06.20.08
Posted in nanotechnology, skin care news at 4:44 pm by Administrator
It turns out that scientists are more concerned about potential health and environmental risks of the new nanotechnology than the public. Over 30 percent of scientists expressed concern that nanotechnology may pose risks to human health while only 20 percent of the general public shared their fears. When it comes to allaying public fears, which are more prevalent in Europe than they are in the United States, the few “scientific” studies that exist should be raising even more alarm bells than they are assuaging anxiety.
For example, in a report issued by researchers at L’Oreal in collaboration with scientists at the University of Queensland, Australia, the finding was “that nanoparticles do not pose a risk to human health…[because]there was no evidence to suggest that nanoparticles actually penetrate the epidermis or the dermis.”
This is hardly reassuring, as more and more anti-aging products entering the market purport to be effective precisely because their high tech delivery systems, based on nanocapsules, fullerenes and the like, penetrate to the deeper layers of the skin, carrying their age-defying ingredients with them.
Either they penetrate or they don’t—which is it? Assuming the worst-case (or best-case depending on your point of view) scenario, and some particles do penetrate, it raises questions such as: how do nano-based cosmetic formulations behave once they are applied to the skin? If particles penetrate the skin’s inner layer due to their size, could this then lead to the particles entering the bloodstream? If so what might the implications be?
Scientists are also voicing misgivings over potential chemical instability of nano manipulated particles, particularly when combined with other compounds, as is the case with cosmetic formulations. The newest generation of micronized titanium dioxide particles for example are so-called “buffered,” often with an aluminum coating. (If this sounds familiar, one may recall the not-so-many-years distant controversy over anti-perspirants containing aluminum causing allergic reactions.) Tiny aluminum-coated particles displaying chemical instability sounds like a high tech nightmare waiting to happen, but the bottom line is that at this point we just don’t know what effects, if any, the new technology may have on public health. At this moment all we know is what we don’t know, since, according to nanotechnology expert Dr. Jay Nadeau of McGill University, once particles reach a certain size their behavior becomes “unpredictable.”
This is why, with The Nanotech Report: 4th Edition, by Lux Research, indicating that the market for nanotechnology manufactured goods is estimated to be worth $2.6 trillion by the year 2015, more scientists world wide are calling for more testing. According to a consumer survey by Germany’s Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BIR) “clear definitions, terms and standards as well as far more research into the potential problems of nanotechnology” is needed before the science is used to a greater degree in products. The German survey confirms calls by scientists and others across the world for more regulatory oversight of nanotechnology.
The explosion of growth in the market place of nanoproducts suggests that the real research and development work into their safety be carried out now, while the technology is still in its infancy.
Permalink
06.19.08
Posted in nanotechnology, skin care news at 9:37 pm by Administrator
This article by Katie Bird points to the growing debate about nanotechnology and its uses. It is growing by leaps and bounds, yet very little is set aside to research safety issues.
Numbers of nano products soars—by Katie Bird
“Consumer products that incorporate nanotechnology are being released at the rate of 3 to 4 a week according to the Project on Emerging Technologies (PEN).
The inventory has now recorded 609 products, 60 per cent of which are health and fitness items including cosmetics and sunscreens.
The news about the increase in nano-based product launches come just days after a PEN investigation concluded that US funding on nanotechnology risk research is lacking, standing at just over half of the amount spent in Europe in 2006.
Rapid expansion in nanotech products
The nanotechnology consumer product inventory maintained by the PEN was started in March 2006 with a total of 212 products.
According to PEN project director David Rejeski the inventory is the tip of the iceberg and the real number of consumer goods products incorporating nanotechnology could be much higher.
Lux Research estimates that by 2014 15 percent of total global output of manufactured goods will incorporate nanotechnology, $2.6 trillion worth. In 2006 this figure was estimated to be $50bn.
Rejeski presented the findings to the Senate Commerce Committee marking the start of the US Senate’s debate on the future of federal investment set aside for nanotechnology research and development.
Federal budget for nanotechnology
The US government has a $1.4bn nanotechnology budget and according to the PEN a dangerously low percentage of this is spent on risk research.
“Public trust is the ‘dark horse’ of in nanotechnology’s future. If government and industry do not work to build public confidence in nanotechnology, consumers may reach for the ‘No-Nano’ label in the future and investors will put their money elsewhere,” said Rejeski.
It is for this reason that Rejeski believes that public perceptions about risks - real and perceived - can have large economic consequences, now and for the future.
