Tag: realhairtruth

‘Just For Men’ Hair Dye Users Report Allergic Reactions

Real Hair Truth

Let’s face it, time really goes fast. One second you’re ten years old running around with the neighborhood kids, and the next thing you know you’re running to a local drug store to purchase hair dye.

For men who are going or have already gone completely gray, JUST FOR MEN has been a popular go-to for around 25 years, as its parent company Combe Incorporated introduced the hair coloring product in 1987.  In recent years Just For Men has received a pretty big advertising push from famous celebrities like ex-baseball star Keith Hernandez and basketball hall of famer Walt Frazier–and when you think of hair coloring for guys, Just For Men is arguably the first product many consider using. But, as with other products and services, consumers aren’t always happy with their first choice. Many consumers have posted on Consumer Affairs about horrible symptoms like chemical burns on the skin, severe itching and painful blisters.

Swelling & Burning

 Take Sean of Brockton, Mass. who said that after trying Just For Men he had a severe reaction that caused facial swelling and painful burning.  “I applied the beard dye as detailed in the directions,” he wrote in our comments section.  “I had a burning sensation as well, and after rinsing it off, I thought I was fine. The next day, my face and neck had swollen up horribly. The following morning my skin had begun to weep as well, and I went to the ER. I was admitted immediately, as it looked horrible. They were concerned about my throat swelling shut. I am nearly 50 and do not have any allergies that I know of. Whatever is in this stuff is harsh. I needed steroids and Benadryl,” Sean detailed. Of course one could have an allergic reaction to just about any product on the market, but the fact that a slew of our readers experienced the exact same reaction is telling, and some of them have used the product before with no problems until very recently. Just For Men is made with a bunch of hard to pronounce ingredients like Erythorbic, Ethoxydiglycol, Trisodium, with several other additives, and some of our readers suggest there was a recent change in the product’s ingredients, because many have only received these harsh reactions recently. “Recent chemical formula change—there must have been a change with the beard color chemical formula,” suggested J of Marietta, Ga. “I’ve been using it for over 10 years with no problems and in the past couple of weeks whenever I use it, there is a burning and itching. I’m going to switch to something less harsh,” he wrote.

Real Hair Truth

 On the Just For Men website, it does suggest that users could have a bad reaction to the dye in the frequently asked questions section. It also says each person should do an “allergy patch test” to see if they’ll experience some of the negative outcomes that a portion of our readers have experienced.

Here’s what the website reads: 

“You must do this patch test on the inside bend of your elbow 48-hours ahead of each and every use in order to minimize the risk of an allergic reaction. With mild soap and water, wash an area about the size of a quarter on the inside bend of your elbow. [Then] pat dry.”

“Unscrew the caps from the Color Developer and the Color Base tubes. Mix small, equal parts of the Color Base and the Color Developer in the mixing tray with the plastic end of the brush. Tightly recap both tubes. Apply mixture with a cotton ball or swab to a test area the size of a quarter on the inside bend of your elbow. Allow to dry.”

“Examine the test area during the next 48-hours. If you get no reaction on the unwashed patch test site after 48-hours, go ahead with full application of Just For Men.”

Just to get a little more detail on not only the patch test, but the ingredients of Just For Men, we phoned the company and spoke with a representative named Camille, and she immediately stressed the importance of the allergy test before using the hair dye. Just to get a little more detail on not only the patch test, but the ingredients of Just For Men, we phoned the company and spoke with a representative named Camille, and she immediately stressed the importance of the allergy test before using the hair dye. “There has not, not in about seven years,” she said. “What the readers or the bloggers are not saying is, even if they are long time users, it is definitely stressed and recommended highly that they always do a 48-hour allergy patch test, due to the fact that body chemistry can change at any one given time. Many of them ignore it and don’t do it.” Camille also said she would have an official company spokesperson contact Consumer Affairs, and we’re still waiting for that response.

