| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Fri Sep 29, 2006 2:09 pm  |
[quote="gracedhy"]I got my first Valmont order, i couldnt believe they gave me samples of l'elixir des glaciers, even thought most of the samples i requested are not included. i am still happy![/quote]
Lucky you. The L'Elixir is such a fantastic cream. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Sep 29, 2006 2:18 pm |
| akhl wrote: |
| shubingrt wrote: |
what product of Valmont is good for 30+ skin without obvious wrinkles...  |
The regenetic cream is good to be used as a day and night cream. |
i support that statement. i used the sample and it's good. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Sep 29, 2006 11:49 pm |
i won't use L'Elixir until my salary could afford it regularly.
i'm afraid i haven't enough money to repurchase it when it run out .
so i will try my best to earn enough money.  |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:41 am |
My SO has been using the Valmont 24 Hour Cream for about 2 weeks. She says she hasn't had a "wow" reaction yet, and doesn't expect to. It's a lot like a Guerlain Super Aqua Night Cream she used to use, and is just keeping her hydrated.
I took a look at the ingredients the other day, and mineral oil is #3 on the list. I've read on here mineral oil clogs pores and causes breakouts. Is mineral oil a common main ingredient in many Valmont products? Other brands get cut down for containing mineral oil, but I've not read any criticism against Valmont for this. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:51 am |
RMB I have received numerous Valmont samples and I would have to say that mineral oil is a very common ingredient in Valmont products!! I am also surprised by the amount of chemicals in the Valmont products. I am not opposed to chemcials in products but the Valmont ones seem to contain quite a bit of them.
As to mineral oil clogging pores and causing breakouts. I have heard this but I have also heard that it is not true. My own opinion is that chemically processed oils/fats are probably a bigger problem than mineral oil when it comes to being comedogenic. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:24 am |
Theresa, thanks for the info on the other Valmont products, and for throwing in that there are opposing views as to whether mineral oil is comedogenic.
I know that if the Valmont were showing a great positive effect, even with the mineral oil, it would be a repurchase. But, as it's just "maintaining", the search will go on.
Also, have you decided on a vit. C serum? Reading Cellex-C's literature on how for example you have to have zinc for ascorbic acid to penetrate is really disheartening. I don't necessarily believe it, but when you're using simple formulations such as PSF and people say HA doesn't penetrate the skin, it makes you wonder what makes PSF or CSRX confident their C is even penetrating. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:49 am |
RMB I am sure you saw my poll on the Valmont Renewing Pack. It seems that alot of our members are not really impressed with that either! I have seen the ingredients for many of their products and nothing really stands out as a wow ingredient. But I am probably more critical of ingredients than most.
After finishing my Proheal I decided to go with the IS Clinical 15% C serum which does have zinc. I recently sampled the Cellex-C Advanced C serum and while I liked it I think that it dehydrated my skin a little. I suspect that the ISC 15% is even a little drying so I may need to switch to something else soon. I guess the more watery C serums might only work for me during our summer monsoon season.
You know I have read the Cellex-C stuff about zinc and vitamin C serums penetrating. I believe that ISC, Skinceuticles and Cellex-C all use zinc in their C serums so perhaps there is some reason why zinc may be necessary. I noticed that propylene or butylene glycol based C serums don't contain zinc but then again I know that PG is a penetration enhancer (I think BG is also) so perhaps that is how they get the C to penetrate. It is certainly something worth looking into. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:15 pm |
Theresa, yes I saw the poll. But honestly, I don't give much credence to many of the polls here. Because vote volume is so low, it just takes a handful of people to completely shift the results from one end to the other.
However, I do very much appreciate the discussion that the polls can provoke. I really like how your poll has been bringing out a lot of the people who don't love the renewing pack, who probably wouldn't have written a review saying "blah product", but would write a small comment if the occasion presented itself. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:40 pm |
Oh yes, I forgot IS Clinical has a C serum outside of the Super Serum and Proheal.
Hmm, out of the more premium C makers (Cellex-C, Skinceuticals, IS Clinical), the IS Clinical is the most cost effective. (High Potency 12.5% at 90USD, Skinceuticals 15 AOX at 80USD, and the IS Clinical at 79 CANADIAN.) Which is good for me, as I run through C very quickly.
The watery Cs can be drying, but that's why they want you to use a HA/B5 solution afterwards right?
Anyway, I don't like purchasing and applying two products when I'm really only after the C. Which is why after Skinceuticals and Cellex, I tried the more substantial CSRX. But I didn't like the texture or smell. Soon I'll be trying the PSF 12%, and I'm really hoping it works. But as I stated in a previous comment, I really wonder about whether the CSRX and PSF penetrate.
