http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/categories/controversial-topics/p2/feed.rss Sun, 19 May 13 16:05:43 -0400 Click here to visit the Beauty Brains blog. Controversial Topics - Beauty Questions Answered en-CA http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/1496/what-is-the-world-coming-to Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:49:21 -0400 sarahf 1496@/bbforum/discussions http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/1463/cool-blog-post Thu, 20 May 2010 00:11:47 -0400 lelalela 1463@/bbforum/discussions
http://ktanihairsense.blogspot.com/2009/12/natrual-products-for-hair.html

just wanted to share.]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/1108/what-do-you-think-of-the-new-guidelines-on-mammograms-for-women-under-50 Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:53:13 -0500 Left Brain 1108@/bbforum/discussions
Mammograms save lives: THERE IS NO DOUBT


Mammograms save lives in women 40 to 49 and over 50: THERE IS NO DOUBT


One-third of women are not being screened due to lack of access, education or awareness: THERE IS NO DOUBT

But the scientists & doctors who have reviewed the peer reviewed scientific data have concluded that there is no benefit to testing women from ages 40 - 49 and are recommending tests at 50 and above.
So, do you put your faith in science or something else?
The thing I find interesting about this list of facts is that it seems that it would also be true that Mammograms save lives in women 30 - 39.  And probably even women from 20 - 29. 
Shouldn't we then advocate giving mammograms to every women every year?]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/1104/products-with-preservatives-vs.-preservative-free-products Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:20:15 -0500 MistyAnn 1104@/bbforum/discussions First off, there are no right or wrong answers when it comes to things such as cosmetics containing preservatives or preservative-free cosmetics. The problem with society is that we rely too much on man for all the answers. As the population in this world continues to grow, we can no longer just put meat on ice and preserve it with salt, unfortunately...so we use preservatives so that we can process more food to feed an over-populated society. Well, unless of course you butcher your own meat or get it from a local butcher. Same with cosmetics.
If you are the one making the cosmetics, of course you don't have to rely on the store to buy any and you'll be able to use your cosmetics before they become contaminated. If any of you are Christians or even believe the possibility that God exists, then you should realize that he knew before he created us that we would have to rely on preservatives and whatnot for our needs. Therefore, I believe we were created to be able to withstand any so called "harsh" chemicals in moderate amounts. People underestimate the power of God. We can't just live in fear everyday and believe that anything and everything we use will cause cancer. (For the thing I greatly feared has come upon me, and what I dreaded has happened to me. - Job 3:25)
God is the ultimate creator and therefore he decides when and how we die, whether people want to accept that or not. Why should we be so paranoid about what we are exposed to everyday? The air we BREATHE has toxins. Why? the 3 letter word called SIN. Sin destroyed this world. Sure, everyone SHOULD eat healthy such as eating plenty of fruits and vegetables, drink lots of water and not try to RUSH death by doing things to harm our body even more than exposure to a few chemicals...like DRINKING and SMOKING! This is where the scripture Matthew 4:7 should make some sense. “It is written again, ‘You shall not tempt the LORD your God.’”
That would be like me jumping out in the middle of the road while a car is coming at 70+mph and saying "well God will prevent this car from injuring my body." Drinking and ESPECIALLY Smoking is purposely destroying your health. God knows I have to shower every day, or rather WANT to...as it is I live at home with my parents because I can't afford to live on my own (can someone say economic depression??) Therefore I can't afford to live a 100% organic lifestyle, this including organic shampoos, soaps, and cosmetics. TOO expensive! and I don't always have access to stuff like that. I practically live in the middle of nowhere away from the majority of society.
I have a great uncle that lived to be about 90 years old that used DAWN Dishwashing Soap to wash his hair EVERY DAY and died without a single gray hair on his HEAD! and guess what? I may only be 23, but so far I have been very blessed and fortunate to be the ONLY one in my house that has never needed to be admitted to the hospital for injuries, medical issues, etc. I've never even had a headache, and by the way I use your average shampoo and my hairdresser says I have the healthiest head of hair she's ever worked on. Then again I don't dye, highlight or anything else that can damage your hair in time. I just wash it with regular shampoo and I let it air dry. I rarely use a hairdryer unless I know I have to go out in cold weather.
My point is, I eat healthy and occasionally I enjoy sweets and chocolate, and I use your average store bought products for every day use and i'm not on my death bed. If these Organic companies want us to purchase their products then they need to make them CHEAPER! People can't afford stuff like that in this economy. While also make it available at a big store chain like Walmart or something so folks like me that live in the middle of nowhere can have easier access to it rather than only having the option of buying it online. In conclusion, i'll leave you with this... "Whoever shall seek to save his life shall lose, and whoever seeks to lose his life shall save it." - Luke 17:33]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/1016/sulfate-free-surfactants Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:41:31 -0400 lavoisier 1016@/bbforum/discussions
What about naming SLS as natrium lauroxy sulfonate? After all, soap is now being called saponified oil. Is this an accepted INCI name?]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/962/the-acai-berry-hoax Sat, 08 Aug 2009 15:22:52 -0400 megadragon 962@/bbforum/discussions
Really want to know before I try it, don’t want to spend serious bucks for fruit juice, because fruit juice has tons of sugar and wouldn’t that be a trip, buy it and it does nothing but taste sweet, because so does fresh fruit which is probably healthier and for sure cheaper.

