No Beauty License? Quite a Scare Tactic Used On The Industry Sheep!

 

So much misinformation is going around the beauty industry of how Licensurship  is going to take the cosmetology profession down the drain. Well in my view it already is! I feel quite differently about the subject. In several states there are plans to not have Cosmetology Licensurship NOT  needed anymore.. Just last week the same desperate so-called beauty industry cons went ahead and spreaded their thoughts about how this would damage our industry. Check out some of the videos made by (Tabitha) on television who knocks down salons by not doing it her way each and every week. She loves to say this will take us back to the stone ages by spreading her knowledge and scare tactics on the sheep of the industry.

Why would you think a license makes you professional? You are the PROFESSIONAL not the piece of paper. The salon professional and salon owner can police their own actions from within. You don’t need a license to purchase hair color, permanent waves, relaxers etc just go on the internet. The manufacturers make them available to the consumer selling you out and sweeping away your values and commitments to them out the door.

MONEY, MONEY WAKE UP!

 But to no haste you will find out that the PBA (Professional Bullshit Organization) will do it”s utmost to guard the financial pyramid and seek protection for the Student puppy mils of beauty college education (Paul Mitchell, Aveda) from financial destruction. Do you really think in this day and age this would not be a change in our industry, and the change will be for the better. And hopefully the United States will introduce and mandate all the perfection the Europeans have in their beauty industry for us. For many decades Europe has been the plateau of example on apprenticeships, beauty schools, and hairdressing. While the U.S. has the Photoshop example of counterfeit hairdressing by the perfect example of NAHA. Such a perfect example of poor leadership for the craft.

 But also think about how the riddance if Licensurship will make the individual so much for attuned to the craft of hairdressing, hair coloring. this may instill a pride in our profession. Yes we will get salons and organizations begging and craving for a solution.  Who’s the blame we all are, just like “WE” never took a stand on the deceptive practices of Paul Mitchel, Loreal, and all the other big named bullshit speaking manufacturers. But as time has gone by, I see the independent artists are creating their own forms of entrepreneurship in our industry. It has been a long time coming, but everyone, change is good, we really don’t need a license at all. Europeans don’t need one. And there methods of training has lasted for several decades. You will see the beauty industry supply chains jumping on this deferment of licensurship and they will likely start selling to the consumer overnight. See all the so-called bootlegged, diverted product lines that are sold in Salon Centric (Which is owned by Loreal)  will be available to the consumer. Big deal! They have been doing us wrong for decades what will happen if they sell so-called professional hair color to a consumer. You can already by the hair color on the internet.

 Hair shows will be able to sell tickets to consumers (which they always do), you will be able to do hair in your kitchen, which we are all guilty of including me. Professionalism will be represented by you, the hairdresser, colorist, makeup artist. And consumers will flock to you, just like they do now. In the makeup profession there is no Licensurship, and they seem to be able to police themselves. When you join a union as a makeup artist you take a test. Consumers know what they want, the have eyes, and senses. The ultimate decision for a service will come from them, not a so-called legal document that you receive out of beauty school.

When I took the test for my  hairdressing license did that mean I was a professional? No it didn’t, the same when I graduated makeup school I was not a professional and may I say, I was reminded that upon graduation. Did the DBPR do anything for you when we had the formaldehyde problems in our industry? No, they did not. OSHA and the FDA had to do all the work! Did the PBA do anything? Hell no! And they advertise themselves as the, “legal voice of the industry”.

BULLSHIT on THEM. 

Licensurship is a huge money-making conglomerate in our industry, for the schools and the state. Educational loans are the way to make an easy living for all and if you can start a beauty school and get state approval (accreditation) then you will get the loans. That is the easy meal ticket in my industry!  And we all see the product coming out of a Paul Mitchel school and Aveda is just the same.

And did you know Aveda is owned by Estee Lauder!! Follow the trail my friends.  

