Q - Can aging be reversed?
A - Skin will return to its most ideal state if there has not beem scarring and if it is given high levels of the nutrients it relies on to function optimally, and it is not continually subjected to ongoing inflammation. This means you cannot use irritants, you cannot exfoliate, you cannot get sunburns. You must increase circulation and maximize non-traumatic ingredients that encourage the skin to live up to its potential. We must also increase our immune efforts to repair and remove the scar tissue. This is best done by activating macrophages. Finally, we need to make repairs at the cellular level to the actual damaged DNA until we can achieve productions levels of antioxidants and enzymes that match the skin of our youth. ______________________________________ Q - Why do I get facial hair? A - There are two components to facial hair: your genetic makeup and the influence of testosterone. Certain ethnicities have higher levels of villous activity. Other women are effected by ovanian cysts, low body fat levels, and the effects of hormone-laced dairy products. _______________________________________ Q - Why am I getting acne after age 30? A - This coul dbe from ovarian cysts. It could be poor elimination and a need for more regularity. It could be elevated yeast levels. It could be a sluggish liver. It could be a buildup of a particular toxin. _______________________________________ Q - What are those bumps on my kids' arms? A - Those goose bumps are what known as keratosis pilaris. I believe they are related to digestion. Exfoliation helps little, but internal options like probitics and/or anti-fungals may be more beneficial.The skin on the back of the arm is sensitive, which is why aggressive topical remedies are not tolerated well. Ben Johnson, MD "Transform Your Skin Naturally", 2010
0 Comments
The introduction of retinoic acid and alpha hydroxy acids to skincare products marks the first time consumers saw immediate gratification in their anti-aging quest. It was a boom for esthetics, who now had clients setting up monthly visits to get their acid fix as part of their facial. The results were impressive-plump, taut skin with a reduced appearance of wrinkles. Who wouldn't be hooked.
The problem, however, is that these results are only temporary, and in the long run they actually damage the skin and cause it to age faster than it would if we didn't use the harsh products and techniques. The reason is that when we apply retinoic acid and alpha hydroxy acids to the skin, we are causing inflammation-and inflammation is bad for the skin. When you apply an acid to your face-and this applies to almost every acid, depending on the concentration-you immediately create trauma. This trauma results in swelling. Swelling makes wrinkles and fine lines look better, but only temporarily. The other effect of these treatments is that they damage the epidermal barrier. The skin, being the intelligent defense mechanism that it is, sees this damage as an assault and seeks to fix the problem. In what is called an "emergency repair response," the skin rushes to repair the damaged epidermis, which speeds up the epidermal turnover rate. Unfortunately, many skincare experts assume that increased epidermal turnover is a good thing-evidence that the skin is returning to its youthful functioning-yet, this forced exfoliation is actually the skin's equivalent of a four-alarm fire. Ben Johnson, MD "Transform Your Skin Naturally", 2010, Chapter 2, pp. 21-22. Scientific research suggests that elevated levels of estrogen and progesterone can result in an increased growth of yeast in the body. Yeast is primarily housed in the digestive tract and may be culpable for as many as 30 percent of the acne cases seen on an annual basis. We can also increase yeast levels by eating sugar, which provides yeast populations with fodder to propagate. This propagation can then lead to imbalances in flora (healthy bacteria) that line our digestive tracts. This, in turn, allows for further yeast overgrowth.
