by
Cassandre
by Cassandre of cassandrebeccai.com
After flat ironing my hair for the curing period
“You mean this product can help keep my hair temporarily bone straight for longer than an hour? Sign me up, today!” This was the only thought that crossed my mind as I trolled the website of the Uncurly brand Brazilian Keratin Treatment looking for a solution for my frizz prone natural hair.
While others complain about missing their curls after 3.4 seconds of wearing a straightened style, I can easily go a week or maybe even two with no interest in seeing my curls again before washday.
My choice to heat-style was met with the reality that my hair doesn’t stay straight for long. The last time I took a flat iron to my hair was two years ago. What became of my hard work after 30 minutes of exposure was an awesome blown out fro. I wanted my straight look to stay for a while this time, but how? With a DIY Brazilian Keratin Treatment, of course!
The Brazilian Keratin Treatment is known for it’s ability to temporarily loosen tightly curly hair and provide humidity resistance for at least 3 months thus improving heat styling results by keeping it frizz-free. I can’t say I did years of research on the BKT, but I did enough to decide on the Uncurly brand Straightening Kit, which among ingredients of nano hydrolyzed proteins contains 4% formaldehyde in the formula.
Yep. FORMALDEHYDE.
Before you turn on your imitation Sweet Brown on me (ain’t nobody got time for that!), hear me out.
I believe one can do anything with their hair as long as they’re not ignorant of best practices and the possible long lasting effects.
I’ve heard about the formaldehyde in the BKT formula debate and decided to go with this product because:
I could hardly wait to apply the product when I finally got it. I clarified with the Uncurly shampoo then I applied the straightener on my air-dried hair. I was careful to use as little heat as possible on my strands so as to not fry my curls. My low heat process + being on mommy duty for much of the time allowed the task to take up to 2 days to complete. In the end, after washing out my hair after the curing process I was pleasantly surprised by my results. You can check out my video recording of the BKT application and results below:
Now, three months after my treatment, I can honestly say that it was the right decision for me.
Here are three positive things I noticed after I did my at home BKT treatment.
1. My hair retained moisture better.
What I noticed for weeks after this treatment is that my hair seemed to be able to retain moisture much better, so much so that I skipped deep conditioning my hair after washes for a few weeks (isn’t that a natural hair faux pas or something?)
Usually, I’d have to moisturize my hair at least twice a day in order for it to feel this good, but for the time I had the treatment, I really didn’t have to. All of a sudden my dry hair seemed less dry!
This makes sense because the product makes your hair more humidity resistant. Humidity resistant hair is hair that is well moisturized and thus doesn’t need to be looking to the atmosphere for the hydration is craves.
2. My hair felt stronger.
I’m not talking about stronger as in “I just did a protein treatment. Can’t you tell by the stiff feeling and dusty look of my afro,” but more like, “Oooh girl, even my ends feel like they’ve just grown out of my scalp!”
My hair seriously had that brand spankin’ new feeling that I only remember as a newly natural. When that hair first pops out of your scalp, it’s unadulterated by the myriad of stuff we do to it and thus it’s generally stronger. That feeling lasted for weeks.
3. My hair snagged and tangled less.
Can I tell you how not a tangle could be seen or felt in my hair for nearly 2 months?! I mean, seriously, ya’ll. SERIOUSLY. Snags and tangling are the arc enemies of growing natural hair and this product helped keep all that at bay and for that I am grateful!
I didn’t experience the loosened curl pattern that many experience after a Brazilian Keratin Treatment, because I deliberately did not use enough product for that to happen. For my length and thickness, using closer to 2/3 or even the whole 4oz bottle of treatment would have probably given me the looser curl result.
My hair two days after the treatment.
Since applying the treatment I’ve only blow-dried my hair twice (my hair dried very quickly by the way; a direct result of the treatment) and I haven’t flat ironed my hair again. At the end of the day, I felt the benefits were worth it to me and I would gladly do it again.
Editor’s Note: The effects of the Brazilian Keratin Treatment vary according to hair’s resilience and strenth. Some naturals have reported excessive shedding and breakage after doing a Brazilian keratin treatment.
What were your results from a DIY Brazilian Keratin Treatment? Would you try it again? Why or why not?
50 Responses
I just got an Amino Acid Treatment and I am in love!!! No turning back!
No more frizz and tangles, but I am still wearing my hair curly. This is a winner for me!
Looks great Cassandre, thanks for the information and your experience.
