Future of Anti Aging for Skincare
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » Skin Care and Makeup Forum

free skin care · Mon Apr 09, 2012 3:57 pm

Summarized, according to 2/12 issue of Skin, Inc.:

Human growth hormone, stem cells, new antioxidants, new peptides with vitamins and minerals working in concert.

Ingredients must be compatible and address multi-factorial causes of skin aging.

One dermatologist references *5* signs of aging, but doesn't list them. I am only aware of 3, so this is curious.

The next big thing is topicals combined with at-home skin care devices.

BFG

free skin care · Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:05 pm

Are you talking about the Inflamation and Aging article?
Those 3 causes of inflamation are NF-kB, oxidative damage and UV damage.

free skin care · Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:44 pm

Is this the article you are referring to?

http://www.skininc.com/skinscience/ingredients/138356454.html

“Even though no two people are alike in their wants and needs for skin care, studies show that today’s consumer wants a product that addresses all seven signs of aging: dehydration, fine lines, wrinkles, skin discoloration, large pores, and loss of elasticity and fullness."

free skin care · Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:48 pm

yes, condensed the article into a few sentences. The rest is old info for this savvy crowd LOL

BFG

free skin care · Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:51 pm

Obviously, there is no general consensus on the common signs of skin aging.

Bad Grin

I've always heard it as three - elasticity, overall condition (wrinkles, spots) and fat loss (volume).

The doctor refers to 5 and now the writer refers to 7 which might rightly be lumped together in some fashion.

BFG

free skin care · Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:51 pm

Barefootgirl wrote:

yes, condensed the article into a few sentences. The rest is old info for this savvy crowd LOL

BFG

There are lots of levels of knowledge on the forum, there are always lots of newbies, can't hurt for people to be able to read the article themselves. What's old to one may be new to another. LOL

free skin care · Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:03 pm

Good idea, I defer to you, thanks for posting the link.

BFG

free skin care · Mon Apr 09, 2012 7:54 pm

jom wrote:

Is this the article you are referring to?

http://www.skininc.com/skinscience/ingredients/138356454.html

“Even though no two people are alike in their wants and needs for skin care, studies show that today’s consumer wants a product that addresses all seven signs of aging: dehydration, fine lines, wrinkles, skin discoloration, large pores, and loss of elasticity and fullness."

I like this article! So how come we have been getting criticized for releasing a product that (as one critic put it) "does too much"?

free skin care · Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:11 pm

DrJ wrote:

jom wrote:

Is this the article you are referring to?

http://www.skininc.com/skinscience/ingredients/138356454.html

“Even though no two people are alike in their wants and needs for skin care, studies show that today’s consumer wants a product that addresses all seven signs of aging: dehydration, fine lines, wrinkles, skin discoloration, large pores, and loss of elasticity and fullness."

I like this article! So how come we have been getting criticized for releasing a product that (as one critic put it) "does too much"?

Who criticized you for doing too much? The only thing your product doesn't address is loss of elasticity and fullness, or did I miss something?

free skin care · Mon Apr 09, 2012 11:49 pm

Anti-Aging Data and Support Claims – Consensus Statement

There is a bit of junk science mixed in there as well.

free skin care · Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:03 am

jom wrote:

DrJ wrote:

jom wrote:

Is this the article you are referring to?

http://www.skininc.com/skinscience/ingredients/138356454.html

“Even though no two people are alike in their wants and needs for skin care, studies show that today’s consumer wants a product that addresses all seven signs of aging: dehydration, fine lines, wrinkles, skin discoloration, large pores, and loss of elasticity and fullness."

I like this article! So how come we have been getting criticized for releasing a product that (as one critic put it) "does too much"?

Who criticized you for doing too much? The only thing your product doesn't address is loss of elasticity and fullness, or did I miss something?

I would ask:

Who criticized you for doing too much? The only thing your product doesn't claim to address is loss of elasticity and fullness.

