CurlTalk

CurlTalk (http://www.naturallycurly.com/curltalk/)
-   General Discussion about Curly Hair (http://www.naturallycurly.com/curltalk/general-discussion-about-curly-hair/)
-   -   Carol's daughter vs Shea Moisture (http://www.naturallycurly.com/curltalk/general-discussion-about-curly-hair/160221-carols-daughter-vs-shea-moisture.html)

sdkitty 07-07-2013 02:12 PM

Carol's daughter vs Shea Moisture
 
These products seem similar to me but Carol's Daughter is a lot more expensive. Is it worth the exra cost?

Samanthascurlz 07-07-2013 02:36 PM

I never tired CD, but I just looked at some of the ingredients in one of the conditioners and it seems that they use silicones- not sure if they are water soluble or not. SM, does not contain any silicones in any of their products; however, I noticed a lot of their products really act as more sealants than moisturizers since they mostly contain shea butter.

CD seems expensive- and if it is going to contain silicones (water soluble or not) it shouldn't be that expensive IMO. You can find other products, not even just SM, that don't contain harsh ingredients, but actual nourishing ingredients for cheaper. I am all about being cost effective (who isn't right?) but I used to buy whatever seemed expensive- because I figured the more expensive, the better. No, not true at all I have learned!

sdkitty 07-07-2013 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samanthascurlz (Post 2188254)
I never tired CD, but I just looked at some of the ingredients in one of the conditioners and it seems that they use silicones- not sure if they are water soluble or not. SM, does not contain any silicones in any of their products; however, I noticed a lot of their products really act as more sealants than moisturizers since they mostly contain shea butter.

CD seems expensive- and if it is going to contain silicones (water soluble or not) it shouldn't be that expensive IMO. You can find other products, not even just SM, that don't contain harsh ingredients, but actual nourishing ingredients for cheaper. I am all about being cost effective (who isn't right?) but I used to buy whatever seemed expensive- because I figured the more expensive, the better. No, not true at all I have learned!

I agree. I think the Internet has made a huge difference in perception of products. I used to always buy dept store cosmetics and skin care. Now I go to websites like Paula's Choice and Makeupalley and here to NC and find great products for drug store prices.
thanks for the response

Samanthascurlz 07-07-2013 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdkitty (Post 2188261)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Samanthascurlz (Post 2188254)
I never tired CD, but I just looked at some of the ingredients in one of the conditioners and it seems that they use silicones- not sure if they are water soluble or not. SM, does not contain any silicones in any of their products; however, I noticed a lot of their products really act as more sealants than moisturizers since they mostly contain shea butter.

CD seems expensive- and if it is going to contain silicones (water soluble or not) it shouldn't be that expensive IMO. You can find other products, not even just SM, that don't contain harsh ingredients, but actual nourishing ingredients for cheaper. I am all about being cost effective (who isn't right?) but I used to buy whatever seemed expensive- because I figured the more expensive, the better. No, not true at all I have learned!

I agree. I think the Internet has made a huge difference in perception of products. I used to always buy dept store cosmetics and skin care. Now I go to websites like Paula's Choice and Makeupalley and here to NC and find great products for drug store prices.
thanks for the response

Very true! I don't want to be anti-silicones (I don't use them myself, but know many curlies who do and love them). I just don't like when products do contain them and yet charge so much money!

Jessiebanana 07-07-2013 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdkitty (Post 2188261)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Samanthascurlz (Post 2188254)
I never tired CD, but I just looked at some of the ingredients in one of the conditioners and it seems that they use silicones- not sure if they are water soluble or not. SM, does not contain any silicones in any of their products; however, I noticed a lot of their products really act as more sealants than moisturizers since they mostly contain shea butter.

CD seems expensive- and if it is going to contain silicones (water soluble or not) it shouldn't be that expensive IMO. You can find other products, not even just SM, that don't contain harsh ingredients, but actual nourishing ingredients for cheaper. I am all about being cost effective (who isn't right?) but I used to buy whatever seemed expensive- because I figured the more expensive, the better. No, not true at all I have learned!

I agree. I think the Internet has made a huge difference in perception of products. I used to always buy dept store cosmetics and skin care. Now I go to websites like Paula's Choice and Makeupalley and here to NC and find great products for drug store prices.
thanks for the response

Oh I <3 Makeupalley, but you'll pry my Dior Quints from my cold dead fingers.

kathymack 07-07-2013 08:51 PM

As you've remarked, just because products are expensive--doesn't make them good.

You don't mention your properties, so I can't compare them to mine. I can just relate my experience. When I first came on nc.com, I tried the CD products--made my hair greasy. Wouldn't be interested in them at all. I've tried 6 or 7 SM products. The Coconut & Hibiscus products just sit on my hair. I have to wash them out. The few others I've used are unremarkable.