Does acai berry really work as a weight loss cleanse?

I once tried master cleanse, way too harsh, couldn’t stick with it want something I can live with just found a website for a product compared to acai http://www.nulean-acaiberrydiet.com never heard of this, anyone know anything about it? Thanks. :)]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/386/jan-marini-age-intervention-eyelash-conditioner Fri, 05 Sep 2008 08:10:09 -0400 barbie 386@/bbforum/discussions http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/574/zinclear-im-micron-sized-but-transparent.-any-thoughts Mon, 05 Jan 2009 07:41:14 -0500 laz 574@/bbforum/discussions http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/12/how-do-you-make-your-eyelashes-grow Wed, 01 Aug 2007 22:09:22 -0400 LeftBrain 12@/bbforum/discussions Essentially, these products are claimed to actually stimulate hair growth at your eyelashes. The Beauty Brains have said they are skeptical and have been examining published proof. You can read some of the back and forth discussion about the proof and lack-there-of of these products at the following link Jan Marini admits product does not promote hair growth
The Beauty Brains are still not convinced that these products are worth the money, are safe, or even work. Are you able to show some proof that they should change their minds? What do you do to make your eyelashes thicker and fuller?
Skepticism means your mind can be changed with the right proof.]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/252/do-kinoki-foot-pads-really-work Mon, 31 Mar 2008 07:52:28 -0400 Left Brain 252@/bbforum/discussions While we love the passionate discussion, the shear number of comments is causing the website to run slower.  Therefore, we've closed comments on that thread and are directing people to leave their comments on the forum in this thread.  The forum is much better equiped to handle more discussion.
My take on the Kinoki Foot pads is that they are a complete scam and will have no effect on the level of toxins in your body.  If people use them and happen to notice they feel better, it is merely a placebo effect.
Any one else care to weigh in?
 ]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/27/how-do-you-feel-about-arbonne-products Mon, 06 Aug 2007 20:46:22 -0400 LeftBrain 27@/bbforum/discussions the Beauty Brains is Arbonne. Some people swear that these are the greatest products and the best business opportunity a woman can be involved in. The Left Brain is skeptical of the claims and the Right Brain, well you know how the Right Brain is.

You can read our review of Arbonne products here

Arbonne Product first review
Did the Beauty Brains botch the Arbonne review
Arbonne Technology

But tell the rest of the community what you think.

Have you ever used Arbonne?
Do you think they are the best products you can buy?
Are they worth the money?]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/448/oxybenzone-ist-safe Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:46:00 -0400 marzenkak 448@/bbforum/discussions http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/440/dermaviduals-range Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:56:56 -0400 mo 440@/bbforum/discussions They claim that all their products are 100% free of preservatives, emulsifiers, colors, fragrance, mineral oils & Silicons. For a change, they are not Organic or Herbal.

