Sodium Lauryl Sulphate

[Essay]

Pamela, I hope I'm not too late, but please don't continue to use the castile soap on your hair. It is a very harsh soap that is (imho) slowly damaging your hair. The damage manifests itself as that curling that you describe, I think.

I shouldn't rush in with all these proclamations, but let me say that I've been making my own shampoo for about 15 years now, and have studied hair and hair care from a biochemist's point of view (finally using my degree!); so I have a philosophy and many opinions on this subject.

...and as for carcinogenesis, c'mon.... SLS is about as dangerous as aspirin....
Acetyl salicylic acid is a chemical name that sounds dangerous, but it's just aspirin.
Sodium laurel sulfate is the chemical name for shampoo-a mild detergent.
Potassium oleate is the chemical name for castile soap (I think); but whatever the fatty acid--oleic, lauric, linoic, or linoleic--it is still a soap! You're washing your hair with soap, not shampoo! And some manufacturers use tallow, coconut, or olive oils to make castile soap also; so watch out, don't get potassium tallowate!
Castile soap is liquid because it uses a potassium salt instead of a sodium salt-as shampoos and regular soaps do, but it is still soap even though it's liquid.

...this is from a google search about making castile soap:
"Your liquid castile soap recipe will include vegetable oil and potassium hydroxide, and the usual fragrance and essential oils."

Potassium hydroxide is like drain cleaner! Don't get any onya!
Well I'm just being silly. They use drain cleaner to make all the soaps and shampoos and detergents; so that's no big deal either. It just sounds scary because it's chemistry, and the basic ingredients can be dangerous.

But drain cleaner and vegetable oils (or tallow) and salts (either potassium or sodium) are not gonna be carcinogenic--even if you mix them together to make shampoo.

So don't avoid the SLS shampoos because you think they might be carcinogenic.
I'd worry about all the frickin' additives that they put in shampoos to make them magically new and improved.
That complex crap is carcinogenic (more than likely) and can cause all sorts of skin reactions, so that's a good reason to find a good simple shampoo.

Just try and find a shampoo without added "protein" and you'll be on the right track.
Try to keep it to simple or natural ingredients that you understand (and you understand SLS now) so SLS shampoos should be on a list of acceptible options.
===

I could go on for hours about the physics and biomechanics of hair care and hair washing, but I'll save that for later.
You may (for a brief time) like the look of that fuller, wavy hair; but I bet it doesn't feel right, and that it gets dirty and tangled more easily than before. Am I right?

~

p.s. It sounds as if you have a nice neutral castile soap with lots of essential oils, and maybe more. That is fine for the skin; but please reconsider the castile decision for your hair. It's going to continue getting more "curly and thick" until it starts breaking more easily--leading to other problems. "IMHO"

Ultimately I think it's the additives, not the cleansing agent that can be problematic.

[freeztar]

Essay, I have to question a few things.

Acetyl salisylic acid is a chemical name that sounds dangerous, but it's just aspirin.
Sodium laurel sulfate is the chemical name for shampoo-a mild detergent.

I don't think there's a problem here with "scary chemical names".

It's not good enough, imho, to declare:

drain cleaner and vegetable oils (or tallow) and salts (either potassium or sodium) are not gonna be carcinogenic--even if you mix them together to make shampoo.

How do you know this? Can you provide a reference?

Ultimately I think it's the additives, not the cleansing agent that can be problematic.

From my understanding, some cosmetic additives have been proven to be carcinogenic. Can we really dismiss some or all of the cleansing agents from carcinogenic scrutiny?

[Essay]

Originally Posted by freeztar

I don't think there's a problem here with "scary chemical names".

Yes, I can't help but think that "Castile" just sounds so very benign when compared to Sodium Laurate. It's just an example of how I easily start ranting about "public perception of science" like the classic aspirin example, but as you say "here" that shouldn't be a problem.
===

Originally Posted by from google --just fyi:

"Lauric acid is a medium chain fatty acid which is abundant in coconut oil and is considered responsible for many of its health benefits...."
Coconut Oil - Healthiest on Earth
...and please don't think that I agree with the "healthiest" comment; this is just to show it is a vegetable oil....

...just to clarify that SLS, like castile soap, is a mixture of salt, vegitable oils, and (for the detergents) sulfate.
...so it's probably drain cleaner, vegetable oil, and sulfuric acid that are the basic ingredients....
===

But yes, as I said several times, "IMHO" based on (a degree in chemistry with a minor in biochemistry and) years of experience, I have developed a philosophy and many opinions on these matters.

I think you'll probably agree that separately, although some are dangerous--caustic, the basic ingredients haven't ever been associated with cancer. Now I agree that when mixed and reacted, products can rise to a new level--affecting things differently than the basic ingredients, but....

But we're not forming any cyclic or aromatic products here (the kind that often are associated with cancers), no DNA analogs or adducts, nor is any mixture with lots of free radicals formed. It's a simple, pure product, not unlike many of the natural chemicals formed by plants and animals (think saponin and lanolin maybe?). It's not gonna be absorbed through the skin--being a large molecule.

This isn't quite like trying to prove (or is it disprove?) a negative, but isn't there one scientific source about the (even suspected) carcinogenicity of SLS? I suppose I didn't check because to me it intuitively (see above) didn't seem like an actual possibility. Wiki doesn't mention anything... and you'd think if it was out there, somebody would have....
===

I should add that I've only had [castile] experience with Dr. Bronner's (for many years), so maybe other castile soaps are not as harsh, but any soap on the hair tends to dry, warp, and embrittle the hair, more than mild detergents (shampoos).
THOUGH....
As my myspace page has said for several years now:
I believe how you wash your hair is more important than what you wash it with.
...or words to that effect.

~

[pamela]

thanks Essay, it is dr bronners that i have been using. I can purchase a good natural shampoo at the health store. Send me a pm if there is something that you could recommend.As far as my skin though, there is a notable difference as to being healthy and I don't feel that residue after using soaps or body washes. I have not made an assumption as to it being cancer causing or not. I just don't want to find out years from now, that it does. I would rather look to alternatives for a healthier body.There are just too many things on the market especially in food items, that are terrible for your health. I want to feel and look good as i age and try to avoid those things that may put me in an early grave