Nanotech hair treatment just a trich?

The Times of London asks whether a hair-repair product from Nanomax is "Trick or Treatment?" The verdict from a trichologist: Trick.

The Times explains:

What is it? A permanent hair repair treatment that uses nanotechnology - the science of manipulating matter on a molecular level. Healthy hair is made up of 90 per cent keratin and 10 per cent moisture, but environmental or cosmetic damage can leave it split, with craters or minute cracks. Nanomax claims to penetrate the hair, duplicating its natural structure, helping to heal, repair, strengthen, protect and shine.

...

Trichologist's verdict: "It is not possible to 'heal' or 'repair' a broken hair, although remoisturising it is beneficial. ... There are more effective ways to remoisturise and condition your hair that don't blind you with (pseudo) science,” says Philip Kingsley, a trichologist. More here

The newspaper used a human "guinea-pig" for its nanotech experiments, by the way. I am proud to say that NanoBot and Small Times (back when I was news editor) bravely pioneered this method of using human test subjects.

Backgrounder
... and I am a trivial boy
Don't hate me because I'm nano-beautiful
Nerd American Idol
Beauty and the Nano Beat

... and I am a trivial boy

Andrew Maynard, chief science adviser for the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies in Washington, honored me with a footnote in his blog post on Elle's recent coverage of nanotech in cosmetics (You can download the entire Elle feature here).

Well, not exactly a footnote. Actually, it's under the subhed "trivia." Maynard writes:

In 2004, nanotech commentator and fellow blogger Howard Lovy drew a link between Madonna and nanotechnology in the Salon article Nanotech angels.

I thank Andrew for the mention, despite our difference of opinion on other issues -- mainly his organization's overuse of the "nano" label on questionably nano products.

Maynard recognized our differences in an e-mail to me recently.

"I suspect you will find the context of allegedly nano consumer products a little tedious, but I thought the Elle nanotech story that I kick off with was interesting - as was your 2004 piece, which I stumbled across while researching the entry," Maynard wrote.

Thank you, Andrew. But, you know, I am certainly not like a virgin in the subject of nanocosmetics. I've been writing and assigning stories on it for years, including recruitment of the very first nanocosmetics guinea pig back in 2004.

And I've been looking at the issue since 2003.

Backgrounder
NanoKabbalah in Salon on my birthday: Coincidence?
Kids grill scientist dad (with ketchup and mustard)
Nerd American Idol
Don't hate me because I'm nano-beautiful
Wilson Center's nano numbers racket
Indigestible nanotech claim

Made-up science attacks makeup

The Angry Toxicologist says: "... don't eat your sunscreen. Good advice anytime."

Thank you, AT. At last, an answer from a pro to the "Friends of the Earth" use of made-up science to attack nanotech in sunscreen.

Backgrounder
FDA should put in more face time
Friends of the Earth releases nanotox report
Truth is stranger than prediction

FDA should put in more face time

The confusion continues over nanoparticles in cosmetics. This uncertainty over safety is one of many reasons why nanobio researchers wish the Beauty Industrial Complex would find a different marketing term and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration would get more aggressive in sorting out safely engineered nanoparticles from untested, nanosized zinc oxide.

The FDA does not have as much authority over cosmetics as it does over, well, food and drugs. An argument can be made, however, that the more-sophisticated cosmetics out there -- L’Oreal's nanosomes, for example -- could qualify as drug delivery devices.

Update: Shopping for answers: Nanotechnology: Another concern for cosmetics users? (By Leigh Grogan, Sacramento Bee)

Backgrounder
Straight-up info on nanotech regulation
Friends of the Earth releases nanotox report
FDA tries to get a virtual grip on nano
Nerd American Idol

Cosmetics: Facing the (lack of) facts

Paula Begoun, who writes a "Cosmetics Tips" column for the Knight-Ridder/Tribune News Service, recently fielded a nanotech question.

Q: A recent news article I read reported that nanotechnology is being used in cosmetic and skin-care products such as sunscreen. There is disagreement about the safety of nanoparticles in these products, particularly in terms of absorption into the skin, and apparently little regulation by any government agency. Do you have a position on these materials? How can a consumer know if nanoparticles are in a particular product? _Natasha, via email

Begoun's answer was refreshingly thorough, thoughtful and accurate, given the limited space she had. I encourage everybody to read her full answer, but if you're in a hurry I'll "bottom-line" it with the excerpt below:

A: ... I have been searching for relevant information to answer your question, and while I do think there are theoretical reasons to be concerned, I can't be any more specific than that, because there is no specific research on the subject, at least not as far as skin-care ingredients go. ... More here

Backgrounder
QuoteBot: Lipstick on a guinea pig?
A nano IPO and excuse to run a supermodel pic
'All we have is speculation on toxicity'