As expected, the prices are quite steep & they seem to be based upon a science called "Corneotherapy".
I would wait for the Beauty Brains to figure this out before I jump in with all my excitement.]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/433/skin-healthy-diets Mon, 13 Oct 2008 20:43:00 -0400 darkeyes 433@/bbforum/discussions My acne is finally under control but my skin looks dull and very blotchy and just ehh. I really want nice, clear glowing skin!
Can a skin healthy diet help me achieve my goal?
Share your experiences! :)]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/392/are-you-going-pink-this-october Sun, 14 Sep 2008 13:34:34 -0400 Lynnette 392@/bbforum/discussions I found this website quite some time ago when I was trying to research just how much of our donations actually go toward research. You may want to check this site out before you "pink."
http://www.thinkbeforeyoupink.org
You may find you no longer want to contribute to some organizations.
buenos dias,
Lynnette
 

This is one of the links to the above:
http://thinkbeforeyoupink.org/Pages/CosmeticCompanies.html]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/344/questions-about-talc Fri, 08 Aug 2008 18:02:39 -0400 Dreniva 344@/bbforum/discussions http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/13/mineral-oil-mania-what-do-you-think-of-the-stuff Wed, 01 Aug 2007 23:07:05 -0400 LeftBrain 13@/bbforum/discussions
http://thebeautybrains.com/2006/11/28/the-top-5-myths-about-mineral-oil-part-1/
http://thebeautybrains.com/2006/12/01/myths-about-mineral-oil-part-2/

But that's just what we think. What do you think Beauty Brains community? Are you a mineral oil hater, lover or you don't give it much thought? And why? What proof do you have that it's great or it's terrible?]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/280/tanning Sat, 17 May 2008 13:46:19 -0400 rach4588 280@/bbforum/discussions  
I was wondering what your thoughts were on indoor tanning? good or bad? ]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/143/lets-talk-supplements-who-takes-them-and-why Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:31:39 -0500 Left Brain 143@/bbforum/discussions colloidal silver to be a bit disturbing. It is more evidence for me on why taking food supplements is generally not worthwhile. If you eat enough fruits, vegetables and fish, a supplement isn't going provide much benefit. On the other hand, if your diet isn't so great maybe they will help. I don't know. I remain skeptical of food supplements for the following reasons.

1. They are not regulated so they can lie about their benefits/effectiveness.
2. There is no guarantee they are safe. (since they aren't regulated)
3. There is no guarantee you're getting what you think you're getting.
4. There is limited proof that they have any benefits.
5. There is some proof that certain supplements are dangerous and interfere with prescription drugs.

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of supplements. If they actually worked to increase my life expectancy, health or appearance I'd take them in a minute. It would be much nicer than having to slather gobs of lotion on my skin or eating Brussels sprouts.

What do you think? Do you take supplements? Love 'em, hate 'em? :neutral:]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/151/ageless-beauty Fri, 16 Nov 2007 08:16:26 -0500 Judy 151@/bbforum/discussions
http://www.salon.com/mwt/col/tenn/2007/11/15/older_beauty/index.html?source=rss&aim=/mwt/col/tenn

Aging is such an obsession amongst Americans...especially those of us who are Baby Boomers and STILL have never grown up. And the beauty business is all too aware of this...hence the profusion of anti-aging products which presents us with the illusion that the physical signs of aging can be arrested or even eliminated.

Are you more concerned with loosing your YOUTH or your YOUTHFUL LOOKS? What fears does aging bring up for you as a woman? Wrinkles or dementia? For me it is the latter. I can live with wrinkles but the thought of losing myself is far more frightening. OK...OK...this is getting a bit deep for a beauty blog!

Please discuss! And if we have any guys out there PLEASE weigh in!]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/177/article-on-spas-and-manicures-what-do-you-think Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:06:56 -0500 hanna 177@/bbforum/discussions
http://fakinggoodbreeding.blogspot.com/2007/12/politics-of-pampering.html

I'm curious what the rest of you think? Do you regularly get manicures or facials, and what do you think about the implicit power dynamics involved in these procedures? Why do you get these things done as opposed to doing them yourself or with a group of friends?]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/163/pueraria-mirifica-breast-enlargment Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:39:28 -0500 darkeyes 163@/bbforum/discussions
I know I should be skeptical about breat enhancement from an herb...and I am...but I am just interested in finding more info about this herb.