Monsanto begins compensating victims of dioxin exposure
Published time: July 08, 2014 19:16
Residents of a West Virginia town that formerly hosted a Monsanto factory that produced noxious, cancer-causing chemicals can begin receiving assistance promised through a 2012, multi-million-dollar settlement.
A long-promised claims office finally opened up on First Avenue in Nitro, WV on Tuesday this week, meaning residents there will now be able to drop by five-days a week through October 31 in order to learn about what kind of coverage they are eligible to receive.
Monsanto, a major biotech corporation and the world’s largest seed producer, shut down their Nitro plan in 2004. Decades beforehand, however, the company produced the Vietnam War-era herbicide Agent Orange at the facility. Dioxin, a chemical by-product of the weed killer, was later linked to causing cancer and other serious health problems in those exposed to it.
In lieu of going to trial over the contamination, the biotech company agreed in 2012 to spend millions of dollars on a program that for the next three decades will assist residents of Nitro impacted by the plant.
West Virginia’s State Journal reported this week that anyone who lived, worked or attended school in areas impacted by the dioxin contamination can now show up at the claims office and register in order to formally express their interest in receiving free medical monitoring or have their property cleaned-up.
Under the terms of the settlement, Monsanto agreed to pay $84 million on the 30-year monitoring program, according to the State Journal — $21 million towards initial testing, and $63 million if dioxin test results suggests more should be done. Additionally, the company pledged $9 million towards property clean-up efforts to be undertaken at cites still contaminated. According to a 2013 report in the West Virginia Gazette, Monsanto planned on cleaning upwards of 4,500 homes in the area that were contaminated with dioxin dust. That procedure, the paper reported at the time, was expected to include vacuuming carpets, rugs and accessible horizontal surfaces with High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filter vacuums, wet cleaning floors, floor vents, tops of doors and window moldings, interior window sills, ceiling fans, light fixtures and radiators.
Thomas V. Flaherty, the court-appointed administrator of the class action settlement, told the paper that the opening of the claims office means that millions of dollars can soon go towards “medical examinations and property cleanup services to people and property affected the production of ‘dioxin’ at the Nitro Monsanto plant.” In order to be eligible, claims filers must be able to show that they worked, lived or studied near Nitro between 1948 and 2010.
“We are pleased to resolve this matter and end any concerns about historic operations at the Nitro plant,” Scott Partridge, Monsanto counsel, said in a statement when the settlement was first reached in 2012.
Meanwhile, a recent study has suggested that Roundup, a Monsanto-made herbicide used to treat the company’s GMO crops, may be linked to a fatal kidney disease. The study, published earlier this year in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, concluded that Roundup’s key ingredient, glyphosate, becomes highly toxic to the kidneys when mixed withor metals like arsenic and cadmium that often exist naturally in the soil. RT reported at the time that glyphosate was patented as a herbicide by Monsanto in the early 1970s, and has since been used to treat crops around the world, albeit with allegedly adverse reactions.
http://rt.com/usa/171312-monsanto-nitro-settlement-office/
I strongly believe that GMO must be better look into because it is not as simple as scientists and their studies make it look like. Choosing a more productive or stronger crop according to the Nature cycles, soils and environment is way much healthier and less harmful than modifying them with gene-insertion using long term harmful methods where bacteria and viruses are used in a way they are not supposed to be used for the sake of having more food faster. It has been proven that GMO plants modify the environment especially when plants are grown in places they aren’t suppose to grow. Fact that as of today there are no scientific proofs that there aren’t harmful to the human body doesn’t mean that they aren’t hurting us. Certains things will not be proven until we find the right method and look at the right angle to find what we are looking for. Fact that the human eye cannot see bacteria and viruses doesn’t mean they don’t exist. We simply had to find the right tool and that was the Microscope. Same thing for X-rays, Ultrasound a RMI. Even in the hair community we use long time proven methods to care for our hair that are only now being explained scientifically. Just like it took time to prove that hormones-laden food and hair products harm our little girls and rush their puberty as early as 6 years old. Ever wonder why the label of your toothpaste states:” keep out of the reach of children under 6 years of age. If more than used for brushing is accidentally swallowed, get medical help or contact a poison control center right away”? This is because it has been scientifically proven that fluoride has a wide array of devastating health effects – one of them being lowered IQ. This chemical damages the neurological development in children including their brain and pineal gland and doesn’t decrease rate of tooth decay like Dentists want us to believe. Populations who use natural toothbrushes like roots or tree branches sticks that they chew