While the Beauty Brains focuses on dispelling myths about beauty products here are some others trying to burst the bogus bubble in other areas.

1. On Nutrition: See Medical News Today – Dispelling the Top 10 Nutrition Myths.

2. On Exercise: See About.com – Fitness Myths.

3. On General Science: See Livescience – Most Popular Myths in Science.

4. On Urban Legends: Try Snopes.com

5. On the Environment: Discover Magazine – Environmental Myths.

And let’s not forget one of our favorite shows on TV. Mythbusters! We love Adam and Jamie.

Heidi’s comment: Shampoos like Pantene, Dove, and the like are using cheaper grade ingredients because…well?… they’re cheaper and they can… they are not different per say… just… cheaper… and larger in molecule size… Some are using the same kind of wax you put on an apple to make it shiney in the conditioner (you thought the shine was natural?)… Its food grade, edible, and naturally derived… Therefore? Legal and acceptable.

The Left Brain retorts:

For those of you who may have missed the discussion, Heidi’s comment appeared in our post on How Beauty Salons Lie to You. While I am appreciative off all the comments from the Beauty Brains community, I do feel compelled to correct inaccurate statements when I have the chance. And although Heidi raises some good points she’s perpetuating a myth when she says that conditioners contain “the same kind of wax you put on an apple.” This is the type of urban legend that has been used to bash non-salon conditioners for years and in reality it’s just not true.

An apple a day…

According to the apple experts (bestapples.com), the natural waxy coating that protects fresh apples from moisture loss is partially washed off when the apples are cleaned after harvesting. To ensure a longer shelf life, a different kind of natural wax is applied to the apples at very low levels.  This wax is usually carnauba or shellac, both of which provide a very durable coating that prevents moisture loss, enhances firmness retention and slows down the apple respiration rate.

(FYI, according to the website “some historians report wax has been used on produce since the early 1920s, but other experts say fruits and vegetables were waxed by housewives long before that to improve storage life.”)

On the other hand, supermarket and drug store conditioner brands like Pantene, Dove, and Tresemme use silicones and cationic polymers to smooth the hair shaft to make it more reflective. These ingredients do coat the hair but they are not like the tough waxy coatings used on fruit. I have NEVER seen a shampoo or conditioner that uses carnuaba or shellac to make the hair shiny.

The Beauty Brains bottom line

If you don’t like silicone containing conditioners because they weigh your hair down, thats your choice. But don’t believe scare tactics that simply aren’t true. Thanks to Heidi for giving me the chance to clear up this misconception (and to learn a little bit about apples!)

Barb Wants To Know…I have arthritis in my right wrist and I was thinking of buying one of those magnetic bracelets that are supposed to cure pain. Do they really work?

The Right Brain Replies:
Amazingly enough, the definitive answer is: Maybe!

While most scientists have considered that using magnetic therapy to reduce pain is quackery, a study done a few years ago shows that there MIGHT be some basis to these claims. The Skeptical Inquirer, the Brain’s favorite site for debunking myths has this to say:

Magnetic attraction

“These examples and the centuries-old connection between magnets and quackery, have led many to consider modern magnetic therapy as total hokum, with the many testimonials for the success of magnetic treatments explainable by placebo effects. But the Baylor study, seemingly a careful double-blind study, has surprised many.The study was conducted by Dr. Carlos Vallbona on fifty post-polio patients at Baylor’s Institute for Rehabilitation Research in Houston. Bioflex, Inc., of Corpus Christi provided both the magnets (multipolar, circular pattern) and a set of visually identical sham magnets to serve as controls. To keep the study “double-blind” neither the patients nor the staff were informed as to which devices were active magnets, and which were shams. Before and after the forty-five-minute period of magnet therapy, the patients were asked to grade their pain on a scale from 0 to 10. The twenty nine patients with active magnets reported, on average, a significant reduction of pain (from 9.6 to 4.4), while the twenty-one patients with shams reported a much smaller average reduction (from 9.5 to 8.4). This is a substantial difference, and if the double-blind study was successfully conducted, cannot be explained by a placebo effect.

For a hardened skeptic, some doubts remain. Both Dr. Vallbona and his colleague, Dr. Carlton Hazlewood, had reported the successful personal use of magnets to relieve their own knee pains prior to the study, raising doubts as to their objectivity. Conscious or unconscious biases of researchers can have very subtle and unrecognized effects on the results of their studies, and a serious difficulty of conducting any double-blind studies with magnets is the ease of distinguishing active magnets from sham magnets (although the patients were reportedly observed during the therapy period to assure that they were not surreptitiously testing their magnets). Another difficulty of any studies of pain relief is the highly subjective nature of the data.

Despite these various reasons for caution, the results of this study have altered the views of many physicians. Dr. William Jarvis, president of the National Council Against Health Fraud, had formerly dismissed magnet therapy as “essentially quackery.” He now tentatively admits that it may have value for post-polio pain.

More studies will be needed before magnetic therapy will be accepted by a majority of the medical community, and some studies are already underway. Last year the NIH Office of Alternative Medicine gave a million-dollar grant to Dr. Ann Gill Taylor of the School of Nursing of the University of Virginia to study the use of magnets to relieve pain. Among other things, she will be testing the effectiveness of magnetic sleep pads in relieving pain in patients suffering from fibromyalgia, a common disease involving joint and muscle pain. While we wait for the results of these and other studies, does what we know about magnetic fields and the human body make it plausible that magnetic therapy for pain might have a physical basis beyond mind/body effects?”

The Beauty Brains bottom line

Looks like the jury is out on this one. While we’re still skeptical, it does look interesting!

Continuing with our Beauty Skepticism series, today we’re going to talk about the “argument from authority fallacy” and how it can lead you astray.