Anyone else heard about this....or tired it? Does it really work?

Sorry, I meant the National Cancer Institute.]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/142/response-to-animal-testing-post-warning-long Fri, 09 Nov 2007 18:35:43 -0500 bixbybear 142@/bbforum/discussions fyi: the original thread is http://thebeautybrains.com/2007/11/07/not-everyone-is-against-animal-testing/


(takes a deep breath)

Brains, I agree with you on so many issues and respect your expertise and knowledge. However, this issue is an important one for me, and some of your statements confuse me.

First of all, I hate, hate, HATE that PETA is seen as the ONLY proponent of moving away from all animal testing. Personally? I don't like PETA, at all. I think they're a shady organization whose extremist, aggressive, intentionally controversial tactics give a bad name to ANYONE who supports more humane treatment of animals.

Also, even though I don't like PETA and find it very frustrating that they're often cited as the only example of animal rights groups, I don't think the comparison between PETA's practice of euthanasia and animal testing is appropriate. IIRC, you guys mentioned use of logical fallacies to a poster recently--is the "Well, but PETA euthanizes animals!" not a perfect example of a red herring, or even a "two wrongs make a right?"

Anyway, I remember reading an article last month in the NY Times (which I am well aware is not a scientific, peer-reviewed journal, but it does put some more complex scientific issues into layman's speak, and I generally trust the NY Times as a news source) about alternatives to animal testing. I also think it presents both sides of the argument, which is always a good thing. I found the link, and I'll post it here--I'd be interested to have the Brains (and anyone else!) read it and get your thoughts.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/12/technology/techspecial/12animal.html?pagewanted=1

It's not too long, and I do think it's worth reading for anyone who's interested in this issue.

It seems from this article that in-vitro human testing is the most prominent area of emerging non-animal testing, but the article also mentions virtual testing and testing microdoses in humans.

I found it to be a very interesting article (and it even mentions P&G and L'Oreal)--particularly because of the assertion that a move towards non-animal testing is, for the most part, LESS about the image/publicity issues and more about the scientific and financial issues--reliability, error risk, and the apparently much higher costs for animal testing vs. in-vitro or virtual testing.

I couldn't find on the NY Times website an additional article or link to the "recent study from the National Academy of Sciences, which was sponsored by the Environmental Protection Agency," but if anyone else can find it, that'd be helpful. The article states that "the study concluded that over time, the use of animals for testing could be greatly reduced and possibly eliminated."

Okay, two more quick things and then I'll shut up (hehe). One, I think the extermination issue is quite different in that the rats and mice being killed *do* pose a potential health risk to the humans around them. Mice and rats are big disease carriers! The Hantavirus alone is fatal more often than not. Extermination is probably not the *most* humane way to eliminate or reduce rodent populations in homes, but this is an issue where it can be directly human life vs. rodent life. And yes, in that debate, human life always takes priority IMO.

Last thing--back to the euthanasia comparison. The idea of euthanasia is that it is used as a painless way to kill animals who are unadoptable, are adoptable but cannot find a home, or animals who are sick/injured beyond reasonable recovery. The key word, of course, is painless.

One could compare the use of euthanasia to the Coca-Cola testing controversy back in May (of this year). From another NY times article about the Coca-Cola (and the Pom/PepsiCo) controversy--

"...particularly when it involves tests on highly intelligent animals, as did a study involving a Coca-Cola scientist, financed by Nutrasweet, that cut open the faces of chimpanzees to study nerve impulses used in the perception of sweet tastes."

(http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/31/business/31testing.html?_r=1&oref=login)

In comparison, I really doubt that was painless for the chimpanzees...

A big thank you to anyone who made it this far! I'd love to hear some more thoughts on this, and I apologize if this came off as rude or too blunt!

Lisa]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/133/what-do-you-think-of-nanotechnology Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:23:40 -0400 Left Brain 133@/bbforum/discussions Nanotechnology and how the FDA doesn't see it as a problem for cosmetics.

Of course there are lots of groups like the EWG who would disagree. There are even some who see nanotechnology leading to the end of civilization in a thing called the Grey goo hypothesis.