on to make it soft and be able to clean their teeth have the strongest and healthiest gums and teeth in the world. Just like it’s better to sit under the sun for your daily dose of Vitamin D than to swallow them pills, it is always better to use the most natural route available whenever possible. For those who are on a spiritual journey as well, we know that food carry a spiritual energy just like Human beings carry one and that eating meat from animals killed in a stressful environment pass on the stress to the person who ends up eating that meat thus harming the body. Those stress levels have only been “scientifically” demonstrated now but these facts have been known in the spiritual community for ages. If we do our research we will find plenty of facts around us showing that “scientific proofs” work if the right methods have been used and for me the right method proving that GMO food is harmful to the human body hasn’t been found yet. It took to get to the 20th century to be able to create a photographic technique that capture images of the energy field surrounding the human body (also known as AURA) but this energy field has been well documented for ages around the world and can be felt. In fact one aspect of it is called “magnetism”. There are plenty of examples out there and in our daily life that prove that science is only able to “prove” a well known fact or habit, custom only when the correct method is used and that it can take generations before we are able to see the impact of the harm we do to ourselves. We may not see the harm in our generation but our kids, grandkids and descendants will for sure suffer the poor choices we are making today when it comes to food and GMO. I believe the rate of Allergies and especially food allergies is rising alarmingly in the U.S and this is directly related to the food we eat and the environment we live in, the exposure to pollution and pesticides. And because of that, our bodies become more sensitive and our immune system less effective. I’m okay with using natural selection for the more productive and stronger crop following the Nature cycles and respecting the environment to grow our food just like our ancestors did. I don’t believe in messing up for the love of money and on the pretense that we need to grow plants faster and better to feed the ever growing worldwide population or we will face shortage of food. This planet is big enough and still have plenty of free spaces for us to grow the food we all need without disturbing the ecosystem. Do your own research and make your own choices wisely.
I’ve done a formaldehyde home treatment on leave-outs and that portions did not revert which was annoying because part of my hair stayed straight, and part of it was curly.
I’ve dobe a formaldehyde home treatment on leave-outs and that portions did not revert which wass annoying because part of my hair stayed straight, and part of it was curly.
I am not a fanatic when it comes to “natural” hair. I say to anyone do what you like and what works for you and your hair. If you want to straighten your hair chemically or thermally then have at it. I came across a keratin product last year and used it once. I am thinking of revisiting it again this year. The name is Simply Smooth Touch of Keratin. I found it on TreasuredLocks.com. It is a do-it-yourself product. I am not cosigning this product 100% only because I only used it once or twice. I did not have a problem with my hair texture or curl pattern going back to its original state and I do not recall it changing the pattern/texture either in any drastic way. I do remember the product irritating my eyes when my hair came in contact with heat (blow dryer, flat iron, even heat from sauna/steam room). I implore anyone interested to do your own research on this or any other product.
Note: Information on treasuredlocks.com * touch of keratin contains vanillin. Vanillin is extracted from vanilla and is a food grade preservative commonly used for baking and in chocolates. Official certified test results show Touch of Keratin contains less than 1/10 of 1% formaldehyde, a trace amount.
A question for the author (or anyone else that might have an answer): my hair loves humectants such as glycerin. Its in almost all of my products. I use a glycerin + water mix everyday as my moisturiser. But as you know, humectants work best in areas of high humidity, by drawing in water from the atmosphere. What would this mean for my hair if I this BKT? would my humectant based products no longer work? do you think my hair would be more willing (lol I speak like my hair is a person) to accept non humectant based products? bearing in mind it never has in the past
Thanks for sharing your experience. But I want to be able to control what goes in and on my body as much as I possibly can, since I’m already unknowingly exposed to who knows what. So I rather not take the risk.
No shade, but how is a woman making the decision to change her hair a “controversial decision”? Chilee, it is just hair.
Perhaps controversial since this is a website dedicated to NOT chemically straightening hair.
I experienced the same 3 benefits she listed above after doing a keratin treatment at the salon. After about 2 months the product was completely gone from my hair ( fyi: I used a different brand).
I think they are really good for people who use heat because it allows you to use heat less often, at lower temperatures, and with less passes necessary to get a completely straight and frizz free result. It’s reversible and if you only do it once or twice a year then exposure to any potential hazardous chemicals is low.
