| Author |
Message |
|
|
 |
Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am  |
Recently we were discussing HA, which used to be my daily wrinkle plumper upper. We pretty much concluded there that overused (so much that it plumps up my wrinkles completely  ) it can lead to dehydration and barrier impairment.
SandraG was recently singing the praises of Retin A acting on her lines within a couple of uses and I'd agree that it's more likely swelling down to irritation inside the skin.
DMAE is now under attack in a study showing it *could* be down to enlarging your 'vacuoles'
http://www.essentialdayspa.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=22612
Liquid oat beta glucans appear to work by forming a film under the skin or at least in frozen dead skin. I think that's healthy. Except then it says this over on smartskincare "Dr Pillai and colleagues theorize that beta-glucan stimulates collagen by inducing the release of immune/inflammatory mediators, such as IL-1 and NFkB. If true, stimulating inflammatory response may not be the optimal way to strengthen the collagen network because inflammation may have negative side effects" so more irritation.
Now I just added spirulina micro algae to my daily mix in a very small test percentage and to my delight I find my under eye lines are greatly reduced in one day. But now I'm worried that this could be down to a. overbloating my skin barrier, b. irritation (like Retin A), c. algae is slightly alkaline so could it be enlarging my vacuoles just like DMAE does? 
So, is any immediate firming/plumping good for the long-term health of your skin?  |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:59 am |
I think someone sensible should kick me
Since I've used that algae two days in a row my wrinkles are *drastically* reduced. I look great, but from past experiences with Diacneal, HA and DMAE I can't help feeling like I'm headed for an imminent skin barrier sensitivity disaster.
Did anyone else have the algae effect and survive? |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:36 am |
Well, you got my attention..I'll be the guinea pig along with you. I'm not that attached to my vacuoles anyway  Are you mixing it with something and..more importantly..where the heck did you get it? |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:53 am |
| All of these actives are just so new. Who knows what they are really doing? I wonder if copper peptides and matrixyl 3000 plump the skin by irritating it? |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:28 pm |
| I will second marina in that one. I would also like to know what you mixed it with and where you got it. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:05 pm |
| marina wrote: |
| Well, you got my attention..I'll be the guinea pig along with you. I'm not that attached to my vacuoles anyway Are you mixing it with something and..more importantly..where the heck did you get it? |
Marina, Mardy - I certainly can't recommend it. It was only an impulse purchase, like a kid at the checkout. I've only used it for two days and I've no idea what it's doing and no proof it does anything of any kind. I've found one dodgy company using it for skincare and they claim a couple of studies but their email address is defunct.
But if you really, really want some more cytoxic waste on your faces  It's this product
http://www.newdirections.com.au/shop/products/index.php?id=1059
that's the Australian site for Mardy (I got it off NewdirectionsUK.com
(pick up some of their pomegranate oil too because that's a real winner)
Doesn't seem to be available on their Canadian/US site, sorry Marina but it's a health food supplement so I'm sure it's easy to find.
All I've done with it is put a little pinch in about 3 teaspoonfuls of distilled water, another teeny pinch of MAP - swished it around, added a couple of squirts of Berry Ben (too drying for me undiluted) and finally a couple of drips of glycerin. Mix it with my fingers, splashed it on my face. Followed up by natural oils mixed with liquid OBGs.
Still looking for someone sensible to kick me |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:08 pm |
| skincarefreak wrote: |
| All of these actives are just so new. Who knows what they are really doing? I wonder if copper peptides and matrixyl 3000 plump the skin by irritating it? |
Do you know skincarefreak; those are two actives I actually feel quite comfortable about. CPs work SO slowly and you don't get the dramatic plumping I experience with other actives and matrixyl kind of gives me a slowly, slowly improvement too (no high drama), although I'm surprised how quickly the improvements are lost once you stop using it. Wonder how that works. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:40 pm |
Thank you so much for thinking of me Molly and putting that website up there  . I think I will do a little more research into this before buying though. At the moment I am looking into making my own eye cream to target these deep wrinkles and am waiting on some Matrixyl but wouldnt mind concocting something with every good thing there is out there for wrinkles in it. They are driving me nuts.  |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:18 am |
You're a wise woman Mardy .