I was just curious how the other Beauty Brains out there feel about nanotechnology. Do you like it? hate it? afraid of it? are clueless about it? What do you think? Inquiring brains want to know...:neutral:]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/113/do-cancer-causing-ingredient-in-your-cosmetics-scare-you Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:23:33 -0400 Left Brain 113@/bbforum/discussions Brains Beauty Newsflash whether there are any "safe" levels of carcinogenic materials. Since you find these kinds of materials in foods you eat, cigarettes, and alcohol clearly there is a safe level. Did you know your body even naturally produces Formaldehyde?

Does the presence of known carcinogens in your cosmetics scare you? :shocked:]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/44/could-we-schedule-some-scent-sitivity-training Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:50:30 -0400 Mactans 44@/bbforum/discussions
One point that makes me a huge fan of Paula's skin care products - there is no fragrance, not even the so-called "masking fragrance" that some manufacturers put in supposedly "fragrance free" products.

I have a seriously throat-itching-can't-breathe-get-to-the-doctor allergic reaction (anaphylaxis) to artificial fragrance; I take medication so that the lovely scent someone else has on merely makes me miserable instead of threatening my well-being, and so that I can actually function out in the real world. Wearing artificially fragranced products myself is in no way an option. I can wear natural scent as long as there is no artificial component - my favorite lip balm is Lizard Lips Xtreme SPF22 (coconut and sweet almond oils - yummy!) - but finding such products that meet my other requirements is not easy.

I'm incredibly picky about what I use. Finding products that do what they say, leave my skin feeling wonderful, and have no artificial fragrance is an ongoing challenge; it often seems that as soon as I find one, it is discontinued. You would not believe how long it took me to find a scent-free antiperspirant (Almay). Formulations constantly change, so a product I can't wear this season may be just fine next year and my current favorite might make me ill the next time I buy it. However, I choose to look at it as an adventure, with the silver lining that my awareness of skin care and makeup products has been heightened by necessity.

So, is anyone else here hypersensitive to fragrance, either artificial or natural? How do you deal with the situation? What products do you use?

For those who don't suffer hyper-scent-sitivity, are you aware of people around you when you use scent, and how it might be affecting them?]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/15/are-department-store-brands-better-than-drug-store-brands Thu, 02 Aug 2007 16:56:36 -0400 Hermione 15@/bbforum/discussions
I do think some dept store is better but it could be the pretty packaging. For example, I like my No 7 lipgloss in Berry from Target. It's highly pigmented but doesn't have the sticky feel of MAC Lipglass. However, I'm totally in love with it's near color twin, Chanel Glossimere (sp) in Summer Plum. It's got that rich texture like MAC but it's not nearly as pigmented.]]> http://thebeautybrains.com/bbforum/discussion/32/newsflash-loreal-guilty-of-racism-are-your-buying-habits-changed Wed, 08 Aug 2007 18:27:38 -0400 fauxmccoy 32@/bbforum/discussions
full article as it appeared in the british press, the Guardian (which i love reading)

loreal article

although by our standards, the dollar figure seems small (little more than $40k) it was applied to more than one company. also, consider that multi-million dollar lawsuits are uniquely american.

one of the difficulties i had in putting my money where my mouth (and heart) are included a woeful lack of knowledge of l'oreals holdings. in researching this post i came up with the following list of brands which fall under the l'oreal umbrella:



Luxury Lines -- armani fragrance & cosmetics, kiehls, lancome, ralph lauren frangrance, shu uemura

Store Brands -- L'oreal, mabelline

Cosmeceuticals -- dermablend, la roche-posay, skinceuticals, vichy; and

haircare -- L'oreal technique, biotherm, garnier, kerastase, matrix, mizani, redken, and most recently acquired pureology



wow, my fingers hurt! i did just recently buy the highly esteemed shu uemera lash curler and really like it, but it feels somewhat tainted now. i won't return it, but i'm glad to have educated myself on l'oreals pervasiveness and hope others can use the information as well.

(on an unrelated note, lancome was found guilty in britain of violating what we would call 'truth in advertising'. a recent magazine ad for mascara featured penelope cruz wearing what was determined to be false eyelashes. talk about setting us up for failure!)

faux lashes]]>