Loading summary
Transcript136 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hi, I'm Perry, and you're listening to the Beauty Brains. Hello and welcome to the Beauty Brains, a show where real cosmetic chemists answer your beauty product questions and give you an insider's look at the cosmetic industry. This is episode 426. I'm your host, Perry Romanowski, and with me today is Valerie George. Hello, Valerie.
- [00:29]
B
Hi, Perry.
- [00:31]
A
Welcome back from New York. We're getting excited to talk about that, right?
- [00:34]
B
Yep, yep.
- [00:36]
A
But we're also going to talk about your questions. And on today's show, we're going to cover a lot of them, including does sunscreen block skincare ingredients and makeup from working. What do you think of the Good face project for cosmetic formulation? Does AO2 Clear help treat acne? What would be a cheaper dupe for Strivectin Anti wrinkle line blur factor for primer? And do infrared hair tools damage hair? And do those heat protectant oils actually work? But first, Valerie, we're back from New York Suppliers Day. What? That was an adventure, huh?
- [01:11]
B
Oh, my goodness. We didn't get to do the meetup. I left early, thank goodness. I changed my flight to come back home for a multitude of things happening back here. And I got out, and I think we can say other people didn't get out. There was a sinkhole on the Runway at LaGuardia. There was something happening with weather. Your flight got canceled and you didn't get home until 36 hours later than intended.
- [01:37]
A
Yeah, yeah, that was rough. And of course, I stayed out way too late. That trip is always about, you know, interesting. I got a hotel, an extra hotel because my flight was canceled and such. And I didn't check into my hotel until 2:30 in the morning. And, you know, when I got there, there was a line to wait to check in.
- [01:57]
B
Oh, my goodness.
- [01:59]
A
I couldn't believe it. It was like 10 people deep. Like, who checks into a hotel at 2:30 in the morning?
- [02:04]
B
I've done it, but not because I'm out partying or anything, but because I'm on a late road trip. And, okay, I need to get a hotel room. But sure, we did have a good time. I taught a course on everything about scalp hair, hair color, hair damage, et cetera. Et cetera. Went well. And my husband, Mr. Cosmetic Chemist, was like, do you have eight hours of content to talk about? And I'm like, oh, yeah, I could talk for even longer. And he said, are people gonna get a break? And I said, no, no breaks. And he was like, you have to give people a break. And I thought, of course they're gonna get breaks, but not many, because we have a lot of content to cover. So that was good. The show was good.
- [02:46]
A
You know, they at least got bagels and donuts in the back, right?
- [02:50]
B
No.
- [02:52]
A
What? There was no food?
- [02:53]
B
Well, there was, like, you know, a light breakfast with fruits and a light lunch, which most of the things had mushrooms, which, you know, that's one of my favorites.
- [03:00]
A
Not a fan of the mushroom.
- [03:01]
B
Not a fan. I respect the mushroom. I'm not gonna eat it, and we won't get into it, but, yeah, that was great. The show was good. It would have been nice to maybe spend a little extra time there, but I was glad to get out of there. I was really exhausted after having to be on. There was an independent beauty association event. I'm on the board. So to be there, you were there. I can't believe you went out afterwards. I was like, I have to go to bed.
- [03:27]
A
I. I can't believe I survived that whole trip just way too late. And then I had to go out of town when I got back because it was Memorial Day weekend. And so I'm. Today is like the first day I'm not going out, and I'm just gonna chill.
- [03:43]
B
Our hair looks like we went out too much and did too much.
- [03:46]
A
It does.
- [03:46]
B
Our hair looks terrible today.
- [03:48]
A
We actually look like we have matching hairdos right now.
- [03:52]
B
It's not good.
- [03:53]
A
You could see my hair if you want to, on my TikTok account. Porch kitties, which I do every morning,
- [04:00]
B
and then just imagine me and that's what my hair looks like today. As my dad would say, you going to work like that? And you know what? I am.
- [04:09]
A
Well, overall, the show, they had some interesting stuff. It looked like the trends were really biotechnology. Lots of exosomes and peptides and that kind of thing. And, of course, AI stuff. And it seemed like it was actually. What I noticed down a bit was the focus on green beauty and clean beauty and that kind of stuff. So that's all seems to be fading into the background, being replaced by advanced technologies, I guess.
