If you were/are thinking about the BRAZILIAN BLOWOUT...read this!

MirCurls · 09-18-2010, 12:36 AM

It's your hair, your health, your choice. BUT...do be informed:

http://www.ohsu.edu/xd/research/cent...and-alerts.cfm

What the final outcomes of retesting, government regulation, etc, will be, dunno. BUT...you should keep an eye out on this emerging alert if this is a procedure you're interested in.

Me, um, I am no longer tempted.

boucles · 09-18-2010, 12:44 AM

I was tempted at one time, especially after my old stylist (who provides organic, resorcinol and ammonia-free colour services) touted the formula that she uses in the Brazilian Blowout as being formaldehyde free.

Thing is, and I wish I could find the article I read after she told me that, formaldehyde is apparently needed regardless or one's hair just won't respond to the treatment.

For me, getting my hair into its healthiest frizz-free natural state as possible (and growing it a bit) is the new goal.

CurlieTop · 09-18-2010, 12:48 AM

Women's Health magazine mentioned this as well in a recent issue, and gave a resounding "no" recommendation to getting a chemical treatment containing formaldehyde. Since magazines are usually run by the companies that advertise in them, that was a breath of fresh air.

Interesting how the Brazilian Blowout containers aren't labeled with ingredients. That should be as illegal as selling a product to a consumer without ingredients.

Edit: I just re-read the part about how the Safety Sheets are required to list formaldehyde amounts of >0.1%, and the BB solution was found to have 4.5%, yet the safety sheet doesn't list any hazardous ingredients. How extremely deceptive.

MirCurls · 09-18-2010, 01:00 AM

Unless that salon in Portland got hold of fakes/hoax batches/weird dupes/knock-offs, BB is on the hook for false claims, false advertising, and just plain being liars who bald-facedly lie with their sleek Brazilian pants on fire. And breaking governmental safety rules.

If it turns out they are liar-liars-flaming-slacks-wearers....I hope they get fined right out of business.

This is not something to fib about.

redcelticcurls · 09-18-2010, 07:10 AM

Formaldehyde-free my ass!

It was just a matter of time before something like this happened.

MirCurls · 09-18-2010, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redcelticcurls

Formaldehyde-free my ass!

It was just a matter of time before something like this happened.

Well, i have always FIRMLY believed your fair Celtic butt was formaldehyde free.

redcelticcurls · 09-18-2010, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MirCurls

Quote:

Originally Posted by redcelticcurls

Formaldehyde-free my ass!

It was just a matter of time before something like this happened.

Well, i have always FIRMLY believed your fair Celtic butt was formaldehyde free.

HAHAHAHAHA!

But, (no pun intended) I often said that you can't just slap some keratin on your hair with a flat iron and get straight/er hair for 3 months. If that was the case, people would be slapping on some K-pak and getting straighter hair.

Keratin treatments are genius about marketing, and know how to hit the hatred of curls and/or frizz.

I just think they should be more open about what they use.

I use chemical services myself in my color, and I am not one of those who thinks that all natural products are any better than conventional products.

But, I do think people should know what is in the stuff they are using, and companies shouldn't BS about how their products work.

MirCurls · 09-19-2010, 12:06 AM

Absolutely. Let us take our risks being INFORMED.

I color as well. Granted, I color less than what would be considered ideal to minimize exposure to the harsher chemicals (more due to my skin sensitivities than concern about hair). And I try to fill the gap with less damaging cellophanes.

I don't care if folks want to use formaldehyde, as long as they know it, the st ylist knows it, and adequate health procedures are taken so clients who don't want to be damaged by chemical toxins aren't exposed. Stylists need to know so they use gloves. Clients need to be informed so if they have ill effects, they can't then yap and sue: it's on their heads. Er, literally.

m_and_m · 09-22-2010, 06:16 PM

I just want to point out that the tested bottle was from 2009, which they do admit contained aldehydes (no idea if they admitted it then, but they do now). The formulation was changed in April 2010, and it does not work the same/as well as the products that still do have aldehydes in them. It does not get all hair types as straight, and it does not last as long.

I'm anxiously awaiting the test results of the bottle they are currently testing. If that one is shown to contain aldehydes (or chemicals that convert to aldehydes with heat), then I'll join you in the bb bashing.

MirCurls · 09-22-2010, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m_and_m

I just want to point out that the tested bottle was from 2009, which they do admit contained aldehydes (no idea if they admitted it then, but they do now). The formulation was changed in April 2010, and it does not work the same/as well as the products that still do have aldehydes in them. It does not get all hair types as straight, and it does not last as long.

