-
Serious article about the dangers.
This article in The Guardian makes interesting reading.
-
9 Replies
-
“…using permanent hair dye increases a black woman’s risk of breast cancer by 45%, compared to an increased risk of 7% in white women.”
That’s not what the study concluded. It was an observational study, not a causal study.
This is an interesting take on the study…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=188&v=P6qhQhvAkPU&feature=emb_logoAlso relevant
https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/hair-dyes.html -
The problem is not hair dyes, but hair straighteners containing formaldehyde a known and banned carcinogen.
https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-products/hair-smoothing-products-release-formaldehyde-when-heatedThe article mixes known science (formaldehyde being carcinogen and banned) with pseudoscience and hearsay.
The name says it all: the Guardian = SJW leftist.
Our unequal earth? Then get just some skills, work hard and you’ll be off poverty. A simple and time-proven solution, comrades. -
Our unequal earth? Then get just some skills, work hard and you’ll be off poverty. A simple and time-proven solution, comrades.
Hard work is overrated as a solution to poverty. Lots of hard working people are dirt poor. More important is being lucky & being born to the right set of parents in the right country. CEOs certainly aren’t the hardest working people at their companies.
-
Perry said:
Our unequal earth? Then get just some skills, work hard and you’ll be off poverty. A simple and time-proven solution, comrades.
Hard work is overrated as a solution to poverty. Lots of hard working people are dirt poor. More important is being lucky & being born to the right set of parents in the right country. CEOs certainly aren’t the hardest working people at their companies.
Well said, Perry! Couldn’t agree more!
@Gunther
What does hard work and poverty have to do with an article about hair dye? :confused: -
I think @Gunter was misunderstood. The Guardian is very biased and indeed an SJW den. There is a huge difference between equity and equality. They are fighting for the first one. Although an element of luck is important.
-
@ngarayeva001 - yes, text is an inefficient way to communicate and tone/meaning can be often missed or misunderstood. I’ve heard the Guardian publishes “rubbish”.
-
@Perry I can provide a good example for you to have an idea what kind of publisher it is:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/08/carcinogens-cosmetics-brexit-britain-eu-makeupIt was posted on chemistcorner before and this is the guardian in a nutshell: “The EU bans 1,328 chemicals from use in cosmetics – including formaldehyde, asbestos and coal tar – that are known or suspected to cause cancer, genetic mutation, reproductive harm or birth defects. The US Food & Drugs Administration (FDA), by comparison, has only banned or restricted 11.”
You raised that point in one of the episodes of the beauty braines. FDA doesn’t ban plutonium, because no one puts plutonium in a lipstick anyway.
The author is neither an expert in regulations, nor a chemist, nor even a hobbyist formulator. She is “is a freelance journalist and feminist campaigner” -
it’s a shame how the Guardian has declined in the last 20 years: it used to be a respectable paper, now its total lack of quality control makes it the world’s most pretentious tabloid
-
Perry said:
Our unequal earth? Then get just some skills, work hard and you’ll be off poverty. A simple and time-proven solution, comrades.
Hard work is overrated as a solution to poverty. Lots of hard working people are dirt poor. More important is being lucky & being born to the right set of parents in the right country. CEOs certainly aren’t the hardest working people at their companies.
Ding ding ding! Winnerrr!
Log in to reply.