It came out hute cute! Personally, cute hairstyles are not worth exposing myself to known cancer causing agents. Thats just me, everyone should do whats best for them.
I purchased the Beautiful Textures, naturally straight manageability system but have not used it yet. It is in fact a keratin straightening treatment but I do not know if it has formaldehyde. An editor from Curly Nikki wrote a good article about the system and broke down and described all of the ingredients to a science. I don’t know if I’m allowed to copy and paste the article on here.
[img]https://bglh-marketplace.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/056.JPG[/img]
Is this temporary? I don’t want my curl pattern to change if I get one.
Hey Kezzy. It isn’t permanent but the heat damage is.
No it’s not permanent. I found that it strengthened my hair, it retained moisture very well, I didn’t need a lot of product (only heat protectant spray), and I didn’t have to use high heat or make excessive passes of the flatiron to get a smooth result.
I didn’t have any heat damage and I flat ironed once a week only on wash days.
Well I never talk about what people decide to do with their hair or not. It’s your head. I’m glad that you decided to give it a shot and then write about it. I’m happy that you liked it. It clearly did what you wanted it to do. I’m a scaredy cat because I’ve had so much progress with my no heat and chemical journey that I feel that trying something like that would possibly set me back. Last night I used my blow dryer and I was so scared because it had been almost 3 months since I used it that I was like Oh God! I’m getting twist put in so I need to straighten my hair and I didn’t have time to band my hair. Either way your hair looks great.
Girl, I totally and completely understand! I think the amount of heat they say to use (450+) is OD especially for afro-textured hair! I used between 375-400 and even that’s really really high. I think it’s a big risk, but if you decide to do it, just to be safe stay around the 325 degree lane.
Okay, I thought I could stay quiet on this, but as a Black woman of science, I can’t. Do you as far as the Brazilian keratin treatments go (that twistout two days after is beautiful), but please don’t equate exposing yourself to 4% formaldehyde to consuming GMOs. GMOs in and of themselves are not bad (though their socioeconomic effects are awful), and I’m getting pretty well sick of the pseudoscience claiming that they are–it’s on the same level as people saying you shouldn’t vaccinate children. For example, bananas and corn. It doesn’t matter how organically either were grown, all examples of the these products on the market today are genetically modified (look up bananas–it’s depressing). We humans have done a bang-up job at genetically modifying our food for millennia before we were able to speed up the process with modern science. Before corn took on the familiar shape we see today (an ear of kernels on a long stalk), it was literally a grass, similar to the long stalks with the seeds at the top you see in open fields. What changed? Native tribes in the Americas realized the seeds of proto-maize (teosinte) were edible, and for each successive crop, they began selecting for more kernels per ear by only planting seeds from plants that produced more kernels than the last, because more kernels= more food. Over hundreds of years, we ended up with corn. Please see these sites (yes I know one is Wikipedia, it’s valid) for more info:
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/selection/corn/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_crops
Modern day GMOs only differ from corn’s evolutionary history in the amount of time required to make a genetic change; it happens in 1-2 generations instead of hundreds to thousands. This isn’t to say that GMOs aren’t problematic. They lead to seed monopolies for certain crops, and stifle small farming operations (frequently, organic/family farming operations) through pricing and yield competition. Large corporations like Monsanto have taken advantage of this, leading to large-scale monocultures that aren’t healthy for us or our land. But that’s a whole ‘nother book I can write, and I haven’t addressed the dangers of formaldehyde yet. You see, unlike for GMOs, there is plenty of scientific evidence supporting the carcinogenic/mutagenic/teratogenic effects of formaldehyde. We generally don’t even use formaldehyde in research anymore–it’s that dangerous*. Please see the material data safety sheet and the National Cancer Institute’s write up for formaldehyde here:
http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9924095
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/formaldehyde
And also, here’s a university standard operating procedure (SOP) on how one should safely handle formaldehyde containing soultions:
http://www.research.usf.edu/cm/docs/zoonotics/Pitt_Formaldehyde.pdf
I apologize for the novel, but scientific misinformation really grinds my gears!!
*We use formalin, which is also dangerous, but safer.
This is great! Thanks or educating me.
No problem! Thank you for having an open mind and not taking offense to my passionate rambling 🙂 Keep avoiding mass-produced GMOs because they hurt small farmers and may lack nutritive value as compared to small crop counterparts, but don’t avoid them for fear of cancer–because there’s no evidence that carcinogens are one of their many evils.
