| |
 |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:30 am  |
| I have been using this with success for about 2 years now. My skin type is combination, active glands inside with excess sebum production but dry and dehydrated outside. Has anyone with my skin type tried another face moisturiser with success too? Or possibly did a similar switch from Dermalogica like I am contemplating now? I need it to be non-comodegenic, or non pore-clogging. Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Jul 24, 2007 2:23 pm |
| Also just searching through the threads, I found rave reviews on Decleor Hydra Floral Moisturing Cream. I have a sample of the HYdra Floral Hydrating Comfort Cream - are these 2 the same thing? I tried a product search for the hydrating comfort cream but it does not bring up anything. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Jul 24, 2007 5:01 pm |
Wise choice to move on. Anything with mineral oils in the ingredients will clog the skin pores. It virtually suffocates the skin. You can find it in many common skin care brands and even those that may seem 'better brands'.
Personally I use Kuush. It balances the sebum flow and does not strip the skin so you don't get that dryness. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Jul 24, 2007 5:48 pm |
| kitten wrote: |
Wise choice to move on. Anything with mineral oils in the ingredients will clog the skin pores. It virtually suffocates the skin. You can find it in many common skin care brands and even those that may seem 'better brands'.
Personally I use Kuush. It balances the sebum flow and does not strip the skin so you don't get that dryness. |
dermalogica doesn't use mineral oil. |
_________________
20s with combination skin. |
|
|
|
|
Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:22 pm |
I did not say Dermalogica uses mineral oil - what I did say was that mineral oil will block pores of the skin (since that was their concern).
The reason I said it is a wise choice to move on is because of the preservatives they use. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Jul 25, 2007 2:47 am |
| just saw another thread on kuush so will wait for more reviews on this before getting into it. any other suggestions? i will post my decleor query on another thread as this could be an alternative for me. i also picked up valmont elixir reviws but its way too expensive... |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Jul 25, 2007 3:09 am |
I have (or had) combination skin too, and found the SAS marine cream to be excellent in this regard - over a period of about 4 weeks, it basically normalised my skin. http://www.skinactives.com/products/marinecream.htm
One of the principals of Skin Actives is a bio-chemist. Hence her no-nonsense, almost brusque approach. While she does not condone the use of mineral oils in skincare, she has no irrational fears about the role that preservatives have to play in skincare. If the product contains water, it must be preserved so customers do not apply nasty bugs on their skin!
What I like about SAS is they list ALL ingredients, and they are about science, not magic. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Jul 25, 2007 5:15 am |
| Thanks nyonyakay The ingredients list parabens, isnt that bad? |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:44 am |
Are parabens "bad"? Here we go again ....
This answer (an extract from a position paper on Preservatives by the Australian Society of Cosmetic Chemists) may be long and complicated but gives a bigger picture on the use
of parabens in skincare beyond hysteria.
Parabens refer to the most widely used group of preservatives in skincare, including butylparaben, propylparaben, methylparaben, and ethylparaben.
It is estimated that more than 90% of all cosmetic products contain some form of paraben. They are considered to cause less irritation than other preservatives. There is research showing that in animal models (and in vitro), parabens can have weak estrogenic activity. Whether that poses any health risk for humans using cosmetics is unknown. The very technical findings of the study, which involved both oral administration and injection into rat skin, did show evidence of a weak estrogen effect on cells in a way that could be problematic for binding to receptor sites that may cause proliferation of MCF-7 breast cancer cells. The study concluded that "future work will need to address the extent to which parabens can accumulate in hormonally sensitive tissues and also the extent to which their weak oestrogenic activity can add to the more general environmental oestrogen problem." (Source: Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, January 2002, pages 49�60).
Does this mean you should stop buying products that contain parabens? That's a good question, but the answer isn't simple or conclusive, even by the standards of the study itself. This is a potentially serious issue and the FDA is conducting its own research to determine what this means for human health (Source: The Endocrine Disruptor Knowledge Base (EDKB), http://edkb.fda.gov/index.html).