I'm anxiously awaiting the test results of the bottle they are currently testing. If that one is shown to contain aldehydes (or chemicals that convert to aldehydes with heat), then I'll join you in the bb bashing.

Good point. But my question remains: Why not list the ingredients?

Get your fricken patent if it's so revolutionary, BB, but list the ingredients. I find "no ingredients" suspect, test or no.

They can say all they want it's "proprietary", but that doesn't wash for me when it's applied to the body and might have health consequences. Too bad. List the ingredients.

And call me cynical, but M_and_M signed up this month and is posting in support of bb. So, I'm guessing, yeah, one of the BB folks.

m_and_m · 09-22-2010, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MirCurls

Quote:

Originally Posted by m_and_m

I just want to point out that the tested bottle was from 2009, which they do admit contained aldehydes (no idea if they admitted it then, but they do now). The formulation was changed in April 2010, and it does not work the same/as well as the products that still do have aldehydes in them. It does not get all hair types as straight, and it does not last as long.

I'm anxiously awaiting the test results of the bottle they are currently testing. If that one is shown to contain aldehydes (or chemicals that convert to aldehydes with heat), then I'll join you in the bb bashing.

Good point. But my question remains: Why not list the ingredients?

Get your fricken patent if it's so revolutionary, BB, but list the ingredients. I find "no ingredients" suspect, test or no.

They can say all they want it's "proprietary", but that doesn't wash for me when it's applied to the body and might have health consequences. Too bad. List the ingredients.

And call me cynical, but M_and_M signed up this month and is posting in support of bb. So, I'm guessing, yeah, one of the BB folks.

It's patent-pending. It can take awhile. A LONG while. I'd prefer they list the ingredients as well, personally, but they aren't required to so they don't.

But no, I'm not one of the bb folks beyond being a stylist that performs the treatment. If it turns out the current formulation does contain aldehydes, then I'll be as pissed as the next person (or more, really, because unlike somebody who gets the treatment 4x a year I'm spending 20+ hours a week doing it for people, and assuring them it's safe).

One of my distributor reps sent me the link, and I was pretty unhappy after I read it until I realized it was from a 2009 bottle.

Here's a little more about me, in case it makes you feel better:
In addition to being a stylist (nights and weekends only), I am also a FT nanny and have a toddler of my own. I also own a cloth diaper website, where I retail CD's and other natural baby products. I'm an outspoken Lactivist and Attachment Parent in Austin, TX.

I've been a colour specialist since 2000, so I never gave much thought to styling curly (or straight) hair until recently when I decided to go back to offering full services. I do a mean highlight on curly hair though. :-)

My salon's FB page is tinyurl.com/salonmar
I'm Mar, and it's a studio salon that my mom and I share- I'm nights and weekends, she's days.

I'm not really into styling my hair enough to be an active poster, but I've been lurking for awhile. I'm also an avid lurker on Mothering.com, thebabywearer.com, and an active poster on thebump.com (since 2003).

Don't know what else to tell ya, but other than providing the service I have no affiliation with bb.

MirCurls · 09-22-2010, 07:43 PM

THANKS for that clarification, MandM. I think you can understand why we're suspicious (and there has been marketing for keratin here masquerading as posters before).

I know patents take a long time. My husband has 25 (or 26, I forget) to his name.

And sometimes it's quite a few years before he gets the number and patent. Seems to me it would be just as long for competitors to get it, longer, since BB would have filed first.

I think as a stylist, yes, you'd be angry. It's YOUR health, too.

Auntie Bubbs · 09-22-2010, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m_and_m

I just want to point out that the tested bottle was from 2009, which they do admit contained aldehydes (no idea if they admitted it then, but they do now). The formulation was changed in April 2010, and it does not work the same/as well as the products that still do have aldehydes in them. It does not get all hair types as straight, and it does not last as long.

I'm anxiously awaiting the test results of the bottle they are currently testing. If that one is shown to contain aldehydes (or chemicals that convert to aldehydes with heat), then I'll join you in the bb bashing.

Regardless of whether the bottle was from 2009 and the formula may or may not have been changed now in 2010, the 2009 bottle was being used on clients and by stylists - it was making them sick. So your point is kind of pointless.
And if you're really a stylist, I would think you'd be worried. This product makes stylists sick. Instead you're advocating for it, but you aren't a BB plant? Ok....

m_and_m · 09-23-2010, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MirCurls

THANKS for that clarification, MandM. I think you can understand why we're suspicious (and there has been marketing for keratin here masquerading as posters before).