Son of McMonkey McBean

My prices are low and I work with great speed
And my work is 100 percent guaranteed
by my new patent process of polar potoxis
of the inner subnuclear nusbaum nogotsis
you will get a star like the Star-Bellied Sneetch
for the mere paltry payment of $3 each

-- Sylvester McMonkey McBean, in the televised version of "The Sneetches," by Dr. Seuss

laser in a bottle - designed to mimic the results of laser technology with QuSome, a patented delivery system that nano-encapsulates potent ingredients-green tea and white tea to help skin fight free radical damage; and grapeseed extract to protect collagen and elastin for firmer skin. -- "dr. brandt's" laser in a bottle

Show your face, Procter & Gamble

Nanotroubles
Big questions about tiny particles
They're already proving useful but are the new, tiny miracle molecules safe? In the rush to commercialize there are unanswered questions, reports Rachel Ross (Toronto Star)

Despite the uncertainty, a handful of products that contain engineered nanoparticles are already on store shelves.

Inside every bottle of Oil Of Olay Complete UV Protection moisturizer is a little bit of nanotech. The Procter & Gamble product is one of many sunscreens that contain a nanoparticle known as microfine zinc oxide. Zinc has long been used as a sunscreen in larger form. It's effective, but certainly not for the vain: it stays white on skin. Make those particles nano-size and there's no more risk of embarrassing white marks.

But some researchers worry that the nanoparticle intended to protect the skin might actually damage DNA.

A July 2004 report commissioned by the British government cited studies that found microfine zinc oxide damaged cells in vitro.

Whether the nanoparticles are toxic to cells in a living body is still unknown. The report, written by the British Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering, said more research was needed before the particle could be considered safe for use in cosmetics.

Procter & Gamble declined to answer questions about the product's safety.

Health Canada said it has not yet studied the issue. More here

Related P&G Patents
Use of nanoscale sterols and sterol esters
Chitosan compositions

NanoBot Backgrounder
WSJ is down with nano
Britain balances science, economics, perception
NPR can't tell Crichton from cosmetics

Nerd American Idol

From: Howard Lovy
Subject: Skin Science
They link to our review of L'Oreal's nanostuff, making Jennifer's suffering for science worth it!

From: Jennifer Foss
Subject: RE: Skin Science
This is my nerd dream come true. I wonder if I'm going to get recognized in the grocery store now!

From: Howard Lovy
Subject: RE: Skin Science
Want me to make you an even bigger nerd star and blog this item?

From: Jennifer Foss
Subject: RE: Skin Science
Oh my gosh ... It's like the American Idol of the Nanotech world! Sure, I don't have a problem with my newfound fame in the scientific community.

Related Posts
Beauty and the nano beat
Don't hate me because I'm nano-beautiful

Related Stories
Product Review: Hey, is that a nanocapsule on your face?
The nanoscience behind beauty is serious business at L'Oreal

Resources
What's New in Cosmetic R&D
L'Oreal's nanosomes

Discuss

Update: Roland Piquepaille writes about a company that literally gets under your skin. STMicroelectronics' SkinChip.

Don't hate me because I'm nano-beautiful

This recent New York Post story had me thinking about beauty.

Small Times reported last year that nanomaterials had been used in cosmetics for years (L'Oreal has had them in products since 1995, despite the Post's assertion that, "Even big names like L'Oreal are getting into the act."). So now, with renewed debate surrounding what is not known about nanoparticles, the fact that nanoscale zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are used in some brands of cosmetics and sunscreen is continuously juxtaposed with news reports about the controversy.

In this cursed and wonderful age of Google, whose spawn is quick access to information but ad nauseaum repetition of often questionable factoids, the L'Oreal lore has circled the globe more than a few times, ripped from its original context. It's the most-easily-available piece of information about how consumers connect to nanotech today and a reporter doesn't need to expend very much energy to find it, so it gets plopped into a news story about potentially dangerous nanoparticles. Is there any evidence, or even suspicion, that consumers who have used L'Oreal's chock-full-o-nanocapsules line of cosmetics for the past eight years have been harmed in any way? Uh … no … But, you know, they have "nanostuff" in them. Isn't that creepy?

Meanwhile, in the world of real nanoscience, Great Britain just named a panel of advisers to look into potential benefits and problems associated with nanotech. The list of names can be found here.

U.S. News and World Report's James M. Pethokoukis continues his analysis of the Greenpeace nanotech report with another column today, Turning green over nanotech. The controversy is still on the European Union's radar, as you can see in this report, Nanotechnology: Public debate takes off and the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology offered what it called a "qualified endorsement" of Greenpeace's report.

Oh, and to those who paid attention to my previous rantings on Shimon Peres and nanotech, CNet ran an interview with the former Israeli leader. He doesn't mention nanotech, but it is a window into how he thinks about technology and its role in national economic health and regional stability: A high-tech bridge to Middle East peace?

Discuss