Actually it wasn't totally spurious using algae because I'd skimmed through the Kanebo threads, but they tend to use sea algae not this one. I noticed the users were surprised by the dewiness so I'm guessing it's the water binding properties I'm seeing here. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:07 am |
Did you actually find proof that this substance is cytoxic or is that just your British humor? 
| Quote: |
| Actually it wasn't totally spurious using algae because I'd skimmed through the Kanebo threads, but they tend to use sea algae not this one. I noticed the users were surprised by the dewiness so I'm guessing it's the water binding properties I'm seeing here. |
Since I use or have tried quite a few Kanebo prodcuts I have to say that I don't think the only ingredient responsible for the dewiness is the algae. The CP Emulsion II and City Day Defense give a dewy look and contain no algae. The Premier Emulsion and Impress Emulsion which DO contain algae give a different finish that the others but I would describe the difference there as more of an instant glow as opposed to being more dewy. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:53 am |
| Molly wrote: |
All I've done with it is put a little pinch in about 3 teaspoonfuls of distilled water, another teeny pinch of MAP - swished it around, added a couple of squirts of Berry Ben (too drying for me undiluted) and finally a couple of drips of glycerin. Mix it with my fingers, splashed it on my face. Followed up by natural oils mixed with liquid OBGs.
Still looking for someone sensible to kick me :roll: |
Hm, looks like I have to place my next order to newdir... (what about the silk thingies?) |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:19 am |
| TheresaL wrote: |
| Did you actually find proof that this substance is cytoxic or is that just your British humor? |
You're getting there  Like your lipstick.
Lin - when I googled something like spirulina and skincare I got a lot of German sites come up. Perhaps you could take a look because I can't understand a word of it. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:15 am |
Of course I can only guess, but I'd say things that cause quick "improvements" are generally those that cause swelling/edema. Skin is reacting to an assault of some sort. As far as DMAE, I don't use it nearly as often as I did when I first started -- and it falls into the category of things that cause a quick, nearly instantaneous change. I've begun to suspect that it's sometimes marketed as a "high school reunion" treatment for a good reason: what may be implicit is that it's not to be used every single day.
I think of cortisone, which can quickly provide relief for many conditions, yet long-term use is ill-advized.
I'm not even sure if I believe long-term dermal health is helped by prolonged use of substances and/or procedures that damage the skin but eventually cause improvement. In some instances, these types of treatments have been proven to kill pre-cancerous or cancerous growths, or to return the skin to a more healthy state, and that's obviously good. But it doesn't necessarily follow that life-long, regular use is ultimately beneficial. Time will tell if those of us who use certain types of products and procedures will pay a price in the end. I hope not, but as it is I wonder if/how scientists can always effectively test in advance and in ways that can offer absolute proof and assurance.
Like skincarefreak said, so much of this stuff is new. Clinical observation over a long period of time may likely the best way to tell when it comes to some things. So face it -- we ARE essentially guinea pigs when it comes to a lot of skincare innovation. It may ultimately be beneficial that we're tempted by so many products, so that we don't stick with one substance or procedure too long in case, in the end, it does more harm than good!
Molly, with your track record I'd say go ahead and use and enjoy the algae for a while. Knowing you, you'll be onto something else before long! |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:49 am |
I agree with you Molly, and I think that immediate filling of lines is not the answer at all.
Who wants something temporary. I dont. I want my lines permanenetly removed. In fact I have stopped using HA every day.
The RetinA work dramatically on me, not just because of swelling, as I suspected, but after talking to my surgery center nurse, she told me, it was because I have very responsive collegen.
I have a medically supervised routine and engage in frequent elso laser treatments, which works on the Cellular level, which leads to permanent improvement.
I actually stay away from these 'temp' 'immediate' solutions, because I think swelling and then deflating over and over can probably make the lines worse. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:11 pm |
| m.april wrote: |
| Molly, with your track record I'd say go ahead and use and enjoy the algae for a while. Knowing you, you'll be onto something else before long! |
Actually that's a real misrepresentation. I've been using the same basic actives for YEARS!!! It's only the past 6 months since I've been back in the UK that I've had the chance to experiment a bit. Too true we're all guineau pigs though!
Lin - I wouldn't buy this. My skin's feeling a bit sore after 3 days. I think I'll ditch it unless I can find out some encouraging info on it. It was only a cheap impulse purchase like I say.
SandraG - Sorry, but what you're doing sure as hell sounds like it's via some kind of irritating route - glycolic is generalised damage to promote healing and with retinoids on top you do get a sudden boost. I did that with Diacneal (retinal + glycolic) and it didn't feel good for my skin's long term health.
I still think some of these skin plumping mechanisms must be benign: The liquid OBGs don't feel bad and nor did PSFs cranberry lift. I mean - moisturising in itself is a plumper, isn't it? |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:57 am |
| I personally would like to use two products. One for the long term reversal and prevention of sun damage and wrinkles and another that could plump out the lines while the other one is working. DREAMING!!!!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:50 am |
| Mardy Bum wrote: |
| I personally would like to use two products. One for the long term reversal and prevention of sun damage and wrinkles and another that could plump out the lines while the other one is working. DREAMING!!!!!! |
The Castle's "tell'em they're dreaming" comes to mind.