I know patents take a long time. My husband has 25 (or 26, I forget) to his name.

And sometimes it's quite a few years before he gets the number and patent. Seems to me it would be just as long for competitors to get it, longer, since BB would have filed first.

I think as a stylist, yes, you'd be angry. It's YOUR health, too.

I totally understand why you'd be suspicious, and I don't take offense at you asking. I see it all the time in the CD world (I am way more involved in online CD stuff than hair- mainly because it's well, an online business/industry) and it's annoying as sh*t.

I don't know much about the patent process besides that it can take fo-re-ver. I know some of the diaper manufacturers I work with have taken upwards of 5 years to get their products patented. I don't know how it differs for this type of thing, but I still assume it's not quick.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Auntie Bubbs

Quote:

Originally Posted by m_and_m

I just want to point out that the tested bottle was from 2009, which they do admit contained aldehydes (no idea if they admitted it then, but they do now). The formulation was changed in April 2010, and it does not work the same/as well as the products that still do have aldehydes in them. It does not get all hair types as straight, and it does not last as long.

I'm anxiously awaiting the test results of the bottle they are currently testing. If that one is shown to contain aldehydes (or chemicals that convert to aldehydes with heat), then I'll join you in the bb bashing.

Regardless of whether the bottle was from 2009 and the formula may or may not have been changed now in 2010, the 2009 bottle was being used on clients and by stylists - it was making them sick. So your point is kind of pointless.

How is it pointless to say that they are two different things? I didn't say the old formula was fine or good or whatever- I said they are DIFFERENT. The current product is not the same as the old product; I didn't say the old product wasn't making people sick. ALL of the keratin treatments with aldehydes are making people sick, bb wasn't the only one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Auntie Bubbs

And if you're really a stylist, I would think you'd be worried. This product makes stylists sick. Instead you're advocating for it, but you aren't a BB plant? Ok....

Perhaps your reading comprehension is a little lacking right now- I did say I'm concerned about my health. I'm concerned about the health of my clients, too.

I'm also not advocating for bb. I'm only saying that the CURRENT product is not the product that has been tested so it creates a false hysteria to freak people out by saying they currently have formaldehyde. You're jumping all over a company because they removed it, so why not jump all over the companies that haven't? They've all tested over the allowable limits at one time. BB is no better or worse than any of the other manufacturers.

Auntie Bubbs · 09-23-2010, 05:28 PM

Methinks the lady doth protest too much. Interesting that she only posts in support of the Brazilian Blowout.
Oh, and btw, MM, I've been a member here for years, with posts in several forums, about many other topics, products, and yes, companies.

MirCurls · 09-23-2010, 05:33 PM

I've been a member for 10 months, but I have 2100+ posts. Snarf.

Feralcurls · 09-23-2010, 06:02 PM

The simple fact is keratin does not make hair straight. Can't say I've ever found it to do heaps for frizz either.

Anyone that has had this done thinking it doesn't have some kickarse chemical in it has been very naive.

redcelticcurls · 09-23-2010, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feralcurls

The simple fact is keratin does not make hair straight. Can't say I've ever found it to do heaps for frizz either.

Anyone that has had this done thinking it doesn't have some kickarse chemical in it has been very naive.

+1

MirCurls · 09-23-2010, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redcelticcurls

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feralcurls

The simple fact is keratin does not make hair straight. Can't say I've ever found it to do heaps for frizz either.

Anyone that has had this done thinking it doesn't have some kickarse chemical in it has been very naive.

+1

Ayup.

Actually, when my curls are drooping, if I use a KERATIN containing protein treatment with heat, it makes me...CURLIER.

Just saying...

MimsTX · 09-24-2010, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Auntie Bubbs

Methinks the lady doth protest too much. Interesting that she only posts in support of the Brazilian Blowout.
Oh, and btw, MM, I've been a member here for years, with posts in several forums, about many other topics, products, and yes, companies.

I think posts like these are so out of line...

if someone's not trolling (and m_and_m is obviously not trolling), there's zero excuse or reason to call someone out like that. She's offering an opinion, and an intelligent, informed opinion at that. Just because she's new doesn't mean that opinion can't be valid. If you don't agree with it, take it for a grain of salt and move on. But this kind of paranoia that so and so is working for "the man" is ridiculous. Who cares if she is? Do your own research in that case and choose to believe what you want, and ignore what she's said. But this is an open forum and I think anyone should be allowed to post their opinions on it without being blasted and accused of being a liar.

just my two cents.