So times change everyone, will you be effected personally by this decision? No you wont, will the multi-million dollar beauty schools be effected? YES. If the states that expel the license adopt a form of apprentice ship this will rid the Paul Mitchell, and Aveda puppy mills from our industry. And when apprenticeships are taken upon the salon will and must pay the apprentice and also give them health care. Once and for all maybe an individual will be treated like a human being in our industry. College graduates upon their succeeding employment they receive a wage, sick days, 1-2 weeks vacation. Does anyone in our profession? No not at all, this way might have individuals seeing the industry for what it really is. And having the cream of the crop flowing to the surface.

I say good riddance to licensurship and lets move ahead.

Best Regards

Joseph Kellner

2012 in review for The Real Hair Truth

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

4,329 films were submitted to the 2012 Cannes Film Festival. This blog had 18,000 views in 2012. If each view were a film, this blog would power 4 Film Festivals

Click here to see the complete report.

California Superior Court Gives Brazilian Blowout 30 Days to Reformulate or Remove Products from Marketplace

Los Angeles—The California Superior Court, County of Los Angeles, issued an order on November 29, 2012 requiring the manufacturers of Brazilian Blowout hair straightening solution, GIB, LLC (GIB) to stop selling its product in California within 30 days and prove that its new, reformulated product meets California Air Quality Standards. According to the attorney general’s court papers, testing by three different laboratories shows that GIB’s hair straightening product violates California air quality law and emits smog-forming pollutants at levels higher than allowed by the California Air Resources Board. Formaldehyde, a human carcinogen, is a major ingredient in Brazilian Blowout.

“The move to pull the original Brazilian Blowout formula from the market is a victory for women’s health,” said Alexandra Scranton, on behalf of the National Healthy Nail and Beauty Salon Alliance. “Brazilian Blowout continues to expose salon workers to cancer-causing chemicals and it clearly violates California’s air pollution standards.”

In a previous settlement agreement with California Attorney General Kamala Harris’s office, GIB agreed to stop deceptively advertising the product as formaldehyde-free and put caution stickers on their product advising users that it releases carcinogenic formaldehyde gas. The company also agreed to participate in further testing to evaluate whether its Brazilian Blowout product violated California air quality laws and reformulate its product if it were found in violation.

Three independent laboratory tests showed that Brazilian Blowout releases high levels of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and in violation of its previous agreement with the State of California, GIB had refused to either reformulate Brazilian Blowout or remove it from the marketplace. Following that refusal, the California Attorney General’s Office asked the California Superior Court to remove Brazilian Blowout from the market on October 9, 2012.

According to the California Air Resources Board, VOCs are an important component in the formation of ground level ozone, a major part of California’s smog problem. The Board’s air quality standards require that Brazilian Blowout contain no more than six percent VOCs by weight. Testing by two independent labs approved by the company, and testing by the Board, found Brazilian Blowout contained between 8.1 percent and 11.49 percent of regulated VOCs by weight.

“We applaud the attorney general for vigorously pursuing an action against this manufacturer who evidently believes it can ignore the law without repercussion. A cosmetic product should never contain formaldehyde, a known carcinogen and respiratory irritant. It’s reassuring that the original formula of Brazilian Blowout, due to violating air quality laws, will no longer be around to harm consumers and hair salon workers in California,” said Catherine Porter with the National Healthy Nail and Beauty Salon Alliance.

Stylists who regularly perform Brazilian Blowout treatments are exposed to formaldehyde gas at levels well in excess of the state’s Proposition 65 warning threshold, according to the California AG’s lawsuit.

“As a hairstylist that has been seriously affected by Brazilian Blowout, I know firsthand just how dangerous this product is. Getting the original Brazilian Blowout formula off the shelves will be a big win for salon workers who have suffered irreparable health problems due to exposure to this product,” said California salon worker Jennifer Arce.

According to the California Attorney General’s office, the California Air Resources Board will test the reformulation of Brazilian Blowout by December 15 to ensure the product meets the VOC limit of six percent.

Brazilian Blowout has been banned in Canada and at least four other countries, including Germany, France, Ireland and Australia, but is still allowed to be sold in the U.S. The federal Safe Cosmetics Act, introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives in July 2011 by Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) would ban chemicals known to cause cancer from cosmetics, as many other countries have already done.