GMO foods are not without their health risks. “Roundup Ready” crops that are manufactured to withstand vast amounts of pesticides are found to contain traces of glyphosate (which can be toxic to humans) well exceeding the level that is permitted by federal regulation. To say that this is what people have done for thousands of years is an oversimplification of the issue.
However, I agree that deliberately exposing your scalp to formaldehyde (btw– 4% is no small percentage) is not even in the same ball park risk-wise. And even if there were some alternate reality where you could feasibly equate those things, why would you run head first (pun intended) toward a known carcinogen with the excuse that, “oh, there are toxic chemicals in the food I can’t always avoid”?
I agree with you that GMO foods are not without health risks, and I apologize for oversimplifying. I didn’t want to write as much as I would need to in order to thoroughly explain everything, and I didn’t want to run the risk of being confusing.
Don’t even get me started on “Round-up Ready” crops or the rest of Monsanto’s bullshit. If there’s any corporation who deserves the axe for endangering life around the globe, it’s them.
this is really at Dananana,
i hate monsanto too but you know they are not goin anywhere. our politicians are far too bought out for that to be even a remote possibility at this point. 🙁 it saddens me. i watched a documentary on them with my hubby way back, and i seethe about them every time i hear/read their name somewhere. including now, actually.
@ cacey: Right? Monsanto + the Koch Bros.= polluted water, polluted land, monocultures, and poverty.
Our politics were co-opted by profit so long ago, and I’m terrified that nothing short of another revolution will change it for the better.
While I agree on the dangers of formaldehyde, gmo’s have not been proven conclusively either safe or harmful. There is not enough data yet. Previous genetic modifications were based on cross pollination and other forms of combining related species. That is not what modern gmo does. They insert random genes into existing crops from unrelated plants/animals to prevent pests and do horrible things like create sterilized crops so local farmers cant plant the seeds (Monsanto). We do not know the long term effects of this type of modification, but it is not necessary- the earth produces enough food without these new hybrids. Food shortages are a byproduct of politics and distribution. Modern gmo is purely a profit driven enterprise that they are testing on the public at large.
You are wrong about GMOs.
I am reading about Monsanto and GMOs now. The fact of the matter is that we don’t really know the impact of GMOs because Monsanto doesn’t release their seeds for scientific study. When there is, scientists lose their jobs, funding, etc. Because of pressure from Monsanto because they don’t like the results.
And please don’t say well the fda approved. Lmao. Monsanto owns the fda and the fda has overlooked many holes in Monsanto’s research. Monsanto has even omitted information.
Again, let’s be clear. There have been no long term or many independent scientific studies of GMOs because the seeds are owned by powerful conglomerates.
I wouldn’t believe anything Monsanto says. This is probably one of the most unethical companies on the planet.
While I agree with both of you (SuzyQ and merry) that Monsanto is the devil, and that their GMOs have not been proven safe…Monsanto is not the only company producing GMOs. Most produce and products on the market are GMOs…even the non-Monsanto seeds you buy for your home garden have been genetically modified in some way. Ever see the world “cultivar” after a plant variety? If you do, it’s a GMO. I also wouldn’t trust the FDA as far as I could throw them, so you’re preaching to the choir here. As far as the method for genetic modification–it doesn’t matter. Cross-pollination is still used in tandem with gene insertion, and while the methods used for gene insertion vary widely, most utilize naturally occurring enzymes. Genes are genes; it doesn’t matter where they come from in relation to the GMO…even we have bacterial genes. Do I agree with/eat GMOs that were modified specifically to produce pesticide substances? HELL NO. But not all GMOs have been modified in that way. Most GMOs have been modified to increase yield and quicken development–which is important when you consider that food shortages are the result of politics, distribution, AND lack of usable land. Some GMOs have even been specifically modified to provide vitamins and minerals to those whose normal diets lack them and would otherwise be malnourished (see “golden rice”). GMOs have the potential to do a lot of good, but also, the potential to do a lot of bad…it just depends on who is using them. I’m not a straight-line proponent of them by any means, but I think it’s silly to use a blanket statement and say they’re carcinogens when there’s no evidence to that effect at the moment.