The most common yeast population among Americans (relevant because of diet) is called Candida albicans, commonly referred to as Candida. Candida in associated with vaginal yeast infections and thrush. It may be a surprise but yeast infections originate in the intestine. When Candida levels fall out of balance, the yeast emits toxins that travel through the body via the body (via the blood stream) and result in a variety of physiological imbalances. If left unchecked, toxic yeast may rise up and disturb hormone production, impair immune function, and generally wreak havoc on many organs with the skin being the common victim. The use of antibiotics to treat acne (used to counteract the bacteria that feed of the sebum in the skin) can cause an additional suppression of the immune system plus negatively affect digestive health which will inevitability exacerbate the development of acne. In my opinion, the colon and its related toxin build up is the primary source of acne. Suffice it to say that acne could be greatly reduce to changes in one's diet, colonics and detoxes (do your research and consult your physician as appropriate). It is often noticed that after menopause women begin to age faster. Wrinkles increase rapidly, akin quickly loses elasticity and smoothness. This seems to be a result from diminished levels of estrogen. Among the hormones whose levels decline with age, estrogens have the most dramatic effect in the skin. Estrogens are known to protect women from heart disease, and now it seems that they also slow down skin aging. Several studies indicate that postmenopausal woman on estrogen replacement therapy develop less wrinkles, better skin texture From EWG Skin Deep
Myth – If it’s for sale at a supermarket, drugstore, or department store cosmetics counter, it must be safe. Fact – The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has no authority to require companies to test products for safety. FDA does not review or approve the vast majority of products or ingredients before they go on the market. The agency conducts pre-market reviews only for certain color additives and active ingredients in cosmetics classified as over-the-counter drugs (FDA 2005, 2010). Myth – The cosmetics industry effectively polices itself, making sure all ingredients meet a strict standard of safety. Fact – In its more than 30-year history, the industry’s safety panel (the Cosmetic Ingredient Review, or CIR) has assessed fewer than 20 percent of cosmetics ingredients and found only 11 ingredients or chemical groups to be unsafe (FDA 2007, CIR 2009, Houlihan 2008). Its recommendations are not binding on companies (Houlihan 2008). Myth – The government prohibits dangerous chemicals in personal care products, and companies wouldn’t risk using them. Fact – Cosmetics companies may use any ingredient or raw material, except for color additives and a few prohibited substances, without government review or approval (FDA 2005, FDA 2000).
Fact – People are exposed by breathing in sprays and powders, swallowing chemicals on the lips or hands or absorbing them through the skin. Studies find evidence of health risks. Biomonitoring studies have found cosmetics ingredients – like phthalate plasticizers, paraben preservatives, the pesticide triclosan, synthetic musks, and sunscreens – as common pollutants in men, women and children. Many of these chemicals are potential hormone disruptors (Gray et al. 1986, Schreurs et al. 2004, Gomez et al. 2005, Veldhoen et al. 2006). Products commonly contain penetration enhancers to drive ingredients deeper into the skin. Studies find health problems in people exposed to common fragrance and sunscreen ingredients, including elevated risk for sperm damage, feminization of the male reproductive system, and low birth weight in girls (Duty et al. 2003, Hauser et al. 2007, Swan et al. 2005, Wolff et al. 2008). Myth – Products made for children or bearing claims like “hypoallergenic” are safer choices. Fact – Most cosmetic marketing claims are unregulated, and companies are rarely if ever required to back them up, even for children’s products. A company can use a claim like “hypoallergenic” or “natural” “to mean anything or nothing at all,” and while “[m]ost of the terms have considerable market value in promoting cosmetic products to consumers,… dermatologists say they have very little medical meaning” (FDA 1998). An investigation of more than 1,700 children’s body care products found that 81 percent of those