Real Hair Truth

Medical Advice

The instructions on the site also say if one does have a negative reaction to Just For Men, they should immediately washout the dye with shampoo and discontinue using it. The company also says to get medical advice before using its product or any other dyes.  What’s interesting about the product warning is that the company pretty much anticipates the same negative symptoms many of our readers experienced, which shows Just For Men is aware of the potential harms.  “Rapidly spreading skin rash, dizziness, faintness, difficulty breathing, shortness of breath, tightness of chest, hives or swelling to eyes/face, blistering of skin or scalp weeping, seek immediate medical attention,” the warning reads. For those who experience a bad reaction to the dye, consumers should mail in the entire bottom flap of the box that contains the UPC code. They should then list their name, address and the price paid for the product to: Combe Incorporated, International Haircolor Specialist, 1101 Westchester Avenue, White Plains, NY 10604.

However sending the product back and getting a refund probably won’t satisfy those who have suffered a lot of pain and discomfort like our reader Sean, who had to go the emergency room. Furthermore, if there is such a strong risk that people can be truly harmed by this product, is it even worth using it? And even with the patch test, do you really want to expose any portion of your body just to see if the dye is usable? Hey, sometimes looking good is associated with a small amount of discomfort, ask any female who had to endure uncomfortable shoes to complete an ensemble or a guy who has been choked by a necktie just to fit into the corporate way of dress–but looking a little more youthful shouldn’t risk your very well-being, right? It’s apparent that men should think long and hard about using such dyes, and should maybe even speak to their doctors before using Just For Men or other products like it. Another thing men can do as they are greying is just embrace looking older if possible. But for those who would rather postpone it than embrace it, the research you do before using Just For Men is a huge and crucial part of the dyeing process. Consumers should really be on guard.

LOreal Misleading Again!

The Real Hair TruthSo Many hairdressers in my industry use LOreal hair color and there products. And so many don’t take the time to really find out that they are in competition with there manufacturer. Who will pledge allegiance too you and will send the “Best Snake Oil Salesman”, too you to inform you on the usage of there color and products that you can buy on the internet. You don’t really understand the how good these company’s are doing you wrong and also to the beauty industry.

Here is a good tidbit to chew on and to really think about how these company’s work behind the scenes to squeeze out every nickel and dime from there products. Advertising can be very misleading to the professional and to the consumer.  Go ahead and click on the link first for the complaint and read about the case filed in court.

November 2013: A federal judge denied final approval of a class-action lawsuit against L’Oréal USA, Inc. The complaint, originally filed in April 2013, alleged that the company misleadingly markets professional hair care products as only available for purchase in salons when the products are actually available for purchase in major retail outlets. According to the settlement terms, the company agreed to remove the misleading labels from the product packages for a period of five years. The Court rejected the settlement because (1) the salon-only purchasers and the retail outlet purchasers had different interests and so the class certification, a requirement for settlement, was inappropriate; and (2) the settlement was not fair, reasonable, and adequate because the company only agreed to stop the misleading labeling for a limited time and the class received no monetary award. (Richardson et al v. L’Oreal, Case No. 13-cv-00508, District of D. C.).

Misleading Information

 You the professional LEGALLY HAS the full liability of the products you use in the salon. You purchase them, you bought them, there yours. Once a product is purchased you have hold full liability. Take the time to know your salon products, color line, hair care line.  Know everything about the distributor, and also the manufacturer.  And of course in my Beauty Industry there are organizations such as the (PBA.com – Who says they are the legal eagle of the industry). (Behind The Chair – This is the Sears & Roebucks of the Beauty Industry), (Hair brained.com – Which basically is what it says it is Hair brained), (Salon Galaxy.com – Which is a copy cat of all the others mentioned). These sites could take the time to influence and to teach there subscribers but have taken the course of self advertising and stimulating there own agenda. So sad! there will come a day when the whole industry is controlled by one or two manufacturers and then don’t say I did not warn you!  Wake up sheeple!

Salon only products!

Don’t be hood winked.!!!!!!!

Joseph Kellner

Short Clip from the Film, “The Beautiful Lies” Release Date November 2014!

