Sudsy: Sure, you think that shampoo in your hair every day is helpful. But is it really? Dermatologists say that daily shampooing can be counter productive.
Courtesy cybertoadWash, rinse, repeat.
It’s the standard verbage that you find on every shampoo bottle. Comedians have a great time making jokes about it. But people who study hair closely are wondering if we’re actually washing our hair too much these days.
Here’s the complete NPR report on the matter.
There are plenty of people in the U.S. who wouldn’t think of going a day with out washing their hair. Americans, on average, wash their hair 4.59 times per week. Those who live in Italy and France scrub their locks about half that rate.
So what’s the right amount of washing for a person’s hair?
Back in the early 1900s, the rule of thumb among Americans was once a month. The short answer for this day and age is: it depends. But dermatologists note that less you wash your hair, the less our sebaceous glands create sebum oil, one of the oils we’re continually trying to wash out of our hair. As a general rule, the dermatologists in the report suggest shampooing your hair no more than two or three times a week.
The type and length of a person’s hair can matter in the frequency of shampooing, too. Those with long, straight hair will generally need to shampoo more often than those with shorter, curlier hair.
Of course, marketers and advertising wizards want to create an impression in our mind that we need to use shampoos more often. After all, they’ll make more money with the more shampoo we use.
The green movement is picking up on this idea, too. Here's a link to a blog by a woman who avoids shampoo – and many other products – for environmental reasons.
Are you foaming to weigh in with your opinions about shampoo? Share them here with other Buzz readers.
Tags : Science Marches Boldly Forth
in Life Science, Chemical Reactions, Interdependence of Life, and Human Organism
A ragtag band of scientists marches into the future: right past the LHC department, to the venom cream section.
Courtesy StevenM_61This truly is a season to remember. Scientific endeavors are being undertaken that will live on for a hundred generations in human memory.
Snake venom facial cream, for instance, is now for sale in London department stores.
If you were concerned that your face wasn’t feeling quite envenomated enough (and why would I even write “if”?), give your hideous frown lines and forehead creases a much needed rest. Science has synthesized the venom of the Asian temple viper, and put it into cream form. And, Science’s work done, Gwyneth Paltrow reportedly stands by the product.
According to the manufacturers, the product gives temporary, Botox-like results by “stunning” the skin in a way “similar to a snake bite.” Hmm. Interesting. Let’s look beyond my initial reaction to the prospect of getting bit in the face by a snake (which is, to be clear, a resounding “Yes!”)
The temple viper is named so for its high population in the Temple of the Azure cloud in Malaysia. It is a species of pit viper, and so a cousin to American rattlesnakes. The venom of the temple viper is a hemotoxin, and affects blood and muscle tissue (as opposed to the faster acting neurotoxins present in some snake venom, which affect the nervous tissue). Hemotoxins contain enzymes that destroy red blood cells, and cause general havoc in nearby organ and tissues. Prey killed with hemotoxic venom is easier for snakes to digest, because it tends to break down the tissue in the region of the bite. This means that, even if a victim is not killed by a bite, it is possible to lose entire limbs to necrosis from hemotoxins.
But I hear that it is positively delightful when applied to the face. Pots of snake science are now available for $105 at Selfridges department store in London.
Oh, also, the Large Hadron Collider was turned on today. Apparently that’s sort of a big deal in science too. But it doesn’t do anything for crow’s feet.
"Doctor Fish": The hand will be skeletal inside of three minutes.
Courtesy Nemo's great uncleI pride myself in my ability to scoot along the greasy razor edge of what’s cool at any given moment. Like right now this is cool: Tentacles. And…now collecting vintage Booberry, Frankenberry, and Count Chocula boxes is cool. And now tentacles are cool again.
It amazes me, then, that this new wave splashed right by me: foot flesh-eating fish. Or, really, I suppose they’d eat flesh from anywhere, but what they’re getting is foot flesh. But how could I have missed this for so long? I mean, Tyra Banks, Eastern Europe, and big chunks of Asia are already all about flesh-eating fish. Sure, Tyra Banks is a little wiser than most people, and I can’t remember a time when Eastern Europe wasn’t dancing on the cutting edge, but that doesn’t mean I have to feel good about it.
So, what we’re dealing with here, to go back to the very beginning, are little carp, Garra ruffa. The carp are native to rivers across the Middle East, and are kept and bred in outdoor pools in Turkish spas. Why? Because they swarm people and eat the dead skin off their bodies.
The fish eat skin because food can be scarce in the warm pools they live in, and because their little jaws are toothless, they’re only able to eat dead skin.
Apparently dead skin isn’t very cool. (I have a feeling that it’s going to be the next big thing, though.) If you’ve got some dead skin on your feet that you’re afraid people will see, there’s a foot fish spa near D.C. The fish are also recommended as an alternative treatment for psoriasis, but you might have to cross an ocean to get to a pool full of psoriatic plaque-gulping fish.
The circle of life. Fantastic.
Do you really know what's in that lipstick you're about to touch to your lips? Read this New York Times story to find out how whale puke and ground up beetles are among the key ingredients to today's cosmetics.
Subscribe
I want to learn about
Science Buzz is supported by the National Science Foundation.Copyright © Science Museum of Minnesota, 2004-2010, except where noted.
Add a new comment