that observation with some serious research. Thank you for clearing the air. Hopefully it will help people think a little more critically.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for such a wonderful article. The work that you guys are doing is very much so appreciated. I was one of the people that fell into the trap of thinking that chemical ingredients were poisoning me. When I realized that the &#8220;natural&#8221; products and the regular ole&#8217; stuff actually contained the same ingredients, listed usually the SAME way, or (even better)the &#8220;natural&#8221; stuff ended up being harsher on my skin, I figured that I was being duped. I followed up on that observation with some serious research. Thank you for clearing the air. Hopefully it will help people think a little more critically.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Even Natural Fragrances Can Be Irritating &#124; The Beauty Brains</title>
		<link>http://thebeautybrains.com/2008/06/18/natural-bias-on-the-beauty-brains/comment-page-1/#comment-36032</link>
		<dc:creator>Even Natural Fragrances Can Be Irritating &#124; The Beauty Brains</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2009 06:01:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebeautybrains.com/?p=2523#comment-36032</guid>
		<description>[...] we&#8217;ve blogged before, we&#8217;re all in favor of natural ingredients that are good for the environment or that provide a specific benefit that synthetic ingredients [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] we&#8217;ve blogged before, we&#8217;re all in favor of natural ingredients that are good for the environment or that provide a specific benefit that synthetic ingredients [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fuzz</title>
		<link>http://thebeautybrains.com/2008/06/18/natural-bias-on-the-beauty-brains/comment-page-1/#comment-34940</link>
		<dc:creator>Fuzz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 20:37:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebeautybrains.com/?p=2523#comment-34940</guid>
		<description>Dear vkb247,

You made some good points and are taking a logical approach that makes sense for you.

I like to comment on your 3rd point above. Many of the personal care ingredients under misinformation attack have been used, tried and tested for generations. Industry is being asked again and again to confirm the safety of ingredients that have been safely used for decades, e.g. Sodium Lauryl Sulfate. Also, there are no cleansers as old as humanity, not even soap. Soap is not natural, it&#039;s the result of the saponification of oils and fats with Sodium Hydroxide or Potassium Hydroxide. 

Cleansing the body of germs and soil and dirt reduces our exposure to pathogens. We live longer and healthier in part due to improved hygiene. And the mildness and safeness of cleansing ingredients is not a result of their origin. Soap is a good example, it is highly irritating to skin and eyes.

Where chemicals come from (natural sources or synthetic sources) does not make them more or less safe. It is the structure, use and exposure of chemicals that dictates their safety.

Humans are no more or less &quot;adapted&quot; to cleansing with soap or aloe than they are to SLS or betaines. We haven&#039;t been &quot;cleansing&quot; ourselves long enough overall to adapt to anything.

Adapting to eating something does not mean we are adapted to wearing it or putting it in our eyes. Exposure is a big part of adaptation (and toxicity for that matter). 

And although I would eat vinegar (acetic acid). I wouldn&#039;t wash my hair with it. It would be damaging by itself over time, but I&#039;d use it in a fully formulated product. Same is true for synthetic ingredients.

The &quot;natural&quot; food item out of your garden is a mixture of chemicals that would sound pretty scary if we listed them by their chemical names.

I like the &quot;adaptation&quot; angle you propose but I&#039;m wondering if you feel safer using &quot;natural&quot; products because their ingredients sound familiar.

Synthetic is not necessarily unsafe - it&#039;s just not something you can grow in your garden. 

And watchout for some of those food items - they can cause permanent eye damage. Remember, your stomach handles those food chemicals with a digestive cocktail that is as corrosive as Hydrochloric Acid. All your eyes have are salt water tears.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear vkb247,</p>
<p>You made some good points and are taking a logical approach that makes sense for you.</p>
<p>I like to comment on your 3rd point above. Many of the personal care ingredients under misinformation attack have been used, tried and tested for generations. Industry is being asked again and again to confirm the safety of ingredients that have been safely used for decades, e.g. Sodium Lauryl Sulfate. Also, there are no cleansers as old as humanity, not even soap. Soap is not natural, it&#8217;s the result of the saponification of oils and fats with Sodium Hydroxide or Potassium Hydroxide. </p>
<p>Cleansing the body of germs and soil and dirt reduces our exposure to pathogens. We live longer and healthier in part due to improved hygiene. And the mildness and safeness of cleansing ingredients is not a result of their origin. Soap is a good example, it is highly irritating to skin and eyes.</p>
<p>Where chemicals come from (natural sources or synthetic sources) does not make them more or less safe. It is the structure, use and exposure of chemicals that dictates their safety.</p>
<p>Humans are no more or less &#8220;adapted&#8221; to cleansing with soap or aloe than they are to SLS or betaines. We haven&#8217;t been &#8220;cleansing&#8221; ourselves long enough overall to adapt to anything.</p>
<p>Adapting to eating something does not mean we are adapted to wearing it or putting it in our eyes. Exposure is a big part of adaptation (and toxicity for that matter). </p>
<p>And although I would eat vinegar (acetic acid). I wouldn&#8217;t wash my hair with it. It would be damaging by itself over time, but I&#8217;d use it in a fully formulated product. Same is true for synthetic ingredients.</p>
<p>The &#8220;natural&#8221; food item out of your garden is a mixture of chemicals that would sound pretty scary if we listed them by their chemical names.</p>
<p>I like the &#8220;adaptation&#8221; angle you propose but I&#8217;m wondering if you feel safer using &#8220;natural&#8221; products because their ingredients sound familiar.</p>
<p>Synthetic is not necessarily unsafe &#8211; it&#8217;s just not something you can grow in your garden. </p>
<p>And watchout for some of those food items &#8211; they can cause permanent eye damage. Remember, your stomach handles those food chemicals with a digestive cocktail that is as corrosive as Hydrochloric Acid. All your eyes have are salt water tears.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Best of the Beauty Brains 2008 &#124; 1800blogger</title>
		<link>http://thebeautybrains.com/2008/06/18/natural-bias-on-the-beauty-brains/comment-page-1/#comment-34729</link>
		<dc:creator>Best of the Beauty Brains 2008 &#124; 1800blogger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:40:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebeautybrains.com/?p=2523#comment-34729</guid>
		<description>[...] preservative free cosmetics 7. Logical does not mean true 8. Hypocrisy in the beauty industry 9. Natural bias on the Beauty Brains 10. EWG misleads consumers about [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] preservative free cosmetics 7. Logical does not mean true 8. Hypocrisy in the beauty industry 9. Natural bias on the Beauty Brains 10. EWG misleads consumers about [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
