Tina’s turmoil: I have been along time reader of another blog called Killer Strands and the writer (Dakota Ellis/Killer Chemist) is a hair colourist and a cosmetic chemist who has tested sulphate shampoos and proved it does fade color and may cause premature hair loss. She mentions it’s very caustic when smelled and may cause you to to faint when opening a jar of SLS !
The Left Brain’s reply:
Sulfate shampoos do cause fading however, they do not cause more fading than other types of shampoos. I can say that because I specifically evaluated all types of shampoos in unpublished research. But until that is published, it’s just hearsay. If you really wanted to prove it to yourself, use 2 different shampoos on each side of your head the next time you get your color done. One should be a sulfate based shampoo and the other should be non-sulfate based. After 5-10 washes you will not likely see any color difference between the two.
Dangerous sulfates?
The idea that sulfates make your hair fall out is just not true. No cosmetic chemist has ever proven this. Furthermore, while they are powerful degreasers and can dry out hair and skin, they are not caustic. And the notion that you will faint just by smelling a sulfate detergent is ridiculous. Sulfates have a weak, bland odor (it’s true that inhaling concentrated SLS can irritate your nasal passages but that will not make you faint.)
We have been in the cosmetic and personal care industry for many years and have not come across any published scientific study to show that sulfates are the worst thing for your hair color or would make your hair fall out. I suspect if you asked the Killer Strands folks for their data they won’t have any. And without the data, it’s just an unvalidated opinion.
Killer Strands
I looked up the Killer Strands website and it appears to be very professional and it contains a lot of good information. Dakota is doing a find job, but I couldn’t find any references to specific studies backing up her statements. You need to consider that while Killer Strands does make some good points, they are also trying to sell you their products and services.
The Beauty Brains bottom line
The Beauty Brains do not and will not sell cosmetic products. We do not recommend specific product brands and we encourage people to make up their own minds about what to buy. We present the unbiased science. If someone is trying to sell you a product, you have to read with skepticism everything that they write. It doesn’t matter if they are cosmetic chemists, board certified colorists, or dermatologists. Once a piece of writing is put out there with the intent to convince you to buy a specific type of product, watch out. The information is suspect.
What do YOU think? Have you noticed that different shampoos cause your hair to fade differently? Leave a colorful comment for the rest of the Beauty Brains community.
Loading ...
{ 24 comments… read them below or add one }
Once again, thank you, O Voice of Reason and Sanity!
I’m getting a bit sick of the sulfate naysaying. Aside from the singular lack of evidence, three reasons:
(1) There’s a world of difference between concentrated pure Ingredient X and a small quantity of X, in solution, mixed with other ingredients.
(2) Many of the attacks on sulfates refer to its alleged colour-stripping, hair-damaging, etc. effects on coloured and otherwise treated hair (chemically and by heat: so, yes, including those folks who must use the blow-dryer before stepping out the door). But on such treated hair, there are other factors to take into account, that are more directly responsible for the hair’s condition: namely the way it’s been treated…
(3) Sulfates are a happy medium between stronger detergents (such as in washing-up liquid) and very very mild cleansing agents (sulfosuccinates and the like). The Scylla and Charibdes of over-cleaning and under-cleaning. Using a super-mild shampoo may mean using more of it, several times over, and scrubbing more at the scalp to get it clean; amongst other things, this can result in greater loosening of the hair at the root… and an increased chance of it falling out.
On the other hand, the one factor that should be taken into account, on the sulfates, is that some people have more irritable skins than others, individual irritants will vary, and some individuals cannot tolerate sulfate-based cleansers on their skin (be that scalp, face, hands, points between, combinations thereof,…).
But taking a suitably-sized sample of any given commenting population, even with a bias (however unscientific) against sufates – say, the Hair board on MUA, or the Long Hair Forum – and you’ll find only a tiny minority (I estimate under 5%) of the sulfate naysayers state irritation as their reason for avoiding sulfates.
Nuff said. I love ‘em – because they clean my hair, fast, and it isn’t coming out (and is untreated and I eat properly, which I *do* think helps).
Thank you for de-bunking another sulfate-related myth. Entire companies have been built on their alleged horrors, yet as you mentioned, the research isn’t there to prove this group of detergent cleansing agents is worse for hair than others (though sodium lauryl sulfate can be too drying to hair and scalp).
Juliet! I didn’t know that sulfosuccinates were a milder version of sulfates! Thanks for the heads up… i’m obsessed with surfactants.
Wait, you forgot to mention that Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS) is used as the irritation standard in surfactant testing and that it is used in concrete cleaners! And although both statements are true, have you ever seen a shampoo with just Water and Sodium Lauryl Sulfate? Of course not! Lemons have a lemon flavor and are sour. You use sugar in lemonade to reduce the sourness but you still get the flavor. Same thing in shampoos. Other ingredients are used to reduce the irritation while still getting the super foam of SLS. People understand about mixing foods, and they can understand about mixing cosmetic ingredients. Just need to tell them.
