3 random questions relating to chemicals in anti aging cream / scar removal.

I recently stumped myself, and decided to put off my first new batch. I want to straighten out some stuff that I am having a bit of a hard time finding hard evidence to questions I have regarding chemicals to make decisions for my skin cream.  


What is better for anti-aging agent, a retinoid, a peptide is healthier for the skin? Which, chemical if either, induces long-term benefits product is discontinued? Is it true that retinoids work by stretching skin, and peptides bind the skin closer together.
Is synthetic Hyaluronic acid really needed in a product, it seems to just plump the skin, temporarily as well. I would kind of really skew any real results of my scar cream, and also from a cost perspective, it seems skipable. If it stimulated production of collagen and elastin like real hyaluronic acid produced in humans, I would say it's a must, but it looks like it does not. Does it provide any other must have benefits? 
My last question is .... why does the FDA make sunscreen unreasonable to work with?  I'm doing things by the book, just incase I have something very good when I'm finally done. I'm trying to follow their impossible rules on Sunscreen. For something that protects people from the sun, they sure want to make it complicated to use in products. I find their vice grip on sun screen irritating and I'm not entirely sure why they do it either, it's not a drug, (Is it? did they seriously classify these as an active ingredient/ drug to keep tabs on sunscreen to be super annoying?!) It's not a marketing claim issue, wtf. Also, why is zinc oxide unlimited for use in Japan but it's really strictly limited in here of all places? I've noted they have fairly similar sunscreen regulations. Anyways, Is there any thing that is pretty skin neutral, safe, and an effective way AROUND this BS WITH THE FREAKING FDA *rips hair out!*








Comments

  • Retinoids are considered best for anti-aging. 
  • ..... Erm.... But... there was like a lot more questions?

    Why are retinoids better, and do they work by stretching skin.

  • I've never heard the skin stretching explanation. Retinoids work by increasing cell turn over. 

    We're working on a show about hyaluronic acid so stay tuned. 

    Why is the FDA unreasonable? *shrug*
  • Ohhh. *tingles* goodie. hyaluronic acids! Some definite answers! I had an all nighter binge looking it up trying to find something relevant to what I needed to know, and I didn't find it! Did I miss the anti aging one???


    I wouldn't say they're unreasonable, they just don't make any sense to me conventions wise. In a purely organizational standpoint, it makes my OCD cringe because their ban list is like the English language with exceptions.

    Things that aren't on the ban list, seem like they ought to be because they either share exact definition traits of 1 or more chemicals removed due to toxicity, and it's explanation for removal.

    However, some of the things on the ban list, I question why it was so important to them to get it of the market asap.... *she mutters bitterly*, "when radium legally can still be used in tooth paste according to them" Like Zinc Oxide for example, and all the pigments? Why is it such a big de

    (Btw, I don't just go of any of the lists anymore online, because I realized how poorly those were represented by hard evidence. I do really heavy research, and I determine for myself if I believe after reviewing studies, lack of long term real hard data, and common sense, if a chemical is safe) I kind of felt like an idiot at first about standing up for safety. EWG, is definitely in the same class as Mercola to me, but I would have to say after doing some really hard investigating, the are right about a very select few things, but for the wrong reasons.)

    I was going to give you some example of some things I seen wrong on the FDA's Ban list when my heart sank, and I thought to myself, "No, they didn't."

    A perfect example of what's wrong with the FDA is Coal Tar. They are systematically eliminating things off the ban list through the CIR.


     Well for example Randy... Coal Tar. CIR strikes again.

  • I know the data suggests lately its not carcinogenic despite having carcinogens in it, but that may just be because the carcinogens are not being absorbed through the skin. My worry is that it may be licked of the skin by pets, or rubbed of on teddy bears by the skin of children, and deeply inhaled from the bear in a hug. Long term exposure by degrees can get people really sick, and messed up for a bit!  And plus here is better treatments out there for both psoriasis and eczema. I am testing on a person who has eczema, and I have psoriasis, so I should know! 
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion