Salon Allergy Specialist

Salon Allergy Specialist

Monday, January 20, 2014

Why I Use the Henna I Do in My Salon (with photos)







I often hear of clients saying that they used this brand of henna, or that brand of henna, when I say VERY OFTEN, to use Mehandi's henna. Different brands of henna's can have other additives in it, even though they are not supposed to. They can have pesticides, or over-spray of pesticides from other crops. I now use henna, amla, cassia, and indigo from Christine  Shahin, at http://faces-of-astarte.com/. She lives in Little Falls, NY and I also recommend her book, Natural Hair Coloring It has a ton of recipes in it. I only change the liquid to hibiscus tea. 2 bags per 8oz. of boiling water.  

The first reason I like the henna I use is that it is 100 percent certified organic. You can go to the lab of choice, type in the lot number of your batch, and you will have all of the information on your batch in your hand. The exact amount of lawsone content, the exact tolerances of pesticides, (zero) the rest is all there as well. I am a nerd, so I feel that having this information at my fingertips before I choose to use it is important. YOU however, can trust me that the tolerance amounts are so tight that your colors will be amazing.

The other brands, they have some guess work. The lawsone amounts are the lowest for hair quality henna. If you look at the photo on the right, which was just colored with Hesh Henna, you can see the striations of the coloring. The roots stayed the brown color, and you can still see the old color red with the hilighting in it from the top right corner of the photo down to the middle left of the photo. Notice in the second photo, the roots do have a very small amount of red, but it barely shows, and only in certain lights.


                                                                                                                                                                                     



The third photo shows the edge of the striations in another area.

The henna I use is called Body Art Quality Henna, or BAQ henna. This is what they get from the first sift when they dry and grind the henna leaves. It is used to do wedding art and is usually kept in India, the Sudan, Africa, or wherever it's been grown. After the BAQ henna is sifted, then they sift for hair henna for their country, and the end of the henna is sent here for hair. It's the lowest quality henna there is.


 Here is a photo of the hair corrected with the correct brand of henna. It will take 3 to 4 days to complete the rich color coming through the hair completely. This is called curing. My lighting and photography is not the best, but the end results four days later was so beautiful, my client called me to say thank you for making her engagement photos spectacular.




If you are not using strong BAQ henna and very good quality indigo, you will not be able to get results like this:
This is what the color of 50/50 henna/indigo with some amla looks like after an hour under the  bonnet dryer.


This is the final result, but without the four days of getting richer in color. 



This is the client's brow after coloring, notice the 2 greys at the tail for reference. 
 People will ask me how easy is it to remove henna. It's NOT easy to remove. In fact, it WILL NOT FADE. It has been used for at leaast 10,000 years for a reason. I personally saw Pharaoh Ramses the 2nd's mummy in Egypt. He died at 91, and you could see after 4,000 years that the mummy had henna coloring on the hair still, and on the fingers. He was a VAIN man. I don't think any synthetic colors could withstand the desert heat for thousands of years. Here is how it took me two bleach sessions to remove henna from pure white hair. The hair had been colored full red twice with henna. Here is a series of color, and bleaches I did to
first bleach, on scalp with 2 boosters
show how it comes out.










Second bleach, off scalp,
 then trimmed,
One month after first bleach.




















Toning with a high lift tint,
and double blue base



final result with a comparison.




Sorry about the gaps, I still am having trouble posting photos on this blog. Here are a few examples that you can see, that will give you examples as to why I continue to use Christine's. The lawsone, or pigment, also known as iron oxide in the plant can be much higher than in any other brand, depending on which batch you choose from there. So, I showed you how a cheaper brand came out, and what it looked like corrected. It was nicer before the four day curing than the other brand was AFTER it cured. I showed you what a grey coverage on dark brown hair looked like, after it's shampooed out, and after drying and styling. I also showed you what it takes to actually remove the organic henna out of your hair. It will not be an easy feat. Plan on doing some heavy cutting! Don't use imposter henna, and you can have the results above. I don't make a penny, nor do I get any discount from them. The henna just happens to be well choosen!

 Have a great January!

Gina xx





Tuesday, January 7, 2014

Happy New Year, and Some PPD News


The First Perms 1920









Well, here is the new year, and I am still trying to wrap up the old year. The more things change, the more they stay the same! I will make this short, but hopefully everyone will find it sweet.

Entry Lighting
I have a very good, and helpful friend who has a web sight  that everyone here could find helpful. I have tried to link it here several times, but I admit, I often have computer difficulties. I am getting better everyday, WOO HOO! Jeanne, this one's for you! Please check this out, it has invaluable information.








I have put a few things on a web sight to be voted on to see it I can get them put into production. If I could get some of you to vote on them, it would be a fantastic help!

This first one is listed as a tube,similar to a double ended mascara tube, to sell to hair dressers with developer in it, and they could put the clients color into the other end. The developer would have a foil seal to keep it separated from the color, and  it would come with a small spatula/brush. The client would take this home and it would be enough color to do his/her part or hair line. Empty ones would work with henna as well. The pre-mixed henna could go in one side, and the powder indigo/amla/cmc/salt could go into the other end. There would be a specific amount of water to add, and the same spatula. I will pitch this later on. It could be frozen until needed as well.

Client custom touch-up
http://www.quirky.com/ideations/829280


This is the one that is for the triple patch testing. I am not sure that it will get through, but if I could get SOME funding, it would help. Please join Quirky.com and vote for them!!

patch testing
http://www.quirky.com/invent/819263/action/vote/query/sort=ending_soon

The Nail Room
Other than that, I am working on hair growth without formaldehyde, that's still going great. I have been doing a lot of henna, and I have had a lot of clients coming from out of town. Past Toronto, Canada, Erie Pennsylvania, Connecticut, and the big city as well. Thank you to them!!

Happy New Year to all, I hope everyone has a fantastic year!
Gina











Friday, December 13, 2013

UPDATE: KOLESTON INNOSENSE, SEE NEW ARTICLE - P&G develops new ME+ molecule with less allergies for Wella, is it SAFE?

Happy Holidays! I hope everyone is having a great holiday season this year. We just had a beautiful snow this morning, it made the Christmas music on the radio a LOT more bearable today. I received an e-mail today that was a request for information on the new ME+ molecule from Wella, which is a Proctor & Gamble company. The new diamine information became available to me in October, but I was not impressed about the information that I read. P&G's inform said it would not people who were already allergic, and it would not stop all allergies. So, I chose not to write about it. I now realize that I need to put the information out about it, good or bad.

It took chemists around the world 20 years to develop this molecule, and they turned down many chemicals before this one. It is an important step in my industry, because it is moving in the right direction. A baby step, but a good step. If it helps to cause less new allergies, then it is a good thing. The name of the chemical is 2-Methoxymeth-p-Phenylenediamine, which did gave me a bit of an eyebrow raise. This is why it will not help people who already have allergy problems with PPD.  While I would like to see a color that the allergic clients could use, we have to crawl before we walk, or we will never run.

Dr. Carsten Goebel, immuno-toxicologist with P&G, stated "that there is data backing up the information." Dr. Bryan Murphy, section head at P&G, said that "there is a growing interest in color that is reduced in the risk of allergic reactions."  From Dr Bianca Piraccini, a dermatologist from the University of Bologna in Italy,
[An]Allergy has two phases. The first is called ‘induction’, when the allergy is developing but shows no symptoms. The second phase is called ‘elicitation’ which is when the symptoms can actually appear. The claim for ME+ is that it has lower potency than PPD/PTD, and so induction of allergy is less likely. But it still could elicit reactions, especially in those already sensitised to PPD/PTD. As Dr Piraccini says: “Severe allergic reactions can still happen, but the induction of an allergy is less likely with the new ME+ technology”.

Wella currently plan to launch the new ME+ molecule as part of their Salon Professional portfolio in early 2014. The product will be called Koleston Perfect Innosense and it will come to salons in 22 shades on launch.

The first link here is to an article in Europe, the second is to the Adobe file from P&G. The third is the European Union's evaluation on the chemical.

http://www.cosmeticsdesign-europe.com/Formulation-Science/P-G-announces-first-permanent-hair-dye-molecule-with-reduced-allergy-risk

http://www.pg.com/en_US/downloads/innovation/factsheet_Wella_ME+_final.pdf

http://www.trichocare.co.uk/download/HE+_2-methyoxymethyl-p-phenylenediamine.pdf

So, the verdict? It's not safe for anyone with allergies. Sorry folks.




Monday, November 4, 2013

Teenage Boy's photos of PPD reaction

I saw this boy on the Dr.Oz show with his mother last year. His mom was a hairdresser, and she actually had known about hair color allergies. The show did talk about the allergies some, but some of the information was not correct. I contacted them via e-mail, but I was  never contacted back again. I have also contacted them 3 times since, but I never get a response. (I have also contacted the Ellen Show, with the same response, I suspect it has to do with advertising money) I have wanted to post these photos here for quite a while, but I am never in the right place at the right time. Finally, here are the photos. I did have them on my facebook for a bit. It was the son's first hair color, but you can tell in the first photo that he has had a tattoo, so he has been exposed to some inks. He also may have come into contact with hair color with his mother being a hair dresser, you just never know. The poor mother felt terrible...so would I! Lesson learned.










Friday, November 1, 2013

Formaldehyde releasers and hair loss, quick results

After doing a months worth of reading and trying a few different brands of product I had my mother try the alcame clean shampoo. It uses a plant based stepan mead mix in stead of sodium laurel sulfate, and has no formaldehyde releasers. Within two weeks, my mother called me at work to say she had a lot of new hair, her bald spots were filled in, and her hair was very full. I responded as any hairdresser, or DAUGHTER would," Mom, there is NO was you could possibly grow that much hair in two weeks. You're crazy." She said she was going to drive over to prove it. I had a client, and I felt impending doom. I am not used to being wrong, but if she is driving over, there is a reason. Of course, my customer was having a good old time watching me squirm. It turned out that both of my parents came, and even my father wants to try the shampoo. I had to take a photo of the area that was previously completely hairless on my mothers scalp, and take a photo for a before photo of my dad. My customer left with a bottle of the shampoo as well. Anyone who knows me, knows that I don't really push products. If you like what I use, and you buy it, you will buy it again. I believe that is more important than a big sales pitch. 

You can read the previous blog and vo to the health food store and purchase much of the same kind of product if you are careful and read the ingredients. Alcame uses 80% recycled plastic, has designed it's bottle so the cap acts as a balance to use every drop, and is highly concentrated. The Pure line has no botanicals,  no essential oils,  no pthalates, no preservatives, ( aka formaldehyde releasers) no sodium laurel sulfate, no petrochemicals, and no fragrance. 

www.alcame.com

Check them out, it's made in Rochester, NY by a friend of mine, Frank Lipani. He is a genius!

Here is the photo of my moms' hair


I hope everyone had a safe and happy Halloween, here's to a "hairy" November!

Gina xx

Monday, October 21, 2013

Hair Loss from PPD , Formaldehyde Releasers and Sodium Laurel Sulfate?

Last week I had a new client that had some hair loss, but had never colored her hair. This was shocking to me, because she was referred to me from a source that usually sends PPD referrals. I began to read through my collection of information, -read as "notebooks of scribble", before I hit the web. I had read something about this before, but I had not remembered how small the articles were, about 4 paragraphs. When I did some reading on-line, I found more information that had been done, and had to add Sodium Laurel Sulfate to the list. I remembered reading something about Formaldehyde, but I was shocked to learn that it was IN THE SHAMPOO I WAS USING!!! I can say that I have been using a line of products I love, but I have been having trouble with hair falling out since my thyroid has been off. Since I switched to Indian shikakia powder, the hair in the shower drain has been cut down to 1/2 of what it was. (you can get it in your local Indian grocery store, or order it on Amazon.com) Here is the information:


 Two of the articles were medical journals that stated that hair loss issues in women can be cause in part from hair color. One was from the Japanese Society for Investigative Dermatology, done in 2012, this study was done on mice and stated that Peroxide or H(2)O(2) and MEA, or Mono-Ethanolamine, may be the key causative ingredients for hair dye-associated dermatitis and hair loss. The second one I had was a medical journal about a woman (41) who had presented hair loss with severe scalp pain. They had ruled out  andro-genetic baldness, and had determined that the cause was due to an allergic reaction to hair dye. (PPD in particular) 

Two of the articles were about Formaldehyde Releasers, which are used as a preservative in shampoos, and other health and beauty aids. I was shocked to learn that even a few of the high end products that I was using in my salon had Formaldehyde Releasers in them. The names of the releasers were as followed: Quaternium 15, DMDM Hydantoin, Ureas, and Sodium Hydroxymethylglycinate.

Here is a bit of the information I learned about the Sodium laurel Sulfate, which is a salt that is cheap, and makes shampoos and soaps lather really nice. I found an article on  livestrong.com from August of 2013 that said this:

Improper use of shampoos containing SLS can lead to hair loss, according to the National Toxic Encephalopathy Foundation. According to the NTEF, hair loss can be the result of poor rinsing that leaves SLS deposits in your hair follicles. These deposits penetrate your scalp and corrode the hair follicle, causing hair loss. MaximumHair.com reports that SLS also affects the rate of new hair growth, which occurs at a rate about eight times slower than normal. In addition, Personal Health Facts reports that NaCL, the salt used as a thickening agent is drying to your hair and, by increasing the potential for breakage, also contributes to hair loss.

Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/303970-sodium-lauryl-sulfate-hair-loss/#ixzz2iNSIVOru

I was pretty blown away to read the 8 times slower bit. I am not so sure that I believe the web sight it came from, but I am experimenting with using nothing on my hair but the powder from India for a short while. I am enclosing what the gob in the shower has looked like for the past 3 Monday mornings. I am not sure how easy it is to tell, but there really is about half as much hair there. I hope it's not too graphic for anyone who is squeamish out there. What a difference so far! -On the bright side, I found several articles that said that they may be able to prove that SLS isn't cancer causing after all. (Believe it, or NOT...)


Tuesday, September 17, 2013

The False Safety of Sunless Tanners, DHA, and the FDA

Tanning booths and sunless tanning is a part of the industry I have chosen for my career. I have worked for salons that offered both, and I have used both. I can say that I used them rarely, because I could not sit still long enough to lay in the tanning bed, or to keep the tanning cream or spray from becoming smeared. I have also unknowingly sold sunless tanner from Aveda with the false pretense that the chemical would be safer because it came from walnut shells. I know know that this is not safer. Here is some information direct from the FDA web sight on DHA, the active ingredient in sunless tanning products.

Thank you, FDA!

http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ProductandIngredientSafety/ProductInformation/ucm134064.htm

What are "sunless tanners"?
Neither the laws nor the regulations enforced by FDA define the term "sunless tanner." It typically refers to products that provide a tanned appearance without exposure to the sun or other sources of ultraviolet radiation. One commonly used ingredient in these products is dihydroxyacetone (DHA), a color additive that darkens the skin by reacting with amino acids in the skin's surface.

DHA is listed in the regulations as a color additive for use in imparting color to the human body. However, its use in cosmetics--including sunless "tanning" products--is restricted to external application (21 CFR 73.2150). According to the CFR, "externally applied" cosmetics are those "applied only to external parts of the body and not to the lips or any body surface covered by mucous membrane" (21 CFR 70.3v). The industry has not provided safety data to FDA in order for the agency to consider approving it for use on these exposure routes, including "misting" from tanning booths.
In addition, no color additive may be used in cosmetics intended for use in the area of the eye unless the color additive is permitted specifically for such use (21 CFR 70.5a) DHA is not permitted for use in the area of the eye. The CFR defines "area of the eye" as follows:
"the area enclosed within the circumference of the supra-orbital ridge, including the eyebrow, the skin below the eyebrow, the eyelids and the eyelashes, and conjunctival sac of the eye, the eyeball, and the soft areolar tissue that lies within the perimeter of the infra-orbital ridge." (21 CFR 70.3s)
As with the lips and other areas covered by mucous membrane, the industry has not provided safety data to FDA in order for the agency to consider approving it for use in the area of the eye.

What does this mean for DHA spray "tanning" booths?
As noted above, the use of DHA in "tanning" booths as an all-over spray has not been approved by the FDA, since safety data to support this use has not been submitted to the Agency for review and evaluation, When using DHA-containing products as an all-over spray or mist in a commercial spray "tanning" booth, it may be difficult to avoid exposure in a manner for which DHA is not approved, including the area of the eyes, lips, or mucous membrane, or even internally.

Consequently, FDA advises asking the following questions when considering commercial facilities where DHA is applied by spraying or misting:

Are consumers protected from exposure in the entire area of the eyes, in addition to the eyes themselves?
Are consumers protected from exposure on the lips and all parts of the body covered by mucous membrane?
Are consumers protected from internal exposure caused by inhaling or ingesting the product?
If the answer to any of these questions is "no," the consumer is not protected from the unapproved use of this color additive. Consumers should request measures to protect their eyes and mucous membranes and prevent inhalation.

Has FDA received reports of adverse reactions associated with sunless tanners?

FDA has received reports from consumers stating that they have experienced adverse events associated with sunless tanning, including rashes and, primarily in the case of spray tanning booths, coughing, dizziness, and fainting. It is uncertain what, if any, ingredient or combination of ingredients in the sunless tanning products might have caused these adverse events, whether an individual's allergic reaction might have played a part, or whether factors unrelated to the sunless tanning products may have been involved, such as pre-existing medical conditions.
Under the authority of the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (FPLA), FDA requires ingredient declarations on cosmetics sold on a retail basis to consumers. In this way, consumers can know what ingredients are contained in the products they purchase and avoid ingredients to which they may be sensitive. However, the FPLA does not apply to products used exclusively by professionals, such as those used in spray tanning booths.

Who is responsible for the safety of spray tanning booths?
The FD&C Act does not authorize FDA to approve cosmetic products or ingredients, with the exception of color additives that are not coal-tar hair dyes. Firms and individuals who market cosmetics are responsible for assuring that the products they market are safe when used under labeled or customary conditions of use and properly labeled. FDA can take action against firms and individuals who violate the law. The practice of administering such products by professionals, such as in salons, is generally the responsibility of local and state health authorities.

Consumers and healthcare providers can report adverse reactions from cosmetic products, including sunless tanners, using the contact information in Bad Reaction to Cosmetics? Tell FDA.

You can read more of this article at the FDA web sight. I included the link at the beginning of the information. I am not sure why so much of my industry is unregulated. I am more surprised by each chemical I begin to look up. I will be posting more often if the results are as fruitful as they seem to be. 

-sadly, Gina 

Thursday, September 5, 2013

What is Really Organic, and What is NOT in a Salon

This week, I had a question about organics. Specifics such as, "Is your shampoo organic?" or, perms, color, put anything in place of the shampoo. It can be a tricky slope for a client. Since a truly organic product must be refrigerated, and will last only a few days, you really want something that is mostly organic.  I look for quality ingredients, natural and organic, along with some other products. I would be lying if I said there were no chemicals. No salon is chemical free, no matter what they say, just by the very definition of the word.

Chemical -  A substance having a specific molecular composition, obtained by or used in a chemical process. 
Obviously, your color is processing, RIGHT?

There are others,

 Chemical - A substance with a distinct molecular composition that is produced by or used in a chemical process.

I worked with Aveda products for 18 years, and I thought they were an amazing company. I would take a short class when each new product came out, and was taught all the lovely things about it. I was told to drink the Koolaid, so to speak. After I stopped selling it, I began to look at the ingredients, and I realized since the Lauder Companies had purchased them they were not quite what they once were. A product touting organic lavender had 25 other ingredients, and lavender was close to last. They even had the Aveda signature scent added, so I had been selling a product, and saying how lovely the organic lavender in it was, but you could not even smell it. Ask anyone who has used Aveda, and they will tell you it is a natural or organic product. However, it's not. In fact, the company actually states, "When possible." When they say that something is 97% naturally derived, that does not mean that it is organic, or that it is good for you. You always need to read the fine print, because chemicals exist.

 The hair products I now carry were developed by a man from Rochester, a city about an hour from where I live, who worked with Aveda for about the same amount of time I did. He decided he could do what Aveda was doing, but much better, so he set out to do just that. All of the scents ALONE  in his products are real, from passion flower, to yuzu nectar.

  www.alcame.com

Most people don't know that in chemistry, there is the study of organic chemistry, and in-organic chemistry. Organic chemistry, is the study of all carbon based things. In-organic based chemistry is the study of basically what's left. So, when I make my all natural lip saver, I use organic apricot oil, organic coconut oil, organic orange oil, and NATURAL BEE'S WAX. You can't control where the bee's go, so they may flit onto a flower with a pesticide. There is no organic bee's wax. Water has no carbon. Therefore, if a product has WATER added, technically, it is NO LONGER ORGANIC. I choose to answer questions CORRECTLY,  and to educate my clients. Is water bad for you? That can be your decision, but it should be very easy!

There are many companies that take advantage of the U.S. laws where you can have just one organic ingredient and call your product "Organic", including "Organic Salon Systems". You can go to any salon that carries this brand of products and they will tell you that their entire salon is organic. Does this mean that the color is chemical free? Absolutely not. Does it mean that the shampoo is food grade products? Absolutely not. Does it mean that the hair color is PPD free? At the time of this posting, absolutely not. It does not mean that the company has a terrible product. It means that they prey on naive people to sell the product, and to purchase the product. They also are no different from many other companies that use the current laws to miss-represent  what the product they have actually is.

You want products that are plant based, high quality, no sodium laurel sulfates, no added fragrance, no added dyes, doesn't test on animals, uses post consumer plastics, and I am sure I am forgetting about 25 other things. Actually, trust your hairdresser, or read the back of the bottle. A good product will have a money back guarantee. That way, if you buy it, and you don't like it, you can bring it back. The most important thing about hair products? That they WORK. Cheap shampoos have detergents that strip hair and strip color. Cheap conditioners use wax and lanolin to make the hair feel soft, but it will also look dirty faster, and feel weighed down. Gels flake, sprays build up and turn white.

 Chemicals exist, but less is always better. In the long run, don't pay extra for something that says it's organic if it isn't organic. False advertising is still false advertising, even if there is a loophole in the law.


Sunday, August 18, 2013

The FDA has no authority over PPD in hair color, a timeline history

I read on boards, and get e-mails, where people blame the FDA for not regulating PPD better. Congress has removed the FDA's ability to control, change, or even adjust hair color. They can monitor, and collect cases of people who have had an allergic reaction. If you have had one (or several...) please go to this link and fill out the paper work.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/medwatch/medwatch-online.htm

This is a brief timeline of sorts compiled from several articles I have collected over the past 10 years of studying this allergy. It might help to explain some of the futility of it all.

1845 - August Wilhelm Hoffman had started to work with compounds such as indigo and coal tar in the 1840's. He names them aniline dyes. Anil, from the Arabic word for indigo.  He prepares this aromatic amino compound in two steps from the coal tar hydrocarbon benzene.  There were other other coal tar hydrocarbons, such as toluene, naphthalene and anthracene.

1856- William Henry Perkins discovers the first completely synthetic aniline dye. It was to replace Madder Root, which imparts different shades of red.

1862- The London World Exhibition has an exhibitor with a "slab" of aniline. It had been produced from 2,000 tons of coal tar, was 20 inches high, and 9 inches wide.

1881 - U.S.Department of Agriculture (U.S.D.A.) authorizes artificial coloring in cheese and butter. The Chemistry department begins research on colorants.

1900 - Coloring agents are used to hide inferior or defective food.

1902 - American Pharmaceutical Association (A.Ph.A.)  requests more standardization for medicine. Percentage of potency in most drugs was well below what was labeled.

1906 - The 1906 Food and Drug Act - Prohibits the use of poisonous or deleterious colors in confectionery, and the coloring and staining of food to conceal damage or inferiority.

1907 - The U.S.D.A. issues the Food Inspection Decision (FID)

1910 - Gaston Boudou produced the first commercially available PPD hair dye in France. It is called, "Inecto"

1912 - Harvey Wiley leaves the U.S.D.A. after 29 years. (1883-1912) He shockingly goes to work for "Good House Keeping Magazine" as the Director of the Bureau of Foods. He chooses this move as a statement about the way that the government is ignoring the issues of purity and safety of food, drugs, and cosmetics. It was also a statement towards the rising power of women's groups, and women as consumers in the marketplace.

1927 - The United States Food and Drug Administration is formed. (F.D.A.) It was called the "Food Drug and Insecticide Administration" at the time, the current name was given in 1930.

1931 -  15 straight colors were approved for use in food. Here are 6 of the seven still in use today :

FD&C Blue No. 1 (Brilliant Blue FCF), 
FD&C Blue No. 2 (Indigotine),
FD&C Green No. 3 (Fast Green FCF),
FD&C Red No. 3 (Erythrosine),
FD&C Yellow No. 5 (Tartrazine), and
FD&C Yellow No. 6 (Sunset Yellow)

1933 -  Lash Lure, a permanent mascara containing Para-phenylene Diamine, has been on the shelves. The FDA is unable to have it removed from the market despite attempts. More than a dozen women had been blinded, and one had died. This was recounted in a 1936 book by Ruth DeForest-Lamb, "The Chamber of Horrors". There were no rules for testing new cosmetics at this time. There were many other cosmetics that had problems in this era, such as Radithor, a radium laced water that was said to restore one's virility, and mercury based skin lighteners.

1937 - Elixir sulfanilamide. This  was an antibiotic that was used in tablet and powder form for several years to treat streptococcal infections successfully. The S.E. Massengill Co. had a chemist who found that the powder would dissolve in Diethylene Glycol, or anti-freeze. The chemist did not know it would be deadly. No testing had been done for toxicity, only for taste, fragrance, and appearance. 107 people died, most of them children. The name given to this mixture, "Elixir", gives the mixture an alcohol based category. This allowed the FDA to seize all products. If the product had been given the proper name, "Solution", no violations would have been made, and the FDA would have been powerless to remove the drug from the shelves. The S.E. Massengill Co. was charged with misbranding.  Dr. Samual Evans Massengill, the firm's owner, said: "My chemists and I deeply regret the fatal results, but there was no error in the manufacture of the product. We have been supplying a legitimate professional demand and not once could have foreseen the unlooked-for results. I do not feel that there was any responsibility on our part." The chemist had committed suicide before the trial, so he must not have shared his feelings.

1938 - The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 - This act further increased government oversight of food and drugs, and for the first time, CONGRESS passed legislation for the regulation of cosmetics and medical devices. For color additives, the 1938 FD&C Act mandated the listing of those coal-tar colors (other than coal-tar hair dyes) that were "harmless and suitable" for use in foods, drugs, and cosmetics; required the listing of new colors; and made mandatory the previously voluntary certification program for batches of listed colors, with associated fees.  Mr. Charlie Crawford, who was head of the FDA, was instrumental in rushing to get this 1938 law passed through congress. There had been a lot of arguing, and no one could agree as to what should be on it, or what should be left out. Once the sulfanilamide deaths had occured, Mr. Crawford had made sure this law was expedited before something else happened, and he was sick with emphysema.

Congress, in 1938, passed a law that said the FDA has no authority over hair dyes. This has not been changed. Until we go to Congress, and plead our case, it will remain the same.

1953 - In upstate NY, Mr. Weilerstein, an FDA worker, makes out a report on a farm that is cutting down old tough beets, and canning them, and selling them as baby beets. The company contacts their congressman, and the result is that they had the first R.I.F, or a Reduction In Force. Some of the  Civil Servants didn't have their permanent jobs yet. The reasoning was that Mr. Weilerstein had nothing better to do than harass the company.

1954 - Mr. G. Larrick becomes commissioner. He builds up the FDA again. He was also responsible for tracking down all of the sulfanilamide in 1937. He was head during it's greatest growth, which had expanded tenfold, according to his leader history on the FDA web sight. Larrick was also known for his ability to get along with Congress, and many investigations came to fruition during his time as commissioner. He resigned in 1965.

1955 -  Division of Biologics Control becomes an independent entity within the National Institutes of Health, after a polio vaccine  is thought to have been inactivated, and  is associated with about 260 cases of polio.


1958 - Food Additives Amendment is enacted, which required manufacturers of new food additives to establish safety. The Delaney proviso prohibited the approval of any food additive shown to induce cancer in humans or animals.

1959 -  Aminotriazole, a weedkiller found to cause cancer in lab animals is found on the U.S. Cranberry crop 4 days before Thanksgiving. Cleared berries were allowed labels showing that they had been tested and cleared; the only such endorsement ever allowed by FDA on a food product before. 

1960 - In the fall of 1960, many children became ill from eating orange Halloween candy containing 1-2% FD&C Orange No.1 a color additive approved for use in food. The FDA re-evaluated all of the listed color additives. They found that there were many that needed to be removed from the list. It also had become clear that coal was no longer the primary raw material source for the manufacture of color additives. This prompted the Color Additive Amendment.

Color Additive Amendment  was enacted, requiring manufacturers to establish the safety of color additives in foods, drugs and cosmetics. The Delaney Clause prohibits the approval of any color additive shown to induce cancer in humans or animals. 

Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act, enforced by FDA, requires prominent label warnings on bottles of Thalidomide, and hazardous household chemical products.

1962 - Thalidomide, a new sleeping pill, is found to have caused birth defects in thousands of babies born in western Europe. News reports on the role of Dr. Frances Kelsey, FDA medical officer, in keeping the drug off the U.S. market, arouse public support for stronger drug regulation.

This was the "Drug Industry Act of 1962", that the FDA was trying to pass. (it does not) What was passed was the Kefauver-Harris Drug Amendments to ensure drug efficacy and greater drug safety.

This is a partial excerpt from a court hearing for the Drug Industry Act of 1962:

"At a hearing before the Food and Drug Administration held in Washington on  January 6 1956, Dr. Adolph Rostenberg, a consultant for the Food and Drug Administration testified to the effect that the patch test was prescribed by the present Food Drug and Cosmetic law was a highly accurate means of discovering whether or not a prospective user of coal-tar hair dyes was allergic to the product.