What Science Says About Sodium Lauryl Sulfate
In its final report on the safety of sodium lauryl sulfate, the Journal of the American College of Toxicology notes that this ingredient has a “degenerative effect on the cell membranes because of its protein denaturing properties.” What’s more, the journal adds, “high levels of skin penetration may occur at even low use concentration.”
Interestingly, sodium lauryl sulfate “is used around the world in clinical studies as a skin irritant,” notes the journal. The publication expressed additional concerns:
Carcinogenic nitrosamines can form in the manufacturing of sodium lauryl sulfate or by its inter-reaction with other nitrogen-bearing ingredients within a formulation utilizing this ingredient.
Other studies have indicated that sodium lauryl sulfate enters and maintains residual levels in the heart, liver, lungs and brain from skin contact. This poses the question whether it could be a serious potential health threat from its use in shampoos, cleansers, and toothpastes.
Still other research has indicated sodium lauryl sulfate may be damaging to the immune system, especially within the skin. Skin layers may separate and inflame due to its protein denaturing properties.
Although sodium lauryl sulfate is not carcinogenic in experimental studies, it has been shown that it causes severe epidermal changes in the area it is applied, indicating a need for tumor-enhancing assays.
Additional studies have found that sodium lauryl sulfate is heavily deposited on the skin surface and in the hair follicles. Damage to the hair follicle could result from such deposition.
Threat to Eye Health
Damaging effects of sodium lauryl sulfate on eye health are also of concern. In experimental, acute eye tests, a solution of 10 percent sodium lauryl sulfate “caused corneal damage to the . . . eyes if not irrigated or irrigation was delayed.”
A solution of 5.1 percent “caused mild irritation.”
Further, according to the Journal of the American College of Toxicology, “Tests show permanent eye damage in young animals from skin contact in non-eye areas. Studies indicated sodium lauryl sulfate kept young eyes from developing properly by possibly denaturing the proteins and not allowing for proper structural formation. This damage was permanent.”
According experts on the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) panel (established by the Cosmetic Toiletry, and Fragrance Association, a cosmetic industry trade association), both sodium lauryl sulfate and its close chemical cousin ammonium lauryl sulfate “appear to be safe in formulations designed for discontinuous, brief use followed by thorough rinsing from the surface of the skin.”
It should be recognized that shampoos represent such brief, discontinuous use products that are thoroughly rinsed, thus clearly minimizing the risk from sodium lauryl sulfate. It should also be recognized that many people shampoo daily, and we really do not know whether a lot of little exposures to sodium lauryl sulfate are dangerous or not.
Given the lack of adequate research and suggestive evidence, however, we believe it might be wise for health-conscious consumers to seek products without sodium lauryl sulfate, especially with regard to young children. Indeed, consumers have the power to choose safe and perhaps even better products without sodium lauryl sulfate.
This may be a very wise choice for another reason. We have found very often the presence of sodium lauryl sulfate in a shampoo formulation is a “marker” for the use of other undesirable ingredients, including formaldehyde-containing preservatives (e.g., imidazolidinyl urea); possible cancer-causing wetting agents (e.g., cocamide DEA); and nitrosamine-forming agents (e.g., triethanolamine). Also, it should be mentioned that in Germany, where there is a concerted effort underway now to label cosmetics and personal care products as certified natural, formulations containing sodium lauryl sulfate, ammonium lauryl sulfate or sodium laureth sulfate cannot be so certified, reports Michael Wrightson, president of Logona Kosmetik.
Whats even more humerous to me is how SLS is being removed from shampoo’s continually yet it is kept on the down low. Why are they removing the ingredient if it is so safe?
Also, you should in fact place the response from Dakota Ellis/Killer Chemist that she has sent you.
“Final report on the safety assessment of sodium lauryl sulfate.” Journal of the American College of Toxicology; 1983; 2(7).
“Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of lauric acid diethanolamine condensate (CAS NO. 120-40-1) in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice (dermal studies).” National Toxicology Program, TR-480.
“The Beauty Brains 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.”
I would be curious as to who you, as a groupd of cosmetic scientists, work for? Meaning: What company/companies do you work for? Who pays you? I can’t suppose that you are scientists and work for free- just being scientists and doing research for pure fun and our enlightenment, and do not have bills to pay, so like everyone else…you likely have a boss who pays you. What company or companies do you all happen to work for?
You’ve peaked my curiosity.
Beauty Brains,
Seems SS has debunked your theory on SLS, seem you should do a little better research on the issue.
There are many reports that not only back that up but make SLS sound much worse.