That is just my opinion, seeing not one shred of proof.

free skin care · Tue Apr 10, 2012 6:48 am

DrJ wrote:

jom wrote:

Is this the article you are referring to?

http://www.skininc.com/skinscience/ingredients/138356454.html

“Even though no two people are alike in their wants and needs for skin care, studies show that today’s consumer wants a product that addresses all seven signs of aging: dehydration, fine lines, wrinkles, skin discoloration, large pores, and loss of elasticity and fullness."

I like this article! So how come we have been getting criticized for releasing a product that (as one critic put it) "does too much"?

Too much? No way. More is more!

free skin care · Tue Apr 10, 2012 6:57 am

To me, the biggest enemy is sagging skin instead of wrinkles.

free skin care · Tue Apr 10, 2012 7:46 am

I have to agree. If a preventive and restorative skincare regimen is started soon enough, currently available topicals can be purchased relatively inexpensively to keep wrinkles, pigmentation, etc. at bay or even eliminated.

Sagging is a completely different beast.

BFG

free skin care · Tue Apr 10, 2012 7:49 am

Barefootgirl wrote:

I have to agree. If a preventive and restorative skincare regimen is started soon enough, currently available topicals can be purchased relatively inexpensively to keep wrinkles, pigmentation, etc. at bay or even eliminated.

Sagging is a completely different beast.

BFG

Absolutely agree 100%

free skin care · Tue Apr 10, 2012 9:20 am

DarkMoon wrote:

Barefootgirl wrote:

I have to agree. If a preventive and restorative skincare regimen is started soon enough, currently available topicals can be purchased relatively inexpensively to keep wrinkles, pigmentation, etc. at bay or even eliminated.

Sagging is a completely different beast.

BFG

Absolutely agree 100%

Sagging/volume loss is my biggest nemesis and the bane of my existence Confused

Every thing else is pretty much under control and I can live with Laughing

free skin care · Tue Apr 10, 2012 9:28 am

bren21 wrote:

DarkMoon wrote:

Barefootgirl wrote:

I have to agree. If a preventive and restorative skincare regimen is started soon enough, currently available topicals can be purchased relatively inexpensively to keep wrinkles, pigmentation, etc. at bay or even eliminated.

Sagging is a completely different beast.

BFG

Absolutely agree 100%

Sagging/volume loss is my biggest nemesis and the bane of my existence Confused

Every thing else is pretty much under control and I can live with Laughing

LOL. I think you are in good company on that issue here bren! Laughing

free skin care · Wed Apr 11, 2012 1:39 am

I thought I was the only one who had that out-of-control sagging problem! The worst part is that I have a really skinny almost gaunt face to boot, so much for the skinny faces don't sag theory.

free skin care · Wed Apr 11, 2012 7:49 am

UmEnis wrote:

I thought I was the only one who had that out-of-control sagging problem! The worst part is that I have a really skinny almost gaunt face to boot, so much for the skinny faces don't sag theory.

Gravity induced descent of the cheek, jowling, and the hanging of "deflated" tissue is directionally influenced by gravitational pull, but gravity doesn't cause it. The cause is loss of volume. Volume is not just fat. It's connective tissue in general (lean and fat) and of especially our old friend elastic tissue. Bony loss plays a smaller role. To restore volume you have surgical implants, injected fillers, or pumping up the matrix. Lots of things will do the latter (stimulate collagen), but there are many issues that relate to the quality & long term viability of different matrix stimuli.

free skin care · Wed Apr 11, 2012 10:55 am

DrJ,

Did you catch the article I posted here this week about the manipulation of hyaluronic acid so that it effectively penetrates the skin?

It appears the study highlighted the topical effects while hinting at long term volumizing effects, almost suggesting that needles could be replaced by topical application, eventually?

Your thoughts on this?