It sounds like the perfect combo though Mardy. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 20, 2007 6:37 am |
| Emma2006 wrote: |
| Mardy Bum wrote: |
| I personally would like to use two products. One for the long term reversal and prevention of sun damage and wrinkles and another that could plump out the lines while the other one is working. DREAMING!!!!!! |
The Castle's "tell'em they're dreaming" comes to mind.
|
Love it! |
_________________
39, in Australia, using retin a, Skin actives I Bright and Antiaging Cream, change sunscreen regularly currently. |
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 20, 2007 6:57 am |
Thanks for this thread Molly!
Being a naturally suspicious sort of person ... I too tend to mistrust things that "work instantly" ... It all goes back to that Dear Abbey letter where she said "If it seems to good to be true ... it probably is."
However, I too have noticed that things like HA and Oat BGs have a temporary and immediate benefit ... but thought that perhaps they were doing positive things "under the surface" that would be long-lasting.
Can I ask what you mean by you think you're headed for "an imminent skin barrier sensitivity disaster"? Does this mean that after a while, you will break out in bumps? [I personally like the an imminent skin barrier sensitivity disaster better than "break out" ... your expression sounds much classier!]
I have stopped using the Oat BGs for a while ... just until things like early spring allergies calm down etc so that I can be sure that any reaction I may or may not have relates to the BGs rather than pollen in the air ... etc.
I used a DMAE product for a while and initially it seemed to work ... but then it just didn't work anymore ... or so I thought ... but perhaps, indeed, I had a "skin barrier sensitivity disaster" ...
Mary |
_________________
Over 50, combo, OCM. Originator of Pearl Paste ... www.silkenpearl.com |
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 20, 2007 6:59 am |
| Molly wrote: |
I still think some of these skin plumping mechanisms must be benign: The liquid OBGs don't feel bad and nor did PSFs cranberry lift. I mean - moisturising in itself is a plumper, isn't it? |
I would tend to agree with this. The OBGTs work by stimulating the immune system which may or may not be bad. I am beginning to wonder if inflammation is always bad. It might not be a bad thing as long as it is not out of control. I think the real problem sets in when that infalmmation gets out of control. But I really don't know for sure.
I do know that edema is bad for the skin since it stretches it. It is particularly an issue where the skin is thin like around the eyes. But where do you draw the line on swelling or plumping? If a slight swelling happens in the stratum corneum is that bad? I would be inclined to think that it matters where this swelling occurs. Swelling in the SC would seem to be less of a concern than swelling in the deeper layers where collagen and elastin reside but I am not certain on this. I agree that moisturizers work by keeping the SC plump. This is a good thing if the plumpness means that the SC is propertly hydrated since a dehydrated SC is not a good thing (an overly hydrated one is bad too so there is a balance).
I do however think that irritating the skin is generally a bad thing but would have to think long and hard to see if I would be willing to make a blanket statement and say any irritation is bad in any situation. Some actives work by irritating the skin into collagen production and while I personally don't want to do this I think that this area needs more research to determine if this is truly a bad thing especially if the irritation is short term and the benefits achieved are long term. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:24 am |
| Quote: |
| I do know that edema is bad for the skin since it stretches it. It is particularly an issue where the skin is thin like around the eyes. But where do you draw the line on swelling or plumping? |
You have me wondering. Right now I am thinking of the Baby Q. After I use it my skin looks wonderful. Lines and wrinkles are plumbed right up and I have a peaches and cream look to my skin. I do not have large pores but after the Q I look almost poreless. The problem is that the results (even after months of use) are temporary (a few days). Perhaps on younger woman the results last much longer. Obviously I realize that at 62 I am going to lose elasticity and get some wrinkles. 
I will never regret buying the Baby Q for my ankle pain (truly a lifesaver). I am wondering if in the long run it could have negative affects on the skin. When using the Q you do feel heat so it stands to reason the heat would plump the skin. Please understand that I am not saying my skin looks worse since using the Q. The Q perks me right up. However, if this irritation thing hold weight I am concerned especially for the younger woman on this forum. With all these actives and gadgets what will your skin look like at 60?
Recently I am dabbling in DIY. I purchased SKB and Oat Beta Glucan. I love SKB for my hair. I have to question putting these products on our face straight or in high concentrations. Even though I worked for a short time for Janson Beckett I do not know much about all these actives. I do remember Ian (President) telling me that there is so much more to a product then the ingredients. It is the careful formulating and blending that makes the product. OBG straight irritate my skin. I am only using a very small amount mixed with my usual creams.