Firefox7275 07-07-2013 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samanthascurlz (Post 2188254)
I never tired CD, but I just looked at some of the ingredients in one of the conditioners and it seems that they use silicones- not sure if they are water soluble or not. SM, does not contain any silicones in any of their products; however, I noticed a lot of their products really act as more sealants than moisturizers since they mostly contain shea butter.

CD seems expensive- and if it is going to contain silicones (water soluble or not) it shouldn't be that expensive IMO. You can find other products, not even just SM, that don't contain harsh ingredients, but actual nourishing ingredients for cheaper. I am all about being cost effective (who isn't right?) but I used to buy whatever seemed expensive- because I figured the more expensive, the better. No, not true at all I have learned!

As ingredients go, silicones are not actually that cheap that is why they are not in many of the cheapest conditioners. This is more evident in the UK where every supermarket and drugstore have an own brand silicone free 'family' conditioner for cheap.

Nor is shea butter especially 'nourishing' for hair because it doesn't penetrate that well, it's much more appropriate for skin. Silicones have to be made in a pricey facility with pricey equipment, shea butter can be made in a cottage industry format (cheap labour in Africa) using the most basic of equipment - I do wonder how cheaply the lower grades can be sourced in bulk.

Similarly I am quite sure the reason wheat protein crops up regularly in haircare is that it's a cheap by product (waste) from the human food industry. It's certainly why it's used so freely in cat and dog food despite the fact that felines are obligate carnivores (must eat meat).

Jessiebanana 07-07-2013 09:51 PM

IME Carol's Daughter products are nothing special. With that said I've come to learn that butters do nothing for my hair and most of their products have butters in them. Contrary to the tightly curly stereotype, my hair likes lighter products in general.

CDs products are very heavily fragranced though and they irritate my scalp. I would choose SM. Their products are a better value and just as, if not more, effective.

anonymous_133347 07-08-2013 12:30 AM

+1 for Shea Moisture. It's my HG brand. I think it could depend on your properties. Mine are the exact opposite of KathyMack's so that's may be why my hair responds so well to all of the emollients, heavy though they may be.

wavydaze 07-08-2013 10:56 AM

My properties are similar to Kathymack's and I like the SheaMoisture Coconut/Hibiscus line. Haven't tried the smoothie though, I think that may weigh me down too much.

I agree with Kathy that the SM C/H Milk in my hair does take a while to absorb, BUT that means I wake up next day with awesome waves (zero producty-feel) and can push 3rd day hair as well. I do conditioner-only styling most days and hate re-wetting and re-styling every day. Yay to lazy-happy products!

There might be better products out there than the SM line (I'm not as well-versed in CG products as Kathymack) but I still think they make solid, solid products.

I have to add that I live in a tropical climate with 70/80s dew points year-round, and then visit my parents in FL in the summer, so more high dews. This probably has a lot to do with why my hair is very happy with all the emollients in SM products.

Haven't tried CD, sorry, can't put my input there.

Samanthascurlz 07-08-2013 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Firefox7275 (Post 2188445)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Samanthascurlz (Post 2188254)
I never tired CD, but I just looked at some of the ingredients in one of the conditioners and it seems that they use silicones- not sure if they are water soluble or not. SM, does not contain any silicones in any of their products; however, I noticed a lot of their products really act as more sealants than moisturizers since they mostly contain shea butter.

CD seems expensive- and if it is going to contain silicones (water soluble or not) it shouldn't be that expensive IMO. You can find other products, not even just SM, that don't contain harsh ingredients, but actual nourishing ingredients for cheaper. I am all about being cost effective (who isn't right?) but I used to buy whatever seemed expensive- because I figured the more expensive, the better. No, not true at all I have learned!

As ingredients go, silicones are not actually that cheap that is why they are not in many of the cheapest conditioners. This is more evident in the UK where every supermarket and drugstore have an own brand silicone free 'family' conditioner for cheap.

Nor is shea butter especially 'nourishing' for hair because it doesn't penetrate that well, it's much more appropriate for skin. Silicones have to be made in a pricey facility with pricey equipment, shea butter can be made in a cottage industry format (cheap labour in Africa) using the most basic of equipment - I do wonder how cheaply the lower grades can be sourced in bulk.

Similarly I am quite sure the reason wheat protein crops up regularly in haircare is that it's a cheap by product (waste) from the human food industry. It's certainly why it's used so freely in cat and dog food despite the fact that felines are obligate carnivores (must eat meat).

I see what you are saying- makes sense why some of Suave and V05 don't carry silicones. Furthermore, I do find it good to know what is in the ingredients since then you know you won't be paying for something that something else possibly cheaper could do.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2011 NaturallyCurly.com