“This dangerous product never should have been on the market to begin with,” said Janet Nudelman on behalf of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics. “But because of lax U.S. regulation, countless stylists and salon patrons have been exposed to harmful levels of formaldehyde.  Unfortunately, Brazilian Blowout is just one of many examples of why Congress needs to pass the Safe Cosmetics Act.”

Johnson & Johnson reformulating products!

Manufacturing giant Johnson & Johnson says it is phasing out the use of a number of potentially harmful chemicals, including formaldehyde, in products made for adults by 2015. Formaldehyde and some other chemicals help fight bacteria and reduce the risk of irritation. Formaldehyde though, has been classified by the National Toxicology Program as a cancer-causing chemical.

In addition, J & J plans to phase out some ingredients in fragrances and an antibacterial substance used in soaps.
Many companies have long been under the gun to take action.  Consumer and environmental groups launched stepped-up safety campaigns against shampoo and cream makers in recent years. But Johnson & Johnson is being praised by former critics for responding to calls for change. “There’s a public discussion underway about the ingredients in beauty care products, and we think it’s important to be part of that,” said Susan Nettesheim, Vice President of Product Stewardship & Toxicology for Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc.  “Consumers today expect more information and greater transparency than ever before and we’re always listening to the people who use our products.  On this site, we’ll do our best to explain how we make the choices we make, and to show how our plans incorporate consumers’ feedback.  We want all consumers to see for themselves how and why every one of our products can be used with peace of mind.”

SafetyandCareCommitment.com includes information about how ingredients are selected and evaluated, and provides details on our gold standard safety assurance process.  The site will evolve and be updated to incorporate consumer feedback, the latest science, new regulations and new information about our policies.  The site contains information about our approach to research, the extra care we put into the development of products for babies and toddlers, and our commitment to sustainability.

The Johnson & Johnson Family of Consumer Companies includes, among other divisions, Johnson & Johnson Consumer Products Company Division of Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc., which markets the JOHNSON’S® baby, AVEENO®, RoC®, and CLEAN & CLEAR® brands, and Neutrogena Corporation, which markets the NEUTROGENA® brand.

We applaud the company for ther interest and transparency with there products.

Unilever’s Suave Product is still under Investigation!

 
Profile Picture
 
Suave Professionals Keratin Infusion 30 Day Smoothing Kit Unilever Trumbull. CT 06611. Actual Kit UPC 7940019562 Modular Display Unit Description and Case UPC : Suave SA Keratin Smoothing Kit 8PC PDQ 10079400228786 Suave Mixed Keratin 17 PC PDQ 10079400233025 Suave Keratin Kit 12PC Wing 10079400240221 SV SH CD Kit Keratin 12PC 15 Inch PDQ 10079400241372 Suave SH/CD/SA Keratin 258PC Bin 10079400244359 SV MB Naturals/Keratin 670 PC Pallet 10079400245790 Standard Case: SV Smoothing Kit (ATG) 12 1ct 10079700195620. Recall # F-1332-2012
CODE
All lots
RECALLING FIRM/MANUFACTURER
Recalling Firm: Unilever United States, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, by letters dated May 8, 2012.
Manufacturer: Les Emballages Knowlton Inc., Knowlton, Canada. Firm initiated recall is ongoing.
REASON: Unilever has received numerous consumer complaints related to undesired hair treatment outcomes and potential consumer misunderstanding for Suave Professionals Keratin Infusion 30 Day Smoothing Kit.
VOLUME OF PRODUCT IN COMMERCE
381,288 Kits
DISTRIBUTION
Nationwide
 
Unilever is one of the world’s leading suppliers of fast moving consumer goods. Unilever markets the product under its wholly owned Suave brand name as a Keratin-based hair straightening product that is “an affordable at-home alternative” to professional salon treatments that’s “formaldehyde free.” However, Unilever may not be able to substantiate its claims. In addition, Unilever may have failed to inform consumers that the Product contains a chemical known as “Tetrasodium EDTA,” which is mainly synthesized from formaldehyde. Unilever also may have failed to inform consumers that the Product contains a chemical preservative known as “DMDM Hydantoin,” which is an antimicrobial formaldehyde releaser with the trade name Glydant. Formaldehyde has been classified as a known human carcinogen (cancer-causing substance) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and as a probable human carcinogen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

So when do we stop thinking of ourselves and start thinking and helping others. Where did simple kind compassion go in a world of give-me. Where did listening and  understanding one another’s problems leave our day-to-day life. When we know the truth and not say the truth that is the most common sin of all. .  Do you really care anymore.