Personally, I doubt that argireline products penetrate the skin, yet CSRX and PSF sell these products. Which makes me wonder if they'd sell non-penetrating C. Again, this is based on my opinion that argireline doesn't penetrate, so please take what I'm saying with a grain of salt. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Oct 06, 2006 7:35 am |
RMB all your recent comments have made me realize just how much I don't know about C serums! I still don't know about the necessity of zinc. It seems that all the C serums from the "premium" C makers contain zinc. But when I looked at the ingredients for Skinceuticals C+E Ferulic, it did not contain zinc. I also read that the Vitamin E in C+E serums has to be alpha tocopherol and that the derivatives like tocopherol acetate are no good. Unfortunate, because I had been considering the SkinMedica C Complex which has tocopherol acetate. I still might go with the SkinMedica just for the C though and I would like to research the vitamin E issue a little more.
I don't like the drying C serums because I believe you should wait 15 min. after you apply your C before you apply anthing else even HA. Where I live it is very dry and by the time I have waited 15 min. my skin has dehydrated considerably if I use a watery C serum!
I am not sure what to make of the Argireline. It really shouldn't work since it should not be able to penetrate the skin enough to reach the muscles. It seems like some individuals have great success with these products while some have no success. In the case of Argireline there is a specific reason why it may work for some and not others but with things like Vialox (which also should not be able to penetrate the skin enough to work) there is no reason why it should work for some and not for others. Maybe there is some research on this but I wonder why anyone is claiming that these work because if what we say about them not being able to penetrate the skin is true then they should not work at all! Is it possible that these really work or is it just that people think that they will work and subconsiously relax their muscles. It seems to me that this is one area where the mind could have a great influence on the outcome. A good double blind study with a control and placebo group could easily determine this. I wonder if one has been done? |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:56 pm |
Theresa, vitamin C serums are a can of worms.
I've noticed that even our FAQ has incorrect information about vit c.
For example, Ester-C is not an ester. It's mainly calcium ascorbate (a mineral salt), so it's a combination of a mineral and ascorbic acid, and not an alcohol and ascorbic acid. An example of an ester of vitamin C would be ascorbyl palmitate.
From this I've formed one stance on topical vitamin C products. I think you have to use products with ascorbic acid. When people post about using products with Ester-C or ascorbyl palmitate, I really don't think they're receiving any benefits.
I believe Ester-C and ascorbyl palmitate are broken down into ascorbic acid in the digestive tract so they work as supplements. However, if you're just applying them topically, your body won't break them down, so your skin is not getting any ascorbic acid.
Okay, the playing field has been narrowed to just ascorbic acid products, and now the question becomes one of penetration.
Cellex-C (in the articles on their website) actually say zinc and tyrosine are NECESSARY for the penetration of the ascorbic acid.
I haven't read anything where SkinCeuticals makes such a concrete claim about what ingredients are necessary for penetration. However, looking at my Serum 15, there's zinc sulfate, phenoxyethanol, bioflavonoids, and sodium hyaluronate.
(As an aside Theresa, I've been putting on the HA directly after the vit C, as I'm afraid of drying, too. The instructions for both Cellex-C and SkinCeuticals use language such as "follow with" so you're not sure if that means immediately after or 15 minutes later. However, they sell HA products to alleviate the irritation their Cs might cause, so I figure they mean directly after. Also, I don't see why applying HA directly after would be a problem, as both SkinCeuticals and PSF have sodium hyaluronate directly in their vit c formulations.)
Okay, in the case of CSRX and PSF, I'm pretty confident they don't believe there are must-have ingredients in order to get ascorbic acid to penetrate. I think they just bought the powder like carekate does and tried to make the least-irritating solution they could. CSRX went the butylene glycol route and PSF went the HA route.
At the end of the day, I don't think Cellex-C is right in that you have to specific ingredients x, y and z in order for ascorbic acid to penetrate. I think that as long as you have some kind of solvent to dissolve the ascorbic acid into, and that the formulation is at a low enough pH, then the ascorbic acid can penetrate.
However, the question remains if there are certain ingredients that *facilitate* the absorption of c. The CSRX is at a 12.5% concentration and the Cellex-C High Potency is at a 12.5% concentration... but is *more* vit c pentrating with the Cellex because of the zinc and tyrosine? That's what I'd like to know.
(Oh, with regards to the alpha tocopherol vs. tocopherol acetate, it sounds a lot like what I was saying before about the ascorbic acid vs. ascorbic acid derivatives, so it seems like the alpha tocopherol would be the way to go.) |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Oct 06, 2006 1:56 pm |
I emailed ISC and asked them what purpose the zinc in their formulas serve. It will be interesting to see what they say!
Since my last post I have done some more research on the Vitamin E and yes alpha tocopherol is certainly the way to go if you want any antioxidant benefits! I actually double checked on the SkinMedica and it contains both tocoperyl acetate and alpha tocopherol. I am waiting to find out what the percentages are.
On the issue of applying HA (or anything else for that matter) over C serums. I first heard that you need to wait 15 min. from Mary at the Skin Care Institute. I have since heard it repeated on various forums so often that I just accept it as fact. But who knows maybe there is no reason to do this. It would certainly make things easier in several ways.