BFG

free skin care · Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:58 pm

Once I am done with school, I will be looking in to cheek impants myself. I figure all this cash I've forked out for fillers I already have one paid for and then some. That really is my only major issue, the loss of volume in my cheeks which causes other side issues.

free skin care · Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:08 pm

bren21 wrote:

Once I am done with school, I will be looking in to cheek impants myself. I figure all this cash I've forked out for fillers I already have one paid for and then some. That really is my only major issue, the loss of volume in my cheeks which causes other side issues.

Have you had cheek thickness measured? Easy to do with accurate caliper. Ask how much do fillers do for you? I ask because sometimes people confuse volume with architecture. If you haven't already, I might suggest trying a liposomal soy isoflavone product. We saw surprising cheek plumping in our clinical trial, and while don't yet have specific data to support, my hypothesis is that isoflavones are a key contributor to that effect.

free skin care · Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:10 pm

Barefootgirl wrote:

DrJ,

Did you catch the article I posted here this week about the manipulation of hyaluronic acid so that it effectively penetrates the skin?

It appears the study highlighted the topical effects while hinting at long term volumizing effects, almost suggesting that needles could be replaced by topical application, eventually?

Your thoughts on this?

BFG

No, can you post again? Thanks.

free skin care · Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:17 pm

DrJ wrote:

Barefootgirl wrote:

DrJ,

Did you catch the article I posted here this week about the manipulation of hyaluronic acid so that it effectively penetrates the skin?

It appears the study highlighted the topical effects while hinting at long term volumizing effects, almost suggesting that needles could be replaced by topical application, eventually?

Your thoughts on this?

BFG

No, can you post again? Thanks.

First post on the link.

http://www.essentialdayspa.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=45323

free skin care · Wed Apr 11, 2012 3:26 pm

DarkMoon wrote:

DrJ wrote:

Barefootgirl wrote:

DrJ,

Did you catch the article I posted here this week about the manipulation of hyaluronic acid so that it effectively penetrates the skin?

It appears the study highlighted the topical effects while hinting at long term volumizing effects, almost suggesting that needles could be replaced by topical application, eventually?

Your thoughts on this?

BFG

No, can you post again? Thanks.

First post on the link.

http://www.essentialdayspa.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=45323

I looked at the PPT presentation by Dr Nestor, and it left me with more questions than answers. I recall seeing this before, and the product formulation that came out of it was really amateurish (and filled with lauryl sulfate & parabens & perfumes & nasties).

In the study, it seem that the non-cross linked HA was not so effective, the CL version was. But the control solution was pretty darned effective itself (nice placebo). In fact, at 15 days, the control solution beat the HA containing ones by a 2:1 margin!!!

What makes the least sense to me is the nanotechnology itself. There is inadequate explanation as to how you take cross-linked HA (restylane) and nano-ize it, given that it is a gel with infinite cross links.

FROM THE LITERATURE:

What is the molecular weight of the Restylane products?

From a scientific point of view, it is not common practice to calculate the molecular weight of a gel. Nevertheless, it may be appropriate to do this in order to demonstrate the very large difference between non-stabilized hyaluronic acid products and the non-animal, stabilized hyaluronic acid (NASHA) in Restylane. In the NASHA gel particles, the hyaluronic acid molecules are connected to each other, i.e. every individual gel particle can be regarded as a single molecule.

The molecular weight of a NASHA gel particle 200 Mym in diameter is then 10,000,000,000,000,000, which is much larger than the molecular weight of hyaluronic acid in various products, which varies from one to ten million.

So, my question for you budding scientists is, how do you get some thing with a minimun size of lets say 1M Daltons to fit into a nano vehicle. I'm willing to be educated on this.

Then, if it was absorbed, what's to stop it from going too deep? You have heard about all the problems with Restylane if if gets deep into dermal tissues (including clotting off small blood vessels).

Anyway, many other questions as well. So what happened to this product? Its been around for 18 months? Die out? Afterlife on QVC? What?

Automatic Message

If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.

Click Here to join our community.

If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site.