“The Beautiful Lies” is a documentary that shines a revealing light on the cosmetic and beauty industry. It showcases the passion of entrepreneurs in this business and brings transparency to product perception, health hazards, organic vs. natural ingredients, and cosmetic mislabeling. While it highlights the professionals who have achieved success through innovation, ambition, and perseverance, it also recognizes that this business is dominated by manufacturer greed and control and…

Jotovi Designs exposes “The Beautiful Lies.”

 

Modern Salon and Alison Shipley Bias reporting of the Beauty Industry!

Modern Salon will promote old news before it tells the true tales of its industry!
Modern Salon will promote old news before it tells the true tales of its industry!

In an industry  of False reporting, Deceptive labeling, and lack of representation of the Beauty Professionals in my industry. Reporting comes  from individual’s who have less than 5 years experience as a hairdresser and writer makes me want to puke. Especially when they report on issues that are over two years old and they are very partisan in their reporting.

In a recent article from the  comic book magazine Modern Salon edited and published by Vance publishing. There was an article written from a novice editor ALISON SHIPLEY, EDITOR OF FIRST CHAIR & MODERN SALON’S EXECUTIVE EDITOR OF SOCIAL MEDIA/VIDEO.(Can they give these kids a big enough title to stimulated there ego)? She reported that the Suave Keratin Treatment is as follows. Consumers are saying the product (Suave Keratin Treatment) caused them (The Consumer in the retail sector severe hair loss and other damages). It is also reported in MS. Shipley’s article, “hundreds of women nationwide are suing the manufacturer and designer of Suave Professionals Keratin Infusion 30-Day Smoothing Kit, a hair treatment product designed to smooth frizzed hair”.  This is a story that I personally sent to Vance Publishing on 3/13/12 to take notice and let the industry know, but being a truth seeker they thought my reporting was to “Blunt”.. The company that produces the product is Unilever, who also produces the following product.

367651-unileverlogoII-1334956044-640-640x480

TIGI (hair care) You know the shit you buy for your salon and that is located in a grocery store.

But they mention no reference to Unilever. Why? Because they need their advertising dollar, their article is very basic and no links provided to the reader. Given that the poor kid probably thinks she is doing the industry a service. This was not reported by CNN, and this was a big enough story to tell the industry but as usual it got placed in the heap of (Don’t tell we need the advertising dollars from Unilever for our monthly comic book). And it also shows to the “Blinded Beauty Industry Sheep”, that your devoted manufacturer will sell you out to the commercial sector. This is a service that is done in my industry, they normally call the Keratin Treatments. These types of “Kits” for the consumer to do at home should only be done in the salon. I said that about hair color at home before but that fell on deaf ears to the sheep of the industry.

In my blog on July 9th 2012 I stated that, “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. An investigation is underway regarding Unilever’s marketing and advertising practices under the Suave brand name. Unilever states on their website that 160 million times a day, someone somewhere chooses a Unilever product. From feeding your family to keeping your home clean and fresh, our brands are part of everyday life”.

On Jezebel.com it is a reliable news website I highly regard for investigative reporting than the comic book Modern Salon., it is reported that in their article written on 10/15/2013 that.

Last year, a group of women filed a class action lawsuit against Unilever, the manufacturer of Suave Professionals Keratin Infusion 30-Day Smoothing Kit, alleging that though the product was marketed at a Keratin smoother, it actually contains a formula to chemically relax the hair. According to the women, this caused everything from melted hair to scalp burns to increased and permanent hair loss and resulted in an aesthetic that would certainly not prompt anyone to GET THIS LOOK! And last week, a judge rejected Unilever’s request to dismiss the lawsuit, which means it will be going to trial.

According to the suit, Unilever also tried to get women who had reported side effects from the product to them to sign a release preventing them from suing the company, in exchange “for as little as $50.00 for a haircut.”

 Why don’t you report that Ms. Shipley? But I bet that Ms. Shipley was told not to go to far in this subject. Why? Because Unilever advertises in the comic book. “God forbid , lets just write about the situation and scratch the surface of the problem.” The sheep will not even notice it. Keep them young and dumb.  But lets not say UNILEVER!