Molly, my gut tells me you are right. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:47 am |
| Winnie wrote: |
I will never regret buying the Baby Q for my ankle pain (truly a lifesaver). I am wondering if in the long run it could have negative affects on the skin. When using the Q you do feel heat so it stands to reason the heat would plump the skin. Please understand that I am not saying my skin looks worse since using the Q. The Q perks me right up. However, if this irritation thing hold weight I am concerned especially for the younger woman on this forum. With all these actives and gadgets what will your skin look like at 60? |
To be honest with you Winnie this is one of the reasons that I will not buy the Q or similar devices. I do wonder if the effect is due to a mild edema and if that is a good thing. I can recall that someone raised this issue (about the Q and edema) on the forum a while back and it really got me thinking. I just recently saw the same concern mentioned in New Beauty magazine. Considering the fact that LED therapy for skin rejuvenation is so new and that we don't have any long term safety or effectiveness data, I am just not willing to take the chance. But those of you that know me know that I am a cautious person and am this way with alot of things. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:11 pm |
Molly - I certainly didn't intend to offend you and I'm sorry if I did. I guess when I think back farther, I do recall you being consistently and mainly into CPs, some acids and SS -- maybe more that I'm not aware of. Forgive me, but these days I tend to think of the launch of your "ugly experiment" as a sort of ANNO DOMINI, and I've had to try to stay sharp to keep up with your latest regimen
All of this DIY info presents even more temptations than just the usual proliferation of retail products. I have to fight getting sucked in. At least individual DIY ingredients are relatively cheap. But at the same time, novice formulators are at risk of overdoing actives. Sorry to hear your algae disappointed in the end! |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:35 am |
Hi m.april - You're right these have been heady days since my ugly experiment and DIY phase commenced, but I'm exploring alternatives so I'm bound to throw out a few lemmings.
I don't want to dredge up another one, but I was over on Skincare 302 wondering what he might recommend for plumping without irritation considering that's very much key to his approach and what do you know he's got a new eye product out.
"Mechanisms
Short chain peptides and fibronectin penetrate outer layers of skin to provide immediate plumpness, smoothing and soft, silky feel. Avocatin 302 provide sustainable protein synthesis."
http://www.302skincare.com/products_eyefirm.html
I wondered if anyone knew much about fibronectin's use in skincare to-date
Winnie - I'm not at all sure about those liquid OBG's. I kind of wonder if it's the other ingredients rather than the 1% OBG doing the immediate plumping. I remember using OBGs years ago in a Simple sunscreen and being surprised by how smooth my skin was. I assumed it was being exfoliated it so ditched the SS, but I don't remember plumping like this. I'm going to try the straight powder and see if it has the same effect.
Mary - I'm not prone to acne at all, but I think degrading the skin barrier can be the cause of that. In me it makes me extremely sensitive to the sun and actives instead. That's what I mean by ""an imminent skin barrier sensitivity disaster"
We had an interesting discussion on HA and whether it can contribute to this. I think it depends on the type and the percentage used myself; I've cut down to about 0.25% and that's a little bit plumping but doesn't feel harmful. I think this is why people who mix with emu (that would make it 0.5) seem content and people who layer HA (that would make it 1%) seem to get dryer.
In case you missed it
http://www.essentialdayspa.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=21688&start=0
I was wondering before why Matrixyl 3000 seems to work quite quickly (2 weeks or so) and then the improvements fade really quickly unlike other collagen generators. Could it be this
"In addition, unlike Matrixyl, they found Matrixyl 3000(tm) fostered the creation of a significant *local nervous fibre and cappillary support grid* prior to the laying of the new collegen. In my mind this benefit of this nourishment structure would be equally as substantial (and facinating) as the increase in collegen 1 overall quantity."
"Matrixyl™ 3000 is a unique ingredient that consists of peptides, or short amino acid chains. It helps to lift the skin, thus minimizing the appearance of wrinkles. Matrixyl™ 3000 contains two different peptides, known as matrikines, that act as cellular messengers to promote skin restructuring and repair. These biochemicals interact with specific receptors to activate genes that are involved in cell proliferation and renewal of the collagen-rich extracellular matrix (*the connective tissue between cells* that provides crucial support to the skin). Both healthy cells and the extracellular matrix are essential to firm, healthy skin.1 The components of Matrixyl™ 3000 work synergistically to help restore and maintain the skin’s youthful appearance"
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2007/jan2007_cover_skin_01.htm
I'm thinking the above means something apart from generating new collagen which would happen prior to that so plumping out the skin. Correct me if I'm wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Apr 22, 2007 2:38 am |
Seems fibronectin is quite common in skincare products, according to Paula Begoun
"fibronectin. A type of protein found in the skin's intercellular matrix similar to collagen and elastin. Fibronectin's deterioration from sun damage and other factors is an element in skin aging and wrinkling. As is true for all proteins, regardless of their origin, it is probably a good water-binding agent for skin. However, applying fibronectin topically on skin doesn't help reinforce or rebuild the fibronectin in your skin."
http://cosmeticscop.com/learn/dictionary.asp?TYPE=SEARCH&ID=F
I wonder if it's any better than other humectants? |
|
|
|
|
| Thu Apr 18, 2024 5:29 pm |
If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.
Click Here to join our community.
If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site. |
|
 |
|