I just watched an awesome movie called GMO OMG, extremely enlightening. Im pushing my state and house reps to pass legislation for labeling of gmos. Although there are no studies, I was raised its best to be safe than sorry. Also, being of african american descent and being aware of things such as the tuskegee experiment, forced sterilization of black women, etc., I believe my mistrust has been more than earned. I have no interest in “innocently” partaking in a mass experiment and then 50years later our government saying “we didnt know”. smh, no thank you. and round up should be illegal-stuff is poison. There is studies in other countries about roundup. When the farmers are scared THAT should be a warning. But yes, catch the documentary if you can GMO OMG. Buy organic and harrass your local reps.
the tuskegee experiment, and this GO stuff is new to me. My eyes have been opened!
Thanks a lot
That’s inaccurate. Studies have in fact been done, and are ongoing. Anyone curious should Google GMO studies.
Sorry, Im a bit late replying, but I’m a computational biologist and “genes are genes” is not really accurate. Slight difference in genes can have long term devastating effects, and epigenetic modifications triggered by the environment or elevated exposures to certain toxins and/or proteins produced by gene inserts can also induce different gene expression that may or may not be desirable in humans and the surrounding environment. We do not have a food shortage, there is no need to increase yield in most countries. Shortages are primarily a political and distribution issue. Genes incorporated from bacteria/viruses have had hundreds or thousands of years and been subject to evolution, meaning the people who weren’t compatible with the gene insert died off. Do we really want to let GMOs play with fire like this unnecessarily? If we were all dying of hunger then fine, but most developed nations have an obesity problem. Why be messy with our food if we don’t have to be?
YES, thank you, the “FDA” doesn’t approve ANY natural remedies, because you can’t patent natural remedies (yet). They say EVERYTHING that is natural is “inconclusive” even if people have been using the herb/natural medicine for centuries. And THAT is just the tip of the iceberg.
Don’t forget that the rats that were fed GMO food were fine UNTIL the 4th generation, where many of them started to become sterile (aka not able to have kids). They also started to get tumors, sooo…not saying we’re rats, but. Ya. Chew on that.
Nothing makes me angrier than when people say that we “need GMO because of overpopulation”. They simply do not realize just how much WASTE we have here. I watch every grocery store in my city throw away massive amounts of food daily! It’s clearly not about feeding the world.
And if we REALLY want to talk about wasted resources, what about all those CAR MALLS in the town I live in? Literally hundreds of thousands of cars that will NEVER all be sold. Waste, waste, waste. It’s a shame. People really need to remember to think before they talk.
I’d like to read that study you’re citing about the rats becoming sterile in the 4th generation-do you mind posting a link? Genuine sterility would be an interesting observation to read about, but I have to burst your bubble and inform you that most research rodents begin developing tumors at a certain age or generation. Unless a study is specifically using rats that don’t get cancer so that they may avoid confounding factors, their rats will eventually have cancer. It’s been that way in every research lab I’ve worked in, and it’s because the types of rats/mice most commonly used for research are naturally genetically predisposed to tumors. Here are two papers documenting this: http://www.pnas.org/content/76/11/5910.full/PDF
cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/33/11/2768.full.pdf
They’re pretty old, and one deals with irradiating specimens to see if tumor incidence increases, but they’re good overviews.
I’m very aware of how much society wastes, and I agree that the need for GMOs would be much smaller if we correctly utilized our resources. But we don’t, and our collective governments are really only interested in money, so that’s the way it will be for the forseeable future. Why does everyone seem to think I’m gung ho for GMOs? Did y’all actually read what I said? I’m neutral leaning towards opposing because while they have the potential for a lot of good, I feel that they’ll be mostly misused. Also, there’s the whole accessibility issue of GMO free food. Organic?GMO-free, and eating entirely GMO free is costly. It doesn’t fit into my meager budget, and I know I’m not alone. Plus, if you’re not on a coast or in a progressive city like Seattle, just finding GMO free produce is a struggle. To those who have the ability to consume only GMO-free noms, more power to you. For the rest of us plebes, just focus on eating as cleanly and as healthily as you can, because there’s still a benefit in just eating healthy. And now, back to hair.
The question mark should be a “does not equal” sign.
Thank you, I was ’bout to say, formaldehyde should be used in a fume hood and with nitrile gloves as a minimum
THANK YOU
seriously, enough with the rubbishy junk science, we don’t need it. Just before I transitioned, almost exactly a year ago I also tried this. It was horrendous. The stuff itself simply wont bind if the temperature is too low so your head is burning and the fumes it lets off…ick. They make your eyes and throat burn. You also need to have your strands separated with a fine tooth comb and I lost a good 2 inches of length through breakage doing this. Avoid.