 
I just used this product a few days ago and my hair is also fried. And when I went to the store to try to find a deep renewing conditioner the product was still on the shelf! I don’t know what to do with my hair at this point. I’ve been trying to nurse it back to life with coconut oil and mayonnaise but it still isn’t enough. Help?!
Sent from my iPhone
 
I too used this product and fried my hair…4 haircuts later still having issues with dry hair and itchy scalp. Any ideas on what I need to do to promote good hair health?
Thanks
 
Hello Mr. Kellner,
Help it has been 4 months for my hair and it continues to break off and is fried.  It seems like it is getting worse not better.  I have spent over $2000 and yet I am still struggling.  No one is responding to my letters Unilever, Suave or Kroeger. I tried to join a class action lawsuit with Wasserman, Comden, Casselman & Esensten but they have not contacted me back yet either.  The $12 is not sufficient and my current professional stylist believes it will be at least another year before my hair is back to normal if ever.  I can not afford this!!  
 Is there any hope we will get some resolve from the company.  Please someone help!! This is truly a nightmare and not only has it ruined my hair but my personal life, my professional life and my personal well-being have all been severely compromised.
Any information that you might have regarding where I might go next would be greatly appreciated.
Suzanne M. Light, Pharm.D.
 
I used this kit twice the first time my tightly curled hair was soft shiny the second time at first I didnt see any change in my then a couple of weeks after my hair started coming out by the handfuls it took me three years to get the growth I had now all Ivan do is cut it all off and do intensive conditioning treatments .something should be done to suave for the damage it has done to my hair.thank you
Sent from my iPhone
 
Hello Joseph,
My name is Dawn Rettew, a hairdresser/make-up artist, three-time salon owner.
I would like to thank you for your courage in addressing the issues of our profession.
Having been a “brainwashed sheep” myself, I understand most of what you are saying.
I would like to break into private labels and have attempted this in the past with no success. Mostly, I’m not able to know which companies to trust anymore and the up front cost is too high.
There are no products left that are not diverted. I especially like the way the product companies are not including “online discount drug stores” as diversion. To me, online sales are diversion. I’ve signed contracts with companies promising to do my part and now I can walk into any Target, TJ Max, most online outlets and purchase the very same products
At this point, I don’t even trust having my own private label for fear of losing even more credibility with clientele. They lie about the ingredients. etc. I’ve been made to be a liar one too many times. If you have any private label insight that you would be willing to share with me, I would greatly appreciate it. I’m just looking for a product line that is non-diverted, the best available ingredients at the best available prices without the deceptive practices that go along with them.
I appreciate you honesty,
Dawn Rettew
 
I bought the treatment on 3/23/12 from Wal-Mart and I used it a week later.  I have previously used Sally’s brand about 8 months prior so I knew what I was doing and I read the directions correctly.  Not even a week after I used the Suave brand, my hair got considerably lighter, which has never happened and my hair started to fall out.  Even now, every time I was my hair, more of it breaks and I am losing it by the handfuls.  I only use the treatments because after I had my daughter, my hair got wavy and thicker only in the back and I wanted an easier way to maintain my hair.  The treatment I used before worked wonders and seeing as Suave’s was a whole lot cheaper, I took a chance.  I know it is not supposed to make it straight, but it is supposed to make it easier to straighten, and this did not do as it was supposed to.  I saw the recall at my local CVS and wanted to know what I am supposed to do from here?  Thanks for your time.
Ashley Mier