Am also interested in Kris’, comment. Why don’t you explain to all of us who you DO work for, certainly you are not doing this out of the kindness of your heart?
Cosmetic Chemists that work for nothing? I doubt it. Not in this lifetime
BTW, you need to review Killerstrands, she doesn’t sell shampoo – she only reviews it… with a silly response like that — makes me wonder….
KC
KC: First of all, who ever said we’re doing this out of the goodness of our hearts? We really do enjoy helping people learn about cosmetics, but we cover our expenses with advertising and we make money off our book sales.
Second, SS did not “debunk” our theory on SLS. It’s not really our theory. All we’re saying is that we haven’t seen compelling data against SLS. We’ll take a look at the studies SS referenced and we’re HAPPY to change our position if the data supports it.
Third: Unless I’m missing something, Killer Strands does sell products. In fact, she says she developed “Thriven” which she sells via her website.
Anyway, thanks for your comments!
Cosmetic scientists work for cosmetic COMPANIES. They don’t become scientists and just write books. They have experience working with cosmetics through cosmetic companies. What comapanies do you work for? I would have to assume this website with its paid advertising and book sales is a SIDE job, as I doubt you make enough money off the advertising and book sales to support the website AND a GROUP of scientists and their families. So one would have to say you are also selling something…books and advertising. So whos to say you can be unbiased when “telling it like it is?” I’m not a Killerstrands member, but I know that SLS fades my hair color FASTER than my non SLS shampoos do. I realized that the first month I started coloring my hair. Its a difference between my color lasting 3 weeks verses it lasting 5-6. I also realized I get contact dermatitis on my scalp from SLS based shampoos, which does make my hair shed, and that I get canker sores from SLS based toothpaste. Since I simply switched to NON SLS bases products years ago now, the canker sores and scalp dermatitis are gone and stay away. I had those problems since I was a child. To say its completely safe is a very generalized statement, as it sure isn’t safe for me, and many others out there. I’m sure many can use it without incident. And there are very strong studies to suggest it is not in fact, good for people to use. When you accept advertising money for your website and work for cosmetic companies, that suggests you may have an alterior motive in saying SLS is safe, does not cause hair loss or fade hair color. To me, that is not unbiased.
Killerstrand sells products, but it appears by the site that shes upfront about it. You sell books and advertising, and are giving an opinion of a main ingredient of many cheap and some better end shampoos (though as you know, that is changing due to consumer demand) so who is to say you aren’t being paid by the same companies that sells these types of shampoos? Thats a little less upfront.
Kris: Our mission is to get people to think objectively about their beauty care products. If you read our blog regularly you’ll find that most of the time we tell our readers that beauty products DON’T live up to all the hype.
That’s why we blog anonymously – so we can state our unbiased opinions.
If you want to believe we’re secretly getting paid off by the big cosmetic companies to promote SLS that’s your choice. But that’s a silly notion considering how often we bash those same companies.
I didn’t say you were “promoting” SLS or “secretly” getting paid. I think you are getting paid right in the open, like any employer would pay their employees. I said you aren’t decidedly unbiased or objective, due to that. SLS is in many different products we use on a daily basis. Shampoo, hand soap, dish washing liquid, detergents. Its used widely because of how cheap it is. Its very basicly, a cheap degreaser. I would think a large company who makes these products such as Procter and Gamble or Johnson and Johnson would frown highly upon their employees suggesting that a main ingredient they use is “unsafe” in any way, shape or form. You might be writing annonymously, but are still being paid by a cosmetics maker who may or may not know about your side job. And the reports you have reviewed about SLS being safe…are those studies done by a cosmetics company, or are they done by a seperate, unbiased testing facility?
An actual unbiased opinion can only be accepted as truth when we know all the facts about whos giving the opinion: such as who you might work for, who might be paying you and what might constitute an agenda- Which isn’t silly at all.
I have read the blog now and then, and was suprised by this latest review about SLS, as it is becoming widely accepted and public knowledge that SLS is not as safe for our hair, skin or health as was originally thought (just like once smoking was considered safe, and how they are discovering many plastic water bottles aren’t- and those are now being filtered out of the market and pulled from shelves.) SLS is being slowly filtered out of the products we use, not because we all think its safe and harmless, but because the public is saying we don’t wish to use this anymore because we feel, due to the emerging evidence, that its either unsafe or detrimental to our health. The cosmetics companies are then forced to listen and act appropriately, or they begin to lose customers. But they surely aren’t going to concede that SLS is unsafe, as that opens them up to liability and lawsuits.
You definately got me thinking objectively about your reviewing, so thank you
Nitrosamines are not formed during the production of SLS. That’s just wrong.
People are taking SLS out of their formulas but they are replacing it with SLES. This still contains a large amount of SLS.