marked “gentle” or “hypoallergenic” contained allergens or skin and eye irritants (EWG 2007a). Myth – Natural and organic products are always safer. Fact – Products labeled natural or organic often contain synthetic chemicals, and even truly natural or organic ingredients are not necessarily risk-free. The global, plant-based pharmaceutical market, valued at $19.5 billion in 2008, relies on the ability of “natural” chemicals – like those used in some natural cosmetics – to significantly alter body functions, a far cry from innocuous (BCC Research 2006, 2009). On the other hand, products labeled “organic” or “natural” can contain petrochemicals and no certified organic or natural ingredients whatsoever. Products certified as organic can contain as little as 10% organic ingredients by weight or volume (Certech 2008). FDA tried establishing an official definition for the term “natural,” but these protections were overturned in court (FDA 1998). Research shows that 35 percent of children’s products marketed as “natural” contain artificial preservatives (EWG 2007a). Myth – FDA would promptly recall any product that injures people. Fact – FDA has no authority to require recalls of harmful cosmetics. Furthermore, manufacturers are not required to report cosmetics-related injuries to the agency. FDA relies on companies to report injuries voluntarily (FDA 2005). Myth – Consumers can read ingredient labels and avoid products with hazardous chemicals. Fact – Federal law allows companies to leave many chemicals off labels, including nanomaterials, ingredients considered trade secrets, and components of fragrance (Houlihan 2008). Fragrance may include any of 3,163 different chemicals (IFRA 2010), none of which are required to be listed on labels. Fragrance tests reveal an average of 14 hidden compounds per formulation, including potential hormone disruptors and diethyl phthalate, a compound linked to sperm damage (EWG & CSC, 2010). Myth – Cosmetics safety is a concern for women only. Fact – Surveys show that on average, women use 12 products containing 168 ingredients every day, men use 6 products with 85 ingredients (EWG 2004), and children are exposed to an average of 61 ingredients daily (EWG 2007a). The industry-funded CIR safety panel incorrectly assumes that consumers are exposed to just one chemical at a time, and personal care products are the only source of exposure (EWG 2004). Authors: Jason Rano, Legislative Analyst, and Jane Houlihan, Senior Vice President for Research. References BCC Research. 2006. Plant-Derived Drugs: Products, Technolog, Applications. Report Code BIO022D. June 2006. http://www.bccresearch.com/report/BIO022D.html. BCC Research. 2009. Safety Botanical and Plant-Derived Drugs: Global Markets. Report Code BIO022E, February 2009. http://www.bccresearch.com/report/BIO022E.html. Calafat AM, Wong LY, Ye X, Reidy JA, Needham LL. 2008. Concentrations of the sunscreen agent benzophenone-3 in residents of the United States: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2003–2004. Environ Health Perspect. 2008 Jul;116(7):893-7. Certech Registration Inc. 2008. International organic standard – Natural and natural organic cosmetic certification. IOS Cosmetics. Issue 01. April 2008. http://www.certechregistration.com/IOS_cosmetics_standard.pdf. CIR (Cosmetic Ingredient Review). 2009. Ingredients found unsafe for use in cosmetics (9 total, through December, 2009). http://www.cir-safety.org/findings.shtml. CSC (Campaign for Safe Cosmetics). 2007. Lead in lipstick. http://www.safecosmetics.org/article.php?id=223. CSC (The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics). 2009. No more toxic tub. http://www.safecosmetics.org/downloads/NoMoreToxicTub_Mar09Report.pdf. Duty SM, Singh NP, Silva MJ, Barr DB, Brock JW, Ryan L, et al. 2003. The Relationship between Environmental Exposures to Phthalates and DNA Damage in Human Sperm Using the Neutral Comet Assay. Environ Health Perspect 111(9): 1164-9. EWG (Environmental Working Group). 2004. Exposures Add Up – Survey Results. http://www.ewg.org/skindeep/research/exposures.php. EWG (Environmental Working Group). 2006. EWG Comments to FDA on Nano-Scale Ingredients in Cosmetics. Docket: FDA Regulated Products Containing Nanotechnology Materials. Docket number: 2006N-0107. http://www.ewg.org/node/21738. EWG (Environmental Working Group). 2007a. Safety Guide to Children’s Personal Care Products. http://www.ewg.org/skindeep/special/parentsguide/summary.php. EWG (Environmental Working Group). 