I will let you know what ISC says about the zinc. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Oct 06, 2006 3:58 pm |
I got a reply from ISC and it said that the zinc is used because it is an antioxidant, anti-inflammatory agent, promotes wound healing and improves immunity.
In my email to them I specifically asked if one of the functions of the zinc was to enhance penetration or to stablize the C serum and in their reply they did not mention either of these so I think it is safe to assume that they are not using the zinc for these purposes. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Oct 10, 2006 5:54 pm |
| Going back to the valmont, is there anybody else who has tried the bio cellular serum? Just wanna hear some feedback, im thinking of buying it. Im 28, i just wanna know if its okey for my age or if this is more for mature skin type. Thanks |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Oct 11, 2006 6:17 am |
| angel06 wrote: |
| Going back to the valmont, is there anybody else who has tried the bio cellular serum? Just wanna hear some feedback, im thinking of buying it. Im 28, i just wanna know if its okey for my age or if this is more for mature skin type. Thanks |
I am interested to know that as well, what Theresa said about the chemical ingredients in Valmont scares me away a little bit... |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:56 am |
| gracedhy wrote: |
I am interested to know that as well, what Theresa said about the chemical ingredients in Valmont scares me away a little bit... |
There are no more chemicals in Valmont products than any other non natural line. I find that Valmont products do work and are great on the skin i.e. no rashes, breakouts etc. As well, Valmont does have a natural line called Nature and EDS stocks these products.
Valmont is a good brand and I am very happy to use their products.
The bio cellular is on my list to try. |
_________________
Skin: Over 60, ex combination now sensitive, Cellcosmet |
|
|
|
|
Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:29 am |
bushy I think that this is something that we will just disagree on. Valmont does have a lot of chemicals even for a non-natural brand. I looked at the ingredients for the Nature line and it is by no means a natural line! It has plenty of chemicals also. It just bothers me that aside from having a large number of chemicals in general alot of the Valmont products have 5+ parabens and they are not at the end of the ingredient list. I have not been impressed by the Valmont products that I have tried so far (Renewing Pack and the L-Elixir Eye Cream) so I guess that I just haven't had the wow experience with this brand that you have had. I do have plenty of other Valmont samples so who knows how I will feel about the brand after I try more of their products. To be perfectly honest my skincare philosophy is not all natural and chemical free. I prefer to minimize the amount of chemicals that I put on my skin but sometimes I do overlook a few extra chemicals because I really am impressed with a product despite the chemicals.  |
|
|
|
|
|
Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:26 pm |
| My facialist uses the Valmont Moisture with a Mask on me. I get more compliments after a facial with that than any other time. My skin is nearly 50 (but not me) and tends to be on the dry side. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wed Feb 28, 2007 7:54 pm |
I heard that many people love renewing pack. But it's so expensive and 50 ML can last only 8 times facial.
Does EDS carry the salon size of renewing pack? |
_________________
lindia |
|
|
|
|
Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:49 pm |
| lindia99 wrote: |
I heard that many people love renewing pack. But it's so expensive and 50 ML can last only 8 times facial.
Does EDS carry the salon size of renewing pack? |
Not sure, you can ask their CS. I have used one jar. My jar lasted for more than 10 times. It's very refreshing. Every time after using it, my skin is smooth and soft with a glow. But I don't see long term improvements. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:14 pm |
| j0g6345 wrote: |
| lindia99 wrote: |
I heard that many people love renewing pack. But it's so expensive and 50 ML can last only 8 times facial.
Does EDS carry the salon size of renewing pack? |
Not sure, you can ask their CS. I have used one jar. My jar lasted for more than 10 times. It's very refreshing. Every time after using it, my skin is smooth and soft with a glow. But I don't see long term improvements. |
Thanks,j0g6345
I really want to try Valmont. I didn't decide Valmont or Valmont nature yet. It seems that they have many good products and I want to own them all.
How I wish I could use my current skin care faster  |
_________________
lindia |
|
|
|
|
Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:22 pm |
| Do you know whether AWF factor II can replace the regular eye cream? Since my face skin doesn't need AWF II now but my eyes may love it, I'm interested in this. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:37 pm |
| i have only used the valmont renew pack, it is a cool pick me up mask, my face is glowing afterwards but it is so expensive that i can only use it once in a while. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:08 am |
| it's very good... i have been use for 3 bottlea |
|
|
|
|
|
Fri Mar 02, 2007 8:23 pm |
| lindia99 wrote: |
| Do you know whether AWF factor II can replace the regular eye cream? Since my face skin doesn't need AWF II now but my eyes may love it, I'm interested in this. |
I got a small sample of AWF II from EDS and used it around my eyes. The skin around my eyes didn't feel irritated. But I am not sure about regular use. |
|
|
|
|
| Fri Apr 19, 2024 2:15 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. |
|
 |
|