“How consumers respond to these early products - in food, electronics, health care, clothing, and cars - is a litmus test for broader market acceptance of nanotechnologies in the future,” he said.
Only three percent spent on risk research
According to a recent PEN assessment only three percent of the federal budget is spent on investigating the risks of nanotechnology.
This amounts to $13m spent in 2006 on projects that were highly relevant to addressing the possible risks of nanotechnology, compared to the $24m spent by European countries in the same year.
Chief science advisor for PEN Andrew Maynard accuses the federal government of ‘wishful thinking’.
“It is trying to substitute research that might inform science’s general understanding of possible nanotechnology risks for research that is focused on getting answers to direct questions being asked today - what makes a nanomaterial potentially harmful, how can it be used safely, and what happens when it is eventually dispose.”
As you know, I am an advocate of doing the research before inflicting potentially risky products on an unwitting public. Men, women and especially children should not be used as guinea pigs while we figure out if there are risks associated with nanoparticle use. I will be writing more about this issue in the coming days.
Permalink
06.16.08
Posted in nanotechnology, skin care news at 7:04 pm by Administrator
The Biological Farmers of Australia have called for certification of organic products to be applied only to products free of nanoparticles. The Australian organic body echoes the concerns of the British-based organic body, the Soil Association, which instigated a similar ban on the use of nanoparticles in organic certified cosmetics products earlier this year. (see page to the right for the complete story).
“There should be an immediate freeze on the commercial release of nanomaterials until there is a sound body of scientific research into all the health impacts,” says the head of the Soil Association. He reflects the concerns of the British Royal Society and the Friends of the Earth; both of these organizations have earlier called for a moratorium on nanoparticle use until more studies can be done.
Nanoparticles in sunscreens
Nanoparticles are now routinely used in sunscreens, with micronized particles of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide being the most commonly used UV filters.
In spite of the growing concerns voiced by scientific bodies internationally many companies defend use of nanoparticles in their products. In a report issued by researchers at L’Oreal in collaboration with scientists at the University of Queensland, Australia, the finding was “that nanoparticles do not pose a risk to human health…[because]there was no evidence to suggest that nanoparticles actually penetrate the epidermis or the dermis.”
There are two problems with this finding that strike me immediately, and I would like to pose a few questions first of all to our distinguished researchers.
1) if nanoparticles do not penetrate the epidermis why are nanocapsules almost universally touted as being excellent delivery systems for anti-aging products?
2) one can infer from the L’Oreal study that nanoparticles are only safe if they do not penetrate the skin. Can we accept the corollary to this as true, namely that a risk is present in cases where the epidermal barrier is compromised, for example by a scratch or cut?
Why MV uses non-micronized zinc oxide
1) Safety: not only does the L’Oreal study dodge several important issues discussed above, there reigns in my mind the paramount question; why not just hold off on using nanoparticles until we have definitive, rather than self-serving, studies?
(I believe the answer lies in their reluctance to disinvest in a technology they have already sunk millions into, but that’s another story.)
2) Better protection
I have long been a proponent of using non-micronized versions of zinc oxide as a sunblock agent. Besides safety, it should be mentioned that larger-sized particles provide better UV protection, the larger the particle, the better the protection.
Formulator’s Standards
My suspicion is that nanoparticles represent an easy way out for formulators who have to deal with consumer complaints about using a product that leaves a sticky, greasy feel to the skin. Nevertheless, nanoparticles may not be the answer, as their safety is in serious doubt. Rather than defend their use in advance of soild data it behooves us as responsible cosmetic formulators to take the road marked “Safety First.”
We must resist consumer pressure to develop products that have cosmetic appeal but which have the potential, in the long run, to harm the user. The standard asked of doctors entering their profession–”First, do no harm,” should apply to us as well.
Permalink
06.15.08
Posted in Facts About UV Protection, skin care news at 8:58 pm by Administrator
A natural sun defense pill is being released by a Florida-based company. The dietary supplement is designed to protect the skin against UVA and UVB damage. Not intended to replace sunscreen lotions, its purpose is to provide an extra layer of protection internally.
The SunPill’s two active ingredients are astaxanthin (a carotenoid found in microalgae) and polypodium leucotomos (a fern extract).
Another biotech company is on the verge of releasing a pill containing lycopene, yet another high-powered beta carotene with significant anti-oxidant properties. This company is also promoting its supplement as providing an additional level rather than acting as a