What is it?

Argument from authority is the idea that you automatically believe something just because some source you respect says it’s true.

We see it in our comments section or in advertisements all the time for example…

“My stylist tells me that Pantene puts wax on my hair”

“My dermatologist said that I should stay away from parabens”

“My naturapath says this homeopathic remedy will cure acne.”

But a person’s background does not make them infallible. There are plenty of dermatologists and scientists that have screwy, mistaken beliefs. You should be skeptical of anything you hear that is not supported by some kind of experiment. Challenge people to tell you how they know what they “know”.

Beauty Authorities

While argument from authority is not a good way to decide what is true, it can be useful to guide you in the direction of truth. Of course, some authorities are more reliable than others. Here are a list of “beauty authorities” and why you should be skeptical of what they have to say.

a. Cosmetologists / Stylists – They have useful experience, but most of their product knowledge is given to them by biased cosmetic marketing companies. Additionally, they are sometimes motivated to get you to buy products that make them extra money.

b. Dermatologists – Top notch educations allow them to cure skin diseases. Unfortunately, some see more money in selling their own line of products that cost more, but haven’t been proven to be better than store brands.

c. Celebrities – Yes, they always look good however, so would you if you had stylists and trainers whenever you needed them. This doesn’t mean they know any more about beauty products than you.

d. Sales people – They may know and use their products, but their sales bias makes them unreliable. They’ll ignore negatives that might make you question purchasing something from them.

e. Advertisers – They attempt to educate you about products but often tell half-truths to make their products look better.

f. Websites – Anyone can write anything and put it on the Internet. ALL things you read on the Internet should be questioned.  They are often regurgitations of biased press releases sent out by PR firms.

g. Media – Those great product articles you read about in Cosmo, Redbook, or Lucky? They may actually be great or maybe not. Story ideas often come directly from PR agencies advocating for specific products.

h. Friends – Your product-aware friend has lots of knowledge about what she likes and this can be useful. However, that doesn’t mean she knows why things work or even what will work for you.

i. Scientists – How could we forget the Beauty Brains and the other cosmetic scientists out there? Certainly, they have useful knowledge but they don’t know everything. Most of their knowledge is based on what the average person will experience. This says nothing about what will work for you specifically. It’s one reason we haven’t created a list of recommended products.

Being Skeptical of Authorities

There are three things you should ask yourself whenever you hear an authority tell you something they think is true.

1. What are their motivations? Are they making money by getting you to buy a product?

2. How do they know what they know? Have they conducted experiments or studied the experimental work of others? Or are they merely giving you an opinion based on years of experience? The former is more reliable than the latter.

3. How do they know a fact will apply to you? Yes, they may know what research has to say about the general population but what do they know about you? Your skin and hair are unique. Be wary of any authorities that don’t recognize your individuality. No product/treatment will work for everyone!

Not Always Incorrect

We should note that not all appeals to authority are incorrect. Often, the opinions of experts is the best information we can get. For example, no one really knows whether global warming is happening. But the majority of climate scientists believe it is, so it’s the best thing to believe. Of course, this consensus opinion is based on a survey of the best available experimental evidence, so it is not strictly belief from authority.

Beauty Brains Bottom Line

To protect yourself from people who don’t have your best interest in mind, you have to remain skeptical of expert advice from beauty authorities. Understand that they are often wrong. You should never rely on a single source and don’t forget, no one “knows” what will work for you. You have to figure that out for yourself.

Who is your Beauty Expert and why do you believe what they have to say?  Leave a comment below.

Calla.lilly is curious…Can you help shed some scientific light into this? Kangen Waters boasts you can “ Lose Weight, Slow Down The Aging Process, Remove Kitchen Grease And Grime, Clean And Disinfect Germs, Create Healthy Skin  And Best Of All Fight Disease With Kangen Water.” I tried searching for some real reviews of this but mostly found websites selling their product. If this is true, I’m assuming many drug and cosmetic companies would be in trouble.

The Left Brain says Kangen Water is all wet: 

Well Lilly, as Taiwanese Girl pointed out in our Forum, the drug companies have nothing to worry about. Kangen water is just another psuedoscientific scam.

Wacky Kangen Water

Companies that make Kangen water claim that their (very expensive) equipment ionizes “pure” water to make it more alkaline so it over comes the acidic conditions of your body, thus improving your health and beauty. 

The concept is fine except for one small detail: it has no scientific basis what so ever. If you’re so inclined, you can find an excellent debunking discussion on the webpage of Stephen Lower, retired faculty member of the Dept of Chemistry, Simon Fraser University Burnaby/Vancouver, Canada. Stephen pulls no punches in giving you the true scientific scoop on this psuedoscience.  But to save you time, I’ll summarize his three key points below:

Why Kangen Water Is Crazy

1. Pure water that doesn’t contain dissolved salts can’t be ionized. In order to be made alkaline, water must contain some kind of dissolved metal ions like sodium, calcium or magnesium.

2. The notion that you should drink alkaline water to counteract the acidic condition of your body is just plain wrong. Even if you were to drink alkaline water, the highly acidic gastric juices in your stomach would quickly neutralize it. Besides. absorption of water doesn’t occur in the stomach, it happens in the intestine, where the fluids are already made alkaline by the pancreatic secretions. So, anything you eat or drink eventually becomes alkaline anyway.

3. The idea that drinking alkaline water is better for your body is not supported by scientific data. If you really need to de-acidify your stomach, you can do so simply by taking common antacids. There’s no need to spend hundreds of dollars for special water ionizing devices like those used to produce Kangen water. 

The Beauty Brains bottom line

Like Kinoki Detox Foot Pads, this product is another pseudoscientific scam. PLEASE, don’t fall for this!