TheRealHairTruthLogo

Try to do the right thing in life Shipley, I guarantee you will not go far. But you will sleep at night!

God forbid you lose your advertising dollars also!

Manufacturers finally getting there due in court!

 

Three of the cosmetics industry’s biggest companies, Mary Kay, Avon, and Estee Lauder (and all the brands under them!) have been named in a class action lawsuit filed in California on behalf of American consumers. The lawsuit sites that these companies fraudulently claimed not to be doing animal testing when in fact they were, misleading the American public. Defendants later purported to disclose, at least on their websites, that they in fact were animal testing, but the disclosures were wholly inadequate and deceptive, the lawsuit states. As a result of their claims of no animal testing, Avon, Estee Lauder and Mary Kay gained and held onto a spot on the much coveted, “Do Not Test” list compiled by PETA. This list indicates which companies do not test products on live animals. Until recently, Estee Lauder, Avon and Mary Kay were among the largest mainstream corporations to be included on PETA’s cruelty-free lists. Specifically, the lawsuit states “As a result of being included on the list, as well as many similar lists, defendants enjoyed the support of PETA and millions of consumers who buy cosmetics only from companies that do not conduct animal testing.  And hence, the commercial success of defendants’ products during the class period was positively influenced by their direct representations regarding animal testing. Simply put, defendants reaped hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue from US consumers who otherwise would not have purchased defendants’ products. Filed in October, and entitled Marina Beltran et al. v. Avon Products Inc., Case No. 12-cv-02502, this amended class action lawsuit is the third filed against Avon, and has two new named plaintiffs that are alleging claims of fraud and violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act. The Plaintiffs allege that Avon is required to disclose its animal testing practices.

The “minerals” in Bare Minerals are a patented blend of 72 minerals (containing Mercury, Arsenic, and many more). Animal research is actually cited in the patent (held by Roger Blotsky and Leslie Blodgett). Fun fact: it’s also sold as a supplement for animals. Biokool is the company that produces it. Google away!

This lawsuit comes after the news in February that PETA was removing these companies from their cruelty free list. The reason that these companies were removed is they are sold in China. China requires cosmetics to be tested on animals, so there isn’t any way these companies could truly be cruelty free. The lawsuit seeks more than $100,000,000 in punitive and compensatory damages for a class of more than 1,000,000 consumers.

I hope this makes them wake up and pay attention!

I am actually really happy to hear about this. Whether or not you are a cruelty free beauty user exclusively, I like the idea of these corporations being held responsible. I hate that companies are able to get away with being vague about their practices, and maybe this lawsuit will help encourage other companies (okay, scare them) to be more transparent and forthcoming with information to consumers. Maybe it will also make them think twice about this whole thing, and flex their power and influence to get China’s animal testing policies changed. Cosmetics are a multi billion dollar industry. Surely there’s something someone can do?

US District Judge Cormac J. Carney ruled that the plaintiffs sufficiently pled their causes of action that Avon fraudulently concealed that it tests on animals.

I hope they win. How dare these companies lie to their consumers, THE ONES WHO PUT THEM IN BUSINESS. I wished I had known about this lawsuit & been able to be apart of it. I TOO had spent money on these companies with the impression that they were cruelty-free.

The technology is already out there to test cosmetic products without the use of animals. Usually these matters all come down to one thing: money. And that is why I hope the lawsuit not only goes forward, but that they win. You can’t teach a large company anything unless you hit them where they will feel it: their bottom line. Whether or not you are worried about animal testing, we simply cannot allow companies to lie to consumers, even by omission.

Avon lied to customers by claiming its products are cruelty free. For years, Defendants marketed and advertised their companies and their cosmetic products as not being tested on animals, when in fact Avon, Mary Kay, Estee Lauder were testing their cosmetic products on animals so that they could sell products in China and other foreign countries, thereby reaping hundreds of millions in sales.

Blog courtesy of The Gloss Managerie.com