To keep the concern in perspective, it is important to realize that parabens are hardly the only substances that may have estrogenic effects on the body.
Any estrogen, including the estrogen our bodies produce, may bind to receptor sites on cells either strongly or weakly. Either this can stimulate the receptor to imitate the effect of our own estrogen in a positive way, or it can generate an abnormal estrogen response.
Ironically, plant estrogens, or phytoestrogens (such as those found in soy), also produce chemicals that mimic estrogen. It is possible that a weak plant estrogen can help the body, but it can also be possible for a strong plant estrogen to make matters worse. For example, there is research that shows coffee to be a problem for fibrocystic breast disease. The reason for this is thought to be because coffee exerts estrogenic effects on breast cells (Sources: American Journal of Epidemiology, October 1996, pages 642-644; Journal of the American Medical Women's Association, Spring 2002, pages 85-90;www.som.tulane.edu/ecme/eehome/newsviews/whatsnew/archive/jan_dec2002.html).
A study in the Journal of Applied Toxicology (Volume 24, Issue 1, January-February 2004, pages 5-13) mentioned that "although recent reports of the oestrogenic properties of parabens have challenged current concepts of their toxicity in these consumer products, the question remains as to whether any of the parabens can accumulate intact in the body from the long-term, low-dose levels to which humans are exposed." The study discussed the fact that traces of parabens have indeed been found in human breast tumors, but was quick to point out that it is unknown if this would be the same in healthy breast tissue. Parabens present in tumors may not be the causative factor but rather a result of parabens when cancer cells are present.
The ASCC has the available information on Parabens and the scientific opinion about the bad press circulating in the industry about the link to cancer (which is now generally considered false). Refer "Concentrations of Parabens in Human Breast Tumors", Dabre PD. Et al, Journal of Applied Toxicology, 24, 5-13 (2004)
In Europe and North America there have been two main issues with parabens in the public. One was the Darbre study (breast cancer issue) and the second was the claimed endocrine effects, especially of the butylparaben and isobutylparaben.
The Darbre study was published in 2004 and is considered not very scientific.
A lot of comments from well recognized scientists and toxicologists have been submitted to the authorities. For example:
A. European Commission Scientific Committee on Consumer Products (SCCP) Opinion on Parabens, Underarm Cosmetics and Breast Cancer, 28 January 2005.
This has the most definitive information in relation to parabens:
(i) there were some important deficiencies in the study design:
- lack of control tissue when measuring concentrations of parabens in breast tumours;
- blank samples clearly contaminated with parabens;
- high variability in individual blank values;
- no study of the general therapeutic history of the tissue donors and no mention of the paraben-containing anti-cancer drugs the patients were using;
- no study of donors' exposure to consumer products containing parabens;
- brief descriptions of tissue handling;
(ii) the most frequently occurring paraben was the methyl ester, which had shown to have the lowest estrogenic activity in the in vitro and in vivo estrogenicity studies;
(iii) existing epidemiological data indicate the absence of an association between underarm cosmetics and breast cancer;
(iv) the majority of underarm cosmetics do not contain parabens as preservatives (> 98%)
[Golden and Gandy 2004, Jeffrey and Williams 2004, Flower 2004].
Darbre et al. and Harvey formulated replies to these comments and therein clearly state that it had never been their aim to link tumour grade, quadrant incidence of the tumour or patterns of underarm cosmetic use in patients. Moreover, Darbre et al. acknowledge that the study on the concentrations of parabens in breast tumours could not identify either the route of entry or the source of the parabens. Carcinogenicity was not considered in the study and the presence of parabens was not claimed to cause the breast tumours. Finally, they mention that epidemiological studies of underarm cosmetic use and breast cancer fell out of the scope of the paper and were, therefore, not discussed [Darbre et al. 2004b, 2004c, 2004d, Harvey 2004].
In September 2004, the Danish Institute of Food and Veterinary Research issued a report titled
"Note on Parabens in Food, Cosmetics and Consumer Products". Therein, the authors also elaborate on the suggested relationship between the use of parabens in underarm cosmetics and the development of breast cancer. They came to the conclusion that there is no indication to support such a causal relationship.
Further important clinical data are:
- Breast cancer tumours occur most frequently in the upper quadrant of the breast (closest to the armpit). A clear relationship, however, has been found with the amount of gland tissue present at that location;
- It is clinically well-established that the circulation of blood/lymph goes from the breast towards the armpit and further towards different organs and tissues and not vice-versa, making an exchange process from the armpit towards the breast tissue highly speculative.
A similar report was issued by the European Cosmetic Toiletry and Perfumery Association Colipa in March 2004
B. Parabens in deodorants and antiperspirants linked to breast cancer�
http://www.nicnas.gov.au/news/20040123-parabenbreastcancer.asp
This highlights further discrepancies in the original study. To quote;
1. The Cosmetic Industry has advised that many deodorant and antiperspirant products do not contain parabens as preservatives as these formulations are essentially self-preserving.
2. NICNAS has reviewed the publication and other available data on the health effects of parabens. The study by Dabre et al (2004) utilized small sample (20), no healthy breast tissue (or other tissue from affected women) was analysed and the source(s) of the parabens found in the breast tumors and routes of exposure were not identified. This paper however, notes the need for further research to establish the significance of the presence of parabens in these tumors and to establish any link between parabens in underarm cosmetics and the development of breast cancer.
C. The American Cosmetics, Toiletry and Fragrance Association 12.1.04
We are aware of the new research published by Dr Phillippa Darbre and the concern this may cause to consumers(1). The research does not find a causal link between underarm cosmetics containing parabens and breast cancer.
Parabens are preservatives that are used in cosmetics because of their excellent safety profile. They are very rarely used in deodorant and antiperspirant products because these products are, essentially, self-preserving. However, where parabens are used in cosmetic products they are declared in the ingredient listing.
Dr Darbre reports finding parabens in samples of human breast tumour tissues but she also found quantities of parabens in samples that did not contain any tissue at all. Thus, the significance of her results is not easy to ascertain. Extensive independent research has previously shown that any traces of parabens that might enter the skin are completely broken down by skin cells to harmless substances that cannot pose any risk of breast cancer.
According to a number of leading cancer research organisations, there is no plausible biological mechanism by which antiperspirants and deodorants could cause breast cancer. Other risk factors, including smoking, drinking and obesity, are well known to have an impact on the rising incidence of breast cancer.
Dr Chris Flower of the CTFA said "Extensive research available to our members continues to indicate that there is no proven link between rising breast cancer rates and the use of antiperspirants or deodorants. Dr Darbre's research is based on an extremely small sample of 20 breast tumour cases and does not include any reference samples from normal tissues."
"Safety is the number one priority for CTFA members who manufacture antiperspirants and deodorants. Parabens are officially approved for use under the Cosmetics Directive (76/768/EEC), the European legislation that regulates all cosmetics and toiletries. We can reassure the public that all cosmetic and toiletry products containing parabens may continue to be used safely."[i] |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:49 am |
Mojocat, sorry my previous post was not exactly about "moving on from Dermalogica ....." but you did specifically ask me about parabens!  |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Aug 03, 2007 2:08 am |
| Thanks for all the info nyonyakay!! Looks like parabens feature in 90% of skincare products and could well be disguised even if not listed as an ingredient. Im interested in the SAS Marine Cream but its state in their website its meant for oilier skins? I dont hv oily skin, I have active gland with dehydrated skin - will it be suitable for me? |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:07 pm |
| i too am looking to move to decleor range of products. however, i wont stop using dermalogica. i dont see why i cant use the two ranges together |
|
|
|
|
| Fri Apr 19, 2024 2:33 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. |
|
 |
|
|