- [04:39]
B
Yeah. The show really mirrored in Cosmetics Global, which occurred in Paris this year, in terms of, like, what launches there were. For me, it was a good opportunity to catch up with the US Sales people that are at the show and get questions answered that maybe I had on things or other projects or market volatility for ingredients. You know, for example, I just wrapped up a project, and there's a material in there, and there's concern that there might not be able to be good market supply. And so it's like, hey, can you check on this? So I used it for that, of course, and to connect with friends and all those things. But yeah, yeah, it was good. The weather was hot. New York felt like a swamp and I was glad I got out of there.
- [05:23]
A
It was a little warm. Do you think anything you saw there is going to have a big impact on beauty products coming in the future that consumers would look for?
- [05:33]
B
No, there wasn't anything where I was like wow, holy cow, this is really neat. I think there were things that consumers are already looking for which are the peptides, the exosomes, a little bit of pdrn. I don't think consumers really understand biotechnology yet. I think that's more of a industry facing trend. But maybe that'll become consumer facing, I'm not sure.
- [05:57]
A
One thing that did strike me though was the lack of any CBD stuff. Remember a couple years ago everything was cbd. So you can tell that trend has come and gone.
- [06:06]
B
That's embarrassing. I knew it would come and go and I was always cringing when marketing was like we want a hemp or CBD product. And it's like, well, you'll be out of vogue soon.
- [06:19]
A
Indeed. Well, it was a good show. Lots of people there, lots of fun. Now let's head on to the beauty news. Valerie, I saw this article from from the Ethos article is called what happens when clean has to mean something? And it went through what they considered a major accountability moment for the beauty industry as the era of self regulated clean beauty marketing comes to an end. And this is driven by something that the FDA published that showed that a lot of products had PFAS's in the forever chemicals and that were contaminated in a lot of products that were marketed as pure. So now the industry is facing an avalanche of class action lawsuits targeting major brands and retailers like Sephora and Ulta for their arbitrary safety seals. Then of course California has their strict PFAS ban on and cosmetic companies can no longer rely on these vague marketing buzzwords instead of they are being legally and financially forced to back up their clean claims with rigorous lab testing, transparent supply chains and verifiable data. Now I'm not sure I agree with this take, but it is interesting to see that you can no longer just call yourself clean if you want to.
- [07:45]
B
Well, I actually like this because clean doesn't mean anything and it actually has created a lot of consumer confusion, especially from brands or beauty retailers that all have their own meaning of what clean means. And it's almost never science Backed. You say pfas. I say pfas. Six in one, half a dozen in the other. Tomato, tomato. You know, this was.
- [08:12]
A
I always say. I always say NASA, too, instead of NASA.
- [08:16]
B
You do not.
- [08:17]
A
I do not.
- [08:18]
B
Okay, all right. It's like, that's. That's awful. But what's interesting about the PFAS regulations is in order for a material to be a pfas, it has to be a fully fluorinated carbon compound. And all of these different states are actually trying to engage in PFAS regulation. And from a cosmetics perspective, not many products actually have this. I think this FDA report found 1744 cosmetic formulations to have them. And honestly, that's not a lot. It's typically found in products that need some kind of water resistance or making sure it doesn't transfer. And that would be color cosmetics. But it's actually not as prevalent as it sounds. They're just really not that many used, and we've been phasing them out for quite a bit of time. So I think this article made it sound worse.
- [09:18]
A
But also the FDA showed that, you know, these were contaminants, not necessarily intentionally where it was put in. Yeah, exactly.
- [09:28]
B
Yeah. So I think there's a lot more to come on this. But what I do like is it is kind of forcing accountability, because the things that are the problem are the brands making claims that don't have any meaning and the retailers creating these arbitrary seals, as the article may be mentioned. And it does create a lot of confusion. And the law has always been, if you state something, you have to prove it. And now I think it's just being enforced, but in a different way. Primarily through litigation.
- [09:58]
A
Yeah, that's how a lot of things happen in the United States to regulate beauty. Interestingly, I heard an interview with the woman who started Beauty Counter.
- [10:08]
B
Okay.
- [10:09]
A
Remember that one?
- [10:09]
B
Yeah.
- [10:09]
A
That was like. Right. They were all about clean beauty and such. And then she ended up selling off the company and coming back and. Well, it turns out she bought back the company after whoever bought, whatever venture capitalist bought it and ran it into the ground. But anyway, she was hoping that her new. Her new try at Beauty Counter would be to set up some sort of national clean beauty standard. I'm like, interesting idea, but good luck with that.
- [10:43]
B
No one will ever agree. People will say more needs to be added. People will say less needs to be on there. We'll never agree.