Cosmetic companies are cowards who will change formulas whenever an ingredient gets bad press. That doesn’t have anything to do with whether the ingredient is bad or not.
I personally think that Sulfates cause premature hair loss. I am only 35 and have very thin hair in the crown. When washing my hair with a normal shampoo, my hair would come in my hands. I have switched to a sulfate free shampoo and don’t have neraly as much hair loss as I did. Ironic? I don’t know, but i am sticking with the Sulfate free shampoos.
What about formalydehyde? I have some Palmolive shampoo from Asia that makes my hair look and feel great, but I don’t ever want to use it because it contains that chemical. I have four bottles of it too!
To tell you the truth, formaldehyde may actually be effective for keeping color in your hair.
dakota aka KC (Killer Colorist)is the owner of the ” Killer Strands” web site. Her only purpose is to sell you her “consult” , her self made products (ie – “THRIVEN” ) and her store bought products – which you can buy cheaper at Sally’s and/ or on ebay .She is aso a liar because she DOES sell shampoo. She sells various sulfate free shampoos on her site that you can buy on ebay for much cheaper!!!!She is un professional as you can see from some of the “KC” comments very rude too!!! She’s only out to make a buck….dont trust her or her products!!!!!!
Well, I really appreciate the unbiased information provided on “the beauty brains”. Use the site as a reference all the time!
Kris: the Brains told you how they make their money and you chose not to believe them, instead choosing to believe that they are being paid by a cosmetics company (no matter what they say), and ignoring the fact that the Brains don’t promote products and chemicals? Wow.
Chew: There are a lot of reasons your hair could be thinning besides the type of shampoo. Many women, including me unfortunately, experience thinning in their mid- to late- 30′s because of perimenopause.
I am allergic to sulfa…I quit my (years of) routine visits to beauty salons as I noticed that every time I had my hair done, I immediately got a headache and nose/eyes congested. As I’ve aged, it seemed to get worse. I have long suspected it had something to do w/the products, but I didn’t want to give up on the salons. When I used “regular” shampoos at home, I found I had similar results. Yesterday I discovered non-sulfate hair products at Target and went crazy buying the products…I used them last night and I feel a definite difference. I had never thought to try to read the tiny print of ingredients and find what was causing my problem. After researching my sulfa allergy, I decided to read labels on my “beauty” products–I was flabergasted! Everything had sulfa derivatives! I now will carry a magnifying glass to read ingredients before buying anything!
The “Sulfate free” products are getting a lot of attention, but a certain biochemist I’ve had the pleasure of chatting with has said that the surfactants being used in place of SLS are not really much different, and in some cases, are less effective and equally irritating. A lot of the raves over sulfate free products are a great example of placebo effect.
As for KC (aka Dakota from Killerstrands), she does indeed sell shampoos, and various other products, and she gives her list members a verbal flogging if they dare mention another product they like, or suggest that a less expensive product worked better than her own overhyped, overpriced conditioner, Thriven. In fact, she is quite abusive to her group members even if they are just having an innocent discussion or asking an innocent question. She’s got to be the greediest, rudest, most selfish (and petulant!) vendor I’ve had the misfortune of doing busniess with.
Actually, she’s probably no more greedy than the major retailers, but she’s exponentially worse at hiding it.
I just found this site with talk about SLS-free shampoos and that they do not cause hair loss. I agree with what Chew wrote in 2008. I have very thin hair, and began seeing much more thinning in the last few years. It got to the point I would not go to a beauty salon for hair trims anymore, as I was so embarassed at how much hair came out after a shampoo, it was handfuls. I read about how damaging SLS in shampoos is and began using organic SLS-free shampoo 6 months ago and am now seeing MUCH less hair coming out after shampooing. To me that is proof of the damaging effects of SLS, how else can this be explained?
Sulfates do not cause cancer: http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/household/shampoo.asp
Sulfates definitely are bad for your hair and scalp and could cause hair loss. A great hair loss shampoo without any sulfates is Regenepure. They list all of their ingredients and benefits of each on their website at http://www.Regenepure.com. Do your research and if you have hair loss issues use Regenepure DR with Ketoconazole. Keto has been known to grow hair, you van find studies on Ketoconazole throughout the internet. It is an antifungal also used for dandruff.
There are many excellent new alternate options when making using combos of cures in a topical style that may significantly increase hair growth. Waxing, instead of yanking, rests and opens the skin follicles together with it’s temperature therefore will not increase hair growth simply because hair usually do not fully feel just as if they are being ripped away from your pore. A very different ways to correctly increase hair growth is usually to be sure that you’re obtaining an enough level of the correct vitamins and minerals.
eh, given the choice between a REALLY good hair day and the POSSIBILITY that I might inhale a few noxious fumes, sorry but my vanity wins out. I’m going with the good hair day.