I think you need to do more research on these GMOs you talk about. As it stands there has not been sufficient research that can conclusively say the GMOs are safe. Since these companies are currently using us as experiments for their GMOs we can’t directly link it to cancer as cancer will take about 30 years to manifest. Negative impacts of GMOs have been observed in terrestrial mammals animals as well as in sea urchins (which are often used as bio-indicators of environmental toxins). Many of these “GMOS are safe studies” that are available today were produced by multinational corporations that are more interested in their economic gain that the well being of the people consuming their food. If GMOs are so safe then why are they banned in Canada, Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. The capacity in which genetically modified foods are being produced today can not be compared to the food produced by our ancestors. The technology and methods used were less invasive.
I’ve not read your entire post, but please allow me to put my two cents in. While I would never attempt to classify myself as a scientist by any means, I have taken many science courses, and have studied the subject of GMO’s in an attempt to understand why people and indeed nations are opposed to them, and believe you are over simplifying the subject.
While it is true that all foods are genetically modified and have been since Mendel’s study of pea plants, one of the issues with modern GMO plants is that the plants are modified to grow in places they haven’t grown before and therefore have an effect on soil as well as insect life in those areas. Indeed, this is the reason Dr. Bronner (of Castile soap fame) helped to finance anti-GMO ballot measures in states like Washington State. When the new pesticides are factored in, that help these modified plants to grow in areas they are not indigenous to, there is an effect on the eco-system that is still being studied, particularly the effect on the bee population in this nation. A population that can be an annoyance to human’s to be sure, but are necessary to keep plant based food sources alive, but also keeping trees thriving.
I get it, it’s fun to think that everyone jumps on various bandwagons without taking the time to look at what the specific issues are. However, you should not presume that just because the majority of the population are not scientists, that they are therefore not educated in regards to the issues they support. Thanks
You should read my entire post. I admitted to oversimplifying, and I’ve already pointed out that they have negative effects on our environment and socioeconomics. Thanks.
Hey Dananana,
thanks for leaving your comments. Had a discussion earlier this month about GMOs and I found your take on it refreshing. About the BKT treatment: I agree it’s definitely carcinogenic and they’re definitely studies to back it up. I have not clicked on any of the link so please excuse me if I really have any information, I’m on my phone and I’m just passing through. I am under the impression that the whole controversy about the formaldehyde being in the BKT treatments with more about the stylish doing the treatments rather than the clients because the stylist will be exposed to those fumes maybe twice a day every other day which is very unhealthy where as a person who would only do it maybe two to three times a year would not be in as much danger. Where do you stand?
In my humble opinion, Cha52, BKT treatments are dangerous for anyone without a respirator in the vicinity of the treatment. I say that because formaldehyde is volatile, meaning it evaporates quickly from a liquid state into the air. While formaldehyde is also a skin irritant (and is quickly absorbed by skin) it does most of its damage while in the air–and breathing it in just gets it into your bloodstream that much faster. That’s why scientists use formalin; adding formaldehyde to water/methanol cuts its volatility a bit. If you want to check out the links I posted on formaldehyde when you get time, they do a much better job of describing how it’s dangerous than I can.
I’ve had a keratin treatment done before as well and love the results…my hair was shinier, dried faster, and still kept my texture. But the keratin treatment I did had zero formaldehyde..and it was plant based…so any naturals that are interested but don’t want the chemicals…they’re options..
Hi Lauren! Please, do tell the brand. I want to know! Do you feel the results lasted for months?
Cassandre….your hair is beautiful but that first picture you posted I guess after the Keratin treatment…your hair looked dry and stiff…Also your ends didn’t look very healthy…they probably should be trimmed….instead of even suggesting a treatment like this which involves a carcinogen being introduced why not try something that is thermo based such as the Japanese straightening method or other thermo based treatments…Please don’t advise or suggest this treatment….I work in the Health care field and we see the very bad effects cancer has on the human body.
But isn’t a japanese hair straightening method the same as relaxing your hair? At least keratin is something that already exists in your hair as a form of protein , and the fact that there’s only approx. 4% formaldehyde in the products she decided to use can’t be that bad compared to what a japanese hair straightening treatment or relaxer may contain
Well I’m not sure because I got it done at the salon..but if you run across a salon or even Google some to see if they offer the plant based formula..
Can you please name the brand name of the product you used? Thanks
Hey, I’d be interested in that one. What’s the name of the plant based keratin treatment?