- [10:52]
A
Yeah, yeah, that's. Yeah, good. Good luck to her. But that's a big challenge.
- [10:58]
B
It's just like food. Everyone has their own belief system about what's okay for you.
- [11:02]
A
It'll never work, right? Yeah, exactly. It'll be hard. All right, well, let's head over to some listener comments.
- [11:15]
B
Misty says thanks for answering my question about amlactin. Valerie said she was curious how I felt about how the new version feels. If I'm remembering correctly, I thought it felt sticky before, and I don't notice that with this version. I don't have any issues with how it feels, but I might be more tolerant to a heavy lotion since that's probably subjective.
- [11:33]
A
Yeah. We answered this question about amlactin. I think it was last episode or maybe two episodes ago. So that was her follow up. Monica also added to the discussion. She said it's actually very frequently prescribed by doctors to elderly patients with extremely flaky skin on their legs due to health issues. Insurance does pay for it when it's prescribed. Just be careful if you have any broken skin because it will stick. Ding. It is a great exfoliation with regular use over a few weeks. Prescription level is usually to apply twice a day with the 12% version.
- [12:07]
B
Oh, interesting. Yeah. I'm not surprised. It's really helpful for extremely flaky skin. Not just from an exfoliation perspective, but lactic acid is an alpha hydroxy acid. And just in general, they have been proven to increase moisture content in skin. So, yeah, that's great to know. And when winter comes up and I get my extremely dry, itchy legs, nothing's worse than itching your shins really strongly and you're like, ah, I might try it.
- [12:35]
A
The only time my legs get really itchy is when I'm bit by all those bugs when I go to the Caribbean or when the little kittens climb my legs and leave these little piercings in my legs, and then as they heals, it gets very itchy.
- [12:49]
B
Well, in the former situation, you could use amlactin, but it sounds like it's not recommended in the kitten situation because it would really sting.
- [12:57]
A
Yeah. And you know what I do use?
- [13:00]
B
Nothing.
- [13:01]
A
Yeah, Willpower.
- [13:04]
B
That's it. Oh, goodness. Let's answer some questions.
- [13:11]
A
All right. Our first question comes from Leah. Hiya. I had a question about layering SPF and makeup. I've been wearing SPF 50 on the face for years. In recent years, I feel like foundations and other makeup focuses on skincare ingredients. I thought after you layer your spf, it blocks products from going into your skin. Are these products not active if you put SPF on first, or do you need to wait Time. I know SPF in foundation is not strong enough alone. Unsure if these are marketing or worth investing in. Thank you. All right, so she puts the SPF on her face first and then she puts the foundation on after that. I mean some, some ingredients can get through a sunscreen, but for the most part, sunscreen is going to stay on top of your skin and it's going to inhibit anything that might have gotten through.
- [14:07]
B
I think it depends on the spf. But sometimes SPF products rely on a film technology or a polymer technology to help the SPF stay in an even film over the skin. And sometimes that film network, the way the molecules are arranged in relationship to each other, do prevent certain ingredients from penetrating. Also, SPFs just are intrinsically on the oily side. If you look at SPF actives, they tend to feel greasy on their own. Like if you looked at Ava benzone or ethyl hexyl methoxycinnomite in a dispersion, for example, they're just really oily feeling. And so if you have these water based actives in, you know, an SPF that's pretty occlusive, they, they may have a hard time penetrating. It's tough to say.
- [14:57]
A
Well, I think for me what is not tough to say is even if you're not blocking them with the spf, you're not getting much benefit out of these anyway. I think ingredients, active ingredients in makeup products are mainly put in there for claims reason because you're not really getting the spread that you would need for these things to be effective, even if they are. And you know, I'm skeptical that a lot of these things are going to be effective in a way that a consumer would notice anyway.
- [15:27]
B
Well, I feel a little twofold on that one. I do agree a lot of the time in makeup products, the skincare aspect is marketing. Makeup products tend to have a low water content and that's where typically the actives go. And if you have a small water content, you may not be able to put enough actives in there to facilitate any change in the skin. But I did do a project with a makeup brand. They had an under eye concealer and it was very heavily skin care focused and there was tons of clinical testing and consumer perception testing done for this particular product. And there was really significant improvement both on both sides. And I know, you know, any claim study, you know, is usually designed to give you results, but I felt like backed with consumer perception testing and a blind test, the results were overwhelming that the consumers felt like there was change in Their skin. And the one thing that the testing company remarked to us was every single respondent asked where they could buy it because they felt like it had really transformed their under eye area. But I don't think that's common.
- [16:39]
A
Right. And it sounds like a well formulated
- [16:42]
B
product and they spent a lot of money doing it. So I would say it's not typical that you would get those types of results from skin care ingredients found in makeup. But I always say, like, you know, if it doesn't hurt you, who cares? Like, just do it anyway. Unless there's a huge price differential. But I don't think there should be.
- [17:05]
A
Yeah, no, I, I agree. But I think the problem is that these makeup companies have, is that the technology, makeup isn't changing very much. No, you know, the, the makeup is kind of, you know, same. It's got the, the same colorants and, and things. It changes a little bit aesthetically, but they got to do something to spice up the products. Right. And I think the skinification, your favorite word of makeup, is one of the strategies they're doing there.
- [17:36]
B
Exactly. So, Leah, I mean, use it if you'd like to, but I don't think you need to make a switch if you're happy with what you have. Our next question is an audio question, and it actually wasn't an audio question. Frank wrote in and said, perry and Valerie, I give Perry permission to use an AI voice of his choice to ask this question, which I'm against, But Frank apparently loves it, just like Perry. So here we go.
- [17:59]
A
I don't necessarily love it, but I am intrigued. Here it is. I recently came across a cosmetics formulation roll that desired experience with the Good Face Project dot com. It's an AI powered formulation software that seems to incorporate regulatory and compliance layers on top. Do you have any experience with this? I wonder where the AI aspects come into play. Does it suggest specific RM or loadings? I imagine that different companies might all converge on the same formulas, given that certain ingredients would get flagged. All right, Valerie, the Good Face Project. Are you familiar with the Good Face Project?
- [18:35]
B
I am. I have experience using it. Yep.
- [18:39]
A
This is actually. This, I guess, is more like a formulator cosmetic science question. So consumers, you know, you're kind of peering behind the curtain here, what goes on in formulating. But the Good Face Project is, I guess, it's like an AI software that can help collect all your data about raw materials, about regulations and such, and also can help you in formulating. I actually have also used it, at least a trial run of it. But in a regular job, it just doesn't really fit in with the workflow that I have about how you create formulas and keeping spreadsheets and things. And so I haven't really adopted it. And I do have other sources for the information that it can get. And also sometimes the information is,
- [19:31]
B
with
- [19:31]
A
all these AI things, the information is never 100% confident that it's right. So you have to be a little unsure about what it's giving you. So you have to double check anyway. And then that kind of removes some of the benefit.
- [19:45]
B
The Goodface project actually started out as a tool for formulators to input a formula and it would check it against retailer clean list to see if your product was compliant against a retailer standard. And they had tried to get me to adopt it, but I said, I don't need that. I already have tools that can help me check against those retailer lists and I don't need a special software to do that. But they've added formulation tools so you can track your formulas in there with different version histories. They've added regulatory and compliance, which my feedback to them was if you could add regulatory and compliance and they're not from a retailer perspective, but from a regulatory perspective in different geographies, that would be helpful. But I, I still don't use it because I just have different, better tools. You still have to be knowledgeable about ingredients and regulations because this essentially just pulls information from the Internet. Right. It doesn't use experience or understand the nuances and formulation about why something would be used or why it's okay to use an ingredient at that level because it transforms in the product and is no longer existing at that level. It doesn't understand those types of things. And I think the interface is beautiful. But I use other software programs.
- [21:06]
A
Yeah, once you get a workflow, it's hard to get some of the change. I think of this, you know, if you're an experienced enough chemist, this maybe helps you a little bit in gathering all the data in one spot. But you're still going to have to double check the information and you probably already have your sources. So this doesn't really provide a huge benefit. And you know, honestly, people don't like sharing their formulations with an outside company. And of course the company's gonna say, oh, it's gonna be all secret and stuff, but you know, you never know. So I'm a little skeptical there.
- [21:45]
B
Yeah. Especially when softwares like this couple it with formulation assistance tools. How do I know that you're not scraping formula data from other customers to come up with different recommendations. So, for example, I worked at a salon brand and you know, they were, I don't recall if it was Goodface in particular, but this company was trying to get us to use their software and not only use it as a regulatory check, retailer compliance check, but to actually store all of our formulation work in there. And then they were launching a tool where if you were a chemist, you could pop in and say, I'm trying to formulate a shampoo like l' Oreal Everpure Volumizing Shampoo. And it would provide a starting formula recommendation to you. And just imagine if the L' Oreal EverPure formula were actually in there, would it use any of that data? And they say no, but it's really hard to prove that data is not segregated like that. And so I'm always skeptical of these types of things as well.
- [22:53]
A
Now the one thing Frank said about here is imagining all the like. If everyone starts to use a tool like this, the formulas would generally start to convert. And my response to that is that the formulas already kind of converge. I remember looking at body washes, you know, body washes at retail and you know, ingredients that almost every body wash uses, you know, SLES and Coca, Midol, Propyl, Betaine. I mean the top 10 selling ones all use kind of the same detergent base. So if you're going to use a tool like this, it's not making things more the same as just natural market forces. And what that does lead to is that people who want to be different will look and see what, what everybody kind of uses and then purposely not use those things.
- [23:46]
B
Yeah, I agree.
- [23:49]
A
All right, thanks Frank. We got a question from Kara from Patreon says. Hi beauty brands. I love your show and appreciate your opinions and your no nonsense approach to the marketing claims made by skin care companies. I'd love to hear your opinion about the AO2 Clear, a topical acne treatment made of only two ingredients, distilled water and oxygen nanobubbles. Marketed as a very clean option for breakout prone and sensitive skin. It's supposed to deliver high concentrations of oxygen into pores via nanobubbles to inhibit acne causing anaerobic bacteria and reduce inflammation. It aims to improve hormonal and persistent adult acne, reduce redness and support overall skin health without the typical irritation or dryness associated with standard acne treatments like benzoyl peroxide or retinoids. It's sold as a 30 day supply in pouches. Once opened, each pouch is meant to be used within 14 days, typically twice dailies and visible improvement expected within the first couple of weeks of consistent use. They have a hydrated version that has glycerin in the formula and they have some clinical studies looking at the study and the science claims. Do you think this product could benefit acne and dry skin? Thank you for your time with this. All the best. What? Water and bubbles? Come on. Is this a real product?
- [25:16]
B
It's a real product and believe it or not, it's come across my desk before from a customer who was like, hey, is this something we should do? And ultimately I recommended not doing it for a multitude of reasons. So the premise of the science is that they infuse nanoparticle sized oxygen bubbles into water and then it's hermetically sealed into a pouch. Once you open the pouch, it has to be used immediately, you have to use the whole pouch. And the thought is that these nanobubbles are able to interact with C Acnes, which is the acne causing bacteria. Certain strains of it are acne causing on skin and C acnes, they like to live in the pores where the sebaceous glands are and they don't like oxygen. And so the thought is these nanooxygen bubbles go in and just totally eradicate adverse strains of C Acnes that contribute to acne. And so in theory the science sounds pretty interesting, right? But in reality, I don't know how well it works. So they have one clinical study on their website and I would say a lot of the details are missing. So they involved 14 clinicians, which I would have to say presumably would be dermatologists or estheticians. It doesn't really say who the clinicians are and they gave it to their patients. A total of 66 responses were received, but I don't know how many people actually did the testing. They were not given a control or at least a control was not disclosed. It doesn't provide a lot of information other than a one month supply twice daily to these patients. And all the results were self reported. So a patient had to say, oh, I had some improvement, oh I had dramatic improvement. I would recommend, maybe recommend at one point, like it's very vague, patient enjoyment. They have some before and after pictures, but it also doesn't say what else they were doing in their regimen. If they were seeing a doctor, presumably they were also on some other kind of treatment. So I would just say there's a lot of questions I have about this study.
- [27:35]
A
I look at this study, they say 88% of patients reported improvement after 30 days of twice daily use. Well, you know what? If they did nothing, it would improve in 30 days.
- [27:47]
B
It could, right? You always say there's three things that could happen. What are the three things?
- [27:51]
A
Three things that could happen with any treatment. It can get better, it could get worse, or it could stay the same. Right. And the same thing can happen if you do nothing. It'll get better, worse. So when I see a claim like that, I'm like, 30 days is a long time for acne. Like, if you do nothing to acne, it's gonna go away in 30 days. I mean, new ones will pop up, sure. But, you know, I don't know. I do not find that claim impressive. 30 days.
- [28:20]
B
They primarily rely on testimonials on this page also. And it doesn't disclose if they're paid, if they are partners, if this is not an advertisement and it's a pure. Hey, I love this product. But there's many of these, and probably more of these than information about the clinical studies. So I would, you know, I hate to be like Perry, but I would be a little bit skeptical. Maybe they have the full study available, but.
- [28:51]
A
Well, I just also think like the whole premise of it. Oxygen nanobubble. That's an oxygen nano bubble. There's no such thing as an oxygen nano bubble, is there?
- [29:02]
B
I don't think so.
- [29:03]
A
I think they're just making that up. Also, I will say that treating acne is like an over the counter drug thing. And so nano, particle, nanobubble. Oxygen is not on the OTC monograph. And this isn't. You don't get a prescription for this, right?
- [29:24]
B
No. I mean, yeah. At the end of the day, these are all drug claims. And the fact that you have to get a 30 day supply, like, it just feels kind of yuck.
- [29:35]
A
It's a different approach. I will give them that, but I remain super skeptical.
- [29:40]
B
Yeah, well, just to answer one other question, Kara says, will it benefit dry skin as well? There's the AO2 hydrate version. And of course it will hydrate skin. It's water with glycerin added. But any serum or moisturizer would do that.
- [29:54]
A
Yeah, it's not going to do anything special, so. Boy, bubbly water. Okay, how about we move on to our next question?
- [30:04]
B
Hi, Valerie and Perry. Love and appreciate your informative show. I've learned and saved so much. I use and like the Strivectin anti wrinkle line blurfector primer, but my budget hates the price. It feels good at application Helps how my makeup wears on my aging skin. Do you know of any dupes out there that would be more economical but give me the same results? Thanks for taking my question and for all you do. A loyal patron on Patreon. Laura.
- [30:32]
A
Well, thank you for supporting us. I am looking at the product. Let's see. It's a special. So cyclopentasiloxane.
- [30:42]
B
Oh, that's what makes it feels good, helps it spread.
- [30:46]
A
Right. They might have to formulate that out though, right?
- [30:48]
B
Maybe if they sell it in Europe, for sure. Let me just give you some background on Strivectin. They have a great reputation on our side of the industry for being pretty thorough in the formulation work, for clinical testing, for ensuring that the whatever they say is doing the things for whatever they say. They have a great reputation in that respect. So, you know, sometimes we see products and we're like, who is this company who knows what they're doing? The data is not great, but just my impression from knowing people in the industry who worked at Strivectin, they are pretty thorough.
- [31:28]
A
And looking at this formula, I mean, it's packed full of silicones and things that make sense with helping to blur wrinkles and imperfections. They have a polymer in there, polymethylmethacrylate, but they have dimethicone, dimethic cross polymer. They have some mica. It makes a lot of sense to me that this thing can work to do what it says it does.
- [31:49]
B
It's like makeup. This is truly a primer in the sense that these silicones are forming a film on the skin. They're filling in these little wrinkle gaps on the skin. Makes total sense.
- [32:00]
A
So this one looks like 42 bucks for a 30 mil. That's, you know, that's pretty expensive. Primer. Is that expensive? What's primer usually running?
- [32:13]
B
I think it. Well, I would say depending on the brand, probably 30 to $50. But for one mil, I think it's expensive. It's just one ounce. And they've infused some skin care ingredients in here, like different plant extracts. I would say those probably aren't doing anything. The real results are coming from the silicone cross polymers and the mica. So, you know, the results are skin feels smoother. Well, of course it does. It has this silicone film on the skin because it fills in those tiny fines, fine lines and wrinkles. Skin looks refined, and it helps prevent product from settling, makeup product from settling into the creases. And these are things that a traditional makeup polymer or makeup primer would do. So. So if you can find a makeup primer that has the first five ingredients on this list, I think it probably would be just as good of a job. It is skincare infused breathable primer. That's what they say. But the reality is this is just a makeup primer.
- [33:21]
A
Yeah. So I think the key ingredients to look for is that cyclopentasiloxane and then polymethacrylate. Look for a primer that has that and that might get you closer. I didn't find one that was obvious that had a similar ingredient list, but I'm sure they're out there. Right. This, this not like, I will say this is not like special exclusive technology. This could be done by a lot of people.
- [33:48]
B
One example that has the first handful of ingredients matched is the ELF mineral infused face primer. And ingredients are cyclopenta siloxane dimethicone cross polymer, cyclohexa siloxane dimethicone, dimethicone, vinyl dimethicone cross polymer. So very similar. From that respect, I'll say one area which is different is it has silica dimethylsily in it, which is kind of a grippy ingredient. So it kind of helps it grip to the skin and helps other things grip to it. And so it might feel a little more tuggy, less nourishing than the Strivectin product. But it is a good starting point to look for those first handful of materials to get the same glide on skin and to get the same stay putiveness on skin.
- [34:35]
A
I found Sephora has the pore primer.
- [34:38]
B
Okay.
- [34:39]
A
Which has both the cyclopentosiloxane, it has the methylmethacrylate, it has more dimethicone. So yeah, that one might do.
- [34:49]
B
What's the size and price?
- [34:50]
A
It looks like it's $18 for, what was it, one.
- [34:54]
B
One ounce. Yeah. All right, well, that's okay. That's pretty good.
- [34:57]
A
So they're comparable. Yeah, so that'd be one worth, you know, checking out. Now they include the inatia bark extract, which isn't doing anything either, but yeah, there you go. So I think that's a strategy you can look for. Look for that cyclopenta siloxane and, you know, some dimethicone and then just try it out because honestly, this is one of those things where it's more about the feel and how you like it. Just because they're the same ingredients doesn't necessarily mean they're going to work the same, but they probably will.
- [35:34]
B
I agree.
- [35:35]
A
All right, we got time for one More question. And this comes to us from Alison. Hi. How does infrared style the hair? Does it really not cause any damage? Do I need a heat protectant? I'm expecting, and I want to know, is it pregnancy safe? And that's her first question about the. She put the Bob Dye boost. Infrared.
- [36:01]
B
Bondi Boost. Bondi Boost.
- [36:04]
A
The Bondi Boost.
- [36:05]
B
Bondi Boost. Oh, my gosh.
- [36:10]
A
To be fair, she typed Bob. So there you go. Okay. And then the second question is, what are the ingredients that protect hair from heat, and are they sufficient? And this is about the briogeo style 4 in 1 smoothing weightless hair oil. So if you use a heat protectant at night on damp hair, do I need to use one in the morning while styling my hair? Thanks, Alison. So let's start with the first one, these infrared heated brushes. It sounds like, you know, techno speak to me. Is this really helping your hair?
- [36:46]
B
Well, it helps dry the hair, and infrared works a little bit differently from conventional hair dryers. So in my prior life, we had a large tool assortment, and we had a guy who knew a lot about hot tools and hair dryers. And, you know, do ions really work to dry the hair? And, you know, a lot of hair dryers come with tourmaline in them and ceramic and all the things. And so I got to learn a lot. And the one thing I do know about infrared tools versus, like, conventional hair drying tools is that usually a hair drying tool, there's a heater inside, and then a fan blows the hot air onto the hair to help the water evaporate from the hair, or in this case, a brush, the brush produces some kind of heat to evaporate water from the hair. Infrared tools are a little bit different because instead of, like, a heat source with a mechanism to move hot air across the surface, they actually produce infrared waves. So it's a type of wavelength that is usually emitted from the sun. And this is creating some kind of energy within the hair fiber. It can penetrate into the hair, and this in turn, displaces the water molecules out of the hair fiber. Typically, infrared is thought to produce heat, but it's not like heat like a heater with a fan moving across it. It's just heat from the wavelengths that are part of that spectrum.
- [38:22]
A
It kind of boils off the water.
- [38:24]
B
Kind of boils off the water. Yeah. And so in this case with a brush, the brush is moving through the hair and at the same time, putting out these infrared wavelengths to improve the rate at which water evaporates from the hair fiber. Now, Is this damaging for hair? I don't think it's the infrared itself that damages the hair. In fact, there's some literature in the old hair literature days that looked at the impact of infrared wavelength on hair, and there is no damage impact. It doesn't fade hair color. It doesn't necessarily damage the tress on its own. But where you get likely some damage is the fact that the hair fiber is heating up and it is displacing this water from the hair. So I don't know if it's more or less damaging than a traditional blow dryer. I think the infrared tool makers will tell you it's less damaging, and maybe that's the case. You know, I don't really know if a consumer would notice a difference, but the thought of having the infrared in a brush instead of a blow dryer is essentially, you brush the hair, and while you're brushing it, it's helping align the hair the way you want it. So making it a little smoother, a little straighter. You're heating it while you're giving it tension. So there's no need to put a blow dryer on it.
- [39:42]
A
But also the brushing is causing damage, too.
- [39:45]
B
Yeah, there's that. Yep.
- [39:47]
A
You know, there is. Now, as far as it being pregnancy safe, I. Yeah, I would think it's pregnancy safe. I don't think it's. I can't imagine there's anything that would be harmful there.
- [39:59]
B
No, no. And in looking at the bristles of this particular brush, the type of bristle that we see is really great for grabbing hair and creating tension on it. And as the hair is drying, while it's tense, you're going to be able to get. It looks like you're having a blowout done at a salon. Essentially, it's grabbing the hair, helping realign those hydrogen bonds to make your hair look smoother, glossier, et cetera, all those things. So I just wanted to point that out. This isn't a brush that you could, like, brush your hair with to detangle it. And I think inherently this brush is a little bit rough on the hair, so you would have to take that into consideration with the hair damage. But in terms of pregnancy safe, I'm not aware of anything because again, infrared is essentially, in this case, it's going to be on your hair or on your scalp. It's not making. It's not coming into contact with your belly. It's not making internal changes inside the body. It's not like laying on an infrared mat.
- [41:00]
A
Right, right. Okay, now this, we talked about heating, and she has this heat, this hair oil. Do you need to protect your hair from the heat with this? And would this oil work? So, you know, I'm a little skeptical that just oils are going to help protect your hair from heat.
- [41:23]
B
Well, here's how you can validate heat protection. So they specifically make a claim that it protects up to 450 degrees Fahrenheit. And so how a validation test is done is you would take hair, a truss, you would thermally damage it without any product. You would take a truss, apply product to it, and then thermally damage it. And this is done with a flat iron heated up to 450 degrees Fahrenheit. And then you essentially comb the hair and count how many hairs are broken. And if you have less broken hairs with the treated product, you can claim there is some thermal protection because less hair is damaged and less hair is broken. That's typically how that test is done. Now, with that, all oils, from that perspective, provide some heat protection up to 450 degrees. But I still recommend using a product that's more of a traditional heat protectant because oils also tend to heat. They may have varying smoke points. And so I'm not a fan of making a blanket statement saying put an oil on your hair and then put a flat iron on it. I just don't think it's good for it over, over time. And I would supplement it, particularly if, you know, it's been several hours since you applied it to your hair, because some oils do penetrate over time and the testing is not done in that fashion. So I would say add a separate heat protectant.
- [43:07]
A
Yeah. And I would point out that in that experiment that you talked about, like any oil is going to prevent breakage. So, you know, I don't know.
- [43:16]
B
Yeah. And that's the other piece. Like they don't wash the oil off the hair and test it. The oil's left on. And so it could be reducing breakage from, you know, just the lubrication of the hair fiber.
- [43:27]
A
Yeah, right, exactly. That is kind of one of the tricks the industry does to tell you your hair is getting stronger. Is it? Yeah. If you condition your hair versus a non conditioned hair, it's going to get less breakage.
- [43:40]
B
But I will say we'll save. Go ahead.
- [43:43]
A
No, you go. But I will say, but I will
- [43:46]
B
say that there is another fact that is not reported on this product, and that's that oils heal split ends. And when I say heal split ends, I mean that they conceal split ends. And that's any plant oil. So one of the recommendations is to use this product as a finishing oil and it helps temporarily close those split ends together. And so I think that's actually a great use for this product as well as well.
- [44:09]
A
That's kind of like when you are trying to put a needle through or a thread through a needle and you and you put it in your mouth and you lick it and you stick it together time temporarily, right?
- [44:21]
B
Exactly. Yeah, that's a great analogy.
- [44:25]
A
Exactly. Oh, thank you.
- [44:28]
B
Thanks for listening. If you get a chance, head over to Apple Podcasts or Spotify and leave us a review that will help other people find the show and ensure we have a full docket of beauty questions to answer.
- [44:38]
A
And if you do have a question, just record it on your smartphone and email it to thebeautybrainsgmail.com. you could also use the form in the show notes to submit your question. You can call us at 1-872-216-1856 and leave a message. And if you don't mind an AI voice like Frank, you can just tell us, hey, you can use an AI voice. Hey, the Beauty Brains are also on Patreon. You might have noticed in this show we don't have any commercials and that's because we don't take sponsorships and we're fully sponsored by the people who listen to and appreciate the show. So if you're one of those people, head on over to patreon.com thebeautybrains and subscribe at any level. You also get the show early, you get your questions answered in a higher priority and you get a transcript of the show.
- [45:25]
B
Don't forget to follow us on various social media accounts. On Instagram, we're at The Beauty Brains 2018 on X, we're at the Beauty Brains. On Blue sky, we're at the Beauty Brains. We have a Facebook page, a Tik tok and a YouTube.
- [45:37]
A
We are out there.
- [45:38]
B
Well, thanks again for listening everyone. And remember, be brainy about your beauty.
- [45:44]
A
Thanks everyone.
- [45:51]
B
Kittens.