Dr. Louis Schwartz, former medical director of the U.S. Public Health Service, testified at the same hearing to the effect that the incidence of allergy to para- phcnylenediamine hair colorings (paraphenylenediamine is a chemical commonly used in the permanent type of hair dyes) was low; that he had examined thousands for incidence of allergy to such dyes and it was nil. His testimony further showed that of millions of bottles of a well known permanent type of coal-tar hair dye sold, a ratio of less than 0.00001 percent complained of alleged allergic reactions. 

No one has ever claimed that hair dyes were toxic or poisonous. The incidence of Injury due to allergic reaction is much too small to justify the proscription (or removal) of these widely used products. There are over 150,000 beauty shops in the United States. Over 800,000 persons are employed In the beauty shop industry. Gross income received by beauty shops total’s over $2.500 million a year. Hair coloring is estimated to constitute over 40 percent of the business of these beauty shops. Without hair coloring
business, few of the 150,000 beauty shops could survive, and hundreds of thousands of idled hairdressers and other employees would greatly expand the already large body of unemployed. Drug and department stores sell milllions of dollars worth of hair dyes yearly. Should section 103 be adopted, these stores would lose an important segment of their business.

Despite the economic disaster which would follow the outlawing of hair colorings. We would not urge it as an excuse for permitting the sale of coal-tar hair dyes if such sale were not amply justified. However, from all of the facts available it must be clear to any impartial observer that there is no justification whatsoever for prohibiting the sale and use of these materials. Millions of women today color their own hair or have It colored in beauty shops. They will not willlngly abandon the use of hair colorings for the enhancement of their personal appearance."
{This is a partial court statement before Honorable Oren Harris, by Ralph L. Evans, Ph. D. (from a well known hair product company, that the name was withheld) H.R. 11582, section 103 be denied.}

Other letters written to the court were found online, you can click on the link and read them for your self.

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/04/apr04/042004/03p-0275-ref0001-089-Tab-38-03-vol6.pdf

1965 - Drug Abuse Control Amendments are enacted to deal with problems caused by abuse of depressants, stimulants and hallucinogens.

1966 - FDA contracts with the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council to evaluate the effectiveness of 4,000 drugs approved on the basis of safety alone between 1938 and 1962.

Fair Packaging and Labeling Act requires all consumer products in interstate commerce to be honestly and informatively labeled, with FDA enforcing provisions on foods, drugs, cosmetics, and medical devices.

1968 - Reorganization of federal health programs places FDA in the Public Health Service

1970 - FDA requires the first patient package insert: oral contraceptives must contain information for the patient about specific risks and benefits

The rest of the information does not contribute to the PPD information that is my passion. You can click on the link below and read the rest of the history. There is also a link provided for where much of the information came from for this post.

I chose to post this information so people will know that congress passed a law in 1938 that the FDA has their hands tied for hair color.





Links :



http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/ProductRegulation/SulfanilamideDisaster/default.htm

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/OralHistories/SelectedOralHistoryTranscripts/UCM264493.pdf (weilerstein)

http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/Leaders/Commissioners/ucm093757.htm (crawford)

http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/Leaders/Commissioners/ucm093755.htm (larrick)

http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/Milestones/ucm128305.htm





Wednesday, July 10, 2013

PPD allergy and direct dyes or azo dyes

For people with mild to moderate PPD allergies, direct dyes are sometimes a life saver. These are the kind of dyes that are one step, no mixing. Of course, they have very different diamines in them as well. At Sally's, you can use Manic Panic, or Jazzing, or for a professional route, you can try Goldwell's Elumen or J Beverly Hills just released Fashion Colors. The dark natural colors in these brands are not all that great. They are all temporary colors, or semi-permanent at best. The best for natural colors is Cosamo. I haven't used it yet, but it seems promising from the client reviews. The customer service is great too.





I can not stress enough that you will want to do the 3 step patch testing that I have covered previously. If you have severe allergies, this is not for you. The red manic panic has had a few reactions as well, so patch test!

Remember, this is NOT a proven color for PPD sufferers. Please use extreme caution. If you react, call 911. Do not use this alone, so if your airway is constricted, someone else can speak to 911 for you. If you start to go into an allergic reaction that is severe, don't drive to the doctor, or the emergency room. The time it takes for your airway to swell is extremely short, so safety is a must.

Best wishes, with caution!
Gina