|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
| Author |
Message |
|
|
 |
Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:18 am  |
Just posting this here to see what people think of this blog post by Wendy Ouriel (who has a masters in cellular biology and her own skincare line)in which she claims that dermarolling can cause collagen breakdown, premature aging and even cancer!
Here is the link:
https://www.oumere.com/blogs/news/how-dermarolling-causes-collagen-breakdown-premature-aging-and-possibly-cancer
Here main argument seems to be that the collagen produced by dermarolling is inferior and that the process creates scar tissue. She also claims that dermarolling will "desensitize the receptors responsible for the signaling of collagen synthesis"
She uses various analogies to make her point such as comparing the skin to the fabric of a much worn and wash t-shirt!!??
I think her argument about how dermarolling accelerates skin aging is about how by forcing our skin to renew itself we are speeding up the lifecyles of our cells and shortening our telemores to a point where they are no longer able to renew the skin. I think she is basically refering to the hayflick limit which doesn't apply to epidermal stem cells, seems quite an oversight by a cellular biologist!
I am not knocking her very expensive product line I am sure she has some nice skincare but she has also warned against using vitamin C serums becasue she believes it is pro-oxident and retinol becasue she claims it destroys the extracellular matrix of the skin and causes fragile, sagging and thin skin. As a long term user of prescription strength retinoids (15 years) that hasn't been my experience. It is also apparently fine to use her own chemical exfolient as it magically transforms according to your skin and only exfoliates what needs exfoliating and doesn't cause cell death.
As far as I know Wendy is 30 or 31 and developed her skincare for herself after her once perfect skin was damaged by commecially available products and is now selling this skincare under her brand Oumere. I can't help but feel she is attempting to seperate herself from the crowd in what is a very saturated market which has been challenged by brands like The Ordinary and it may well turn out to be a smart move on her part. I think it does seem like she has created a product line and philosophy based around her own skin which seems to be very fine and dry but is forgetting that a multitude of varying genetic factors or enviormental factors impact on peoples skin and that what works for her won't necessarily work for everyone.
My main issue though is that she seems to be ignoring a lot of proper, scientific research on collagen induction therapy (dermarolling) not to mention retinoids and vitamin c in order to hawk her own products!
Note: I don't personally do dermarolling yet although its something I am interested in doing in the future. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Sep 08, 2019 10:19 pm |
I have thought on and off about that post of hers so today went and looked at it a little more closely. Her cited research at the bottom was compiled primarily of research sources on skin cancers, except for one other article from the 80s.l (which was not on microneedling).
This research study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/28690124/?i=6&from=/28869385/related
presents a review of all primary research and results to date on the effects of microneedling and it is definitely in favor of it.
I have no idea Wendy’s objective for slamming microneedling like she does, but I’d like to see her using research showing that microneedling in particular causes degradation to skin. Just using the argument that the collagen formed is bad because it is created in response to stress does not make sense. Dr Fernandez who started all this decades ago explains that the micro*needles are so fine that you slip into the deeper layer where different rejuvenating (and inflammatory) factors are triggered with very little damage/stress to epidermis along the way. Of course inferior needling mechanisms can damage skin but high quality rollers or the Derminator should function more as he explains.
Plus Wendy compares skin to a t-shirt. Skin is not inanimate. It is dynamic, responsive organ. I’ve read similar logic statements from plastic surgeons comparing skin/facial structures to rubber bands or elastic bands that get worn out from use. And this as their reasoning for why facial exercises are not helpful and in fact harmful. And that is just not the case for the majority of people. |
_________________
Almost 40! with sensitive/responsive skin, using facial exercises very lightly. Derminator or prof micropen just a few times a year. AQ eye serum (great for lash growth too) on occasion. Otherwise natural skin care products. |
|
|
|
| Mon May 13, 2024 9:54 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. |
|
 |
|
|
|