2007b. Cosmetics with banned and unsafe ingredients. Table 1 – Banned in other countries. Accessed June 21, 2010. http://www.ewg.org/node/22624. EWG (Environmental Working Group). 2007c. Cosmetics With Banned and Unsafe Ingredients. Table 2 – Unsafe for use in cosmetics, according to industry. Accessed June 21, 2010. http://www.ewg.org/node/22636. EWG (Environmental Working Group). 2007d. EWG research shows 22 percent of cosmetics may be contaminated with cancer-causing impurity. http://www.ewg.org/node/21286. EWG (Environmental Working Group). 2010. EWG’s 2010 sunscreen guide. Nanomaterials and hormone disruptors in sunscreens. http://www.ewg.org/2010sunscreen/full-report/nanomaterials-and-hormone-disruptors-in-sunscreens/. EWG & CSC (Environmental Working Group and Campaign for Safe Cosmetics). 2010. Not so sexy. Hidden chemicals in perfume and cologne. http://www.safecosmetics.org/article.php?id=644 FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration). 1998. Clearing Up Cosmetic Confusion” by Carol Lewis. FDA Consumer magazine. May-June 1998. http://www.pueblo.gsa.gov/cic_text/health/cosmetic-confusion/398_cosm.html. FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration). 2000. Ingredients prohibited & restricted by FDA regulations. June 22, 1996; Updated May 30, 2000. http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ProductandIngredientSafety/SelectedCosmeticIngredients/ucm127406.htm. FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration). 2005. FDA authority over cosmetics. http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/cos-206.html. FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration). 2007. Compliance Program Guidance Manual. Program 7329.001. Chapter 29 – Colors and Cosmetics Technology. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/cosmetics/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/ComplianceEnforcement/ucm073356.pdf. FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration). 2010. Regulation of non-prescription products. http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/cos-206.html. Gomez E, Pillon A, Fenet H, Rosain D, Duchesne MJ, Nicolas JC, et al. 2005. Estrogenic activity of cosmetic components in reporter cell lines: parabens, UV screens, and musks. Journal of toxicology and environmental health 68(4): 239-251. Gray TJ, Gangolli SD. 1986. Aspects of the testicular toxicity of phthalate esters. Environmental health perspectives 65: 229-23. Hauser R, et al. DNA damage in human sperm is related to urinary levels of phthalate monoester and oxidative metabolites. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(3):688-95. Houlihan, J. 2008. Statement of Jane Houlihan on Cosmetics Safety: Discussion Draft of the ‘Food and Drug Administration Globalization Act’ Legislation: Device and Cosmetic Safety. Before the Subcommittee on Health of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, United State House of Representatives. May 14 2008. http://www.ewg.org/node/26545. IFRA (International Fragrance Association). 2010. Ingredients. IFRA survey: Transparency list. http://www.ifraorg.org/public/index_ps/parentid/1/childid/15/leafid/111. Schreurs RH, Legler J, Artola-Garicano E, Sinnige TL, Lanser PH, Seinen W, et al. 2004. In vitro and in vivo antiestrogenic effects of polycyclic musks in zebrafish. Environmental science & technology 38(4): 997-1002. Swan SH, Main KM, Liu F, Stewart SL, Kruse RL, Calafat AM, et al. 2005. Decrease in anogenital distance among male infants with prenatal phthalate exposure. Environ Health Perspect 113(8):1056-61. Veldhoen N, Skirrow RC, Osachoff H, Wigmore H, Clapson DJ, Gunderson MP, et al. 2006. The bactericidal agent triclosan modulates thyroid hormone-associated gene expression and disrupts postembryonic anuran development. Aquatic toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 80(3): 217-227. Wolff MS, Engel SM, Berkowitz GS, Ye X, Silva MJ, Zhu C, Wetmur J, Calafat AM. 2008. Prenatal phenol and phthalate exposures and birth outcomes. Environ Health Perspect. 2008 Aug;116(8):1092-7. |
Welcome...to dermagrace cosmetic rejuvenation blog and information center. If you're looking for dramatic and long lasting skin improvements…look no further. My goal is to provide the most authoritative skin care protocols, research and articles. Everyday I search for relevant and reliable information. I look forward to any comments or questions. Archives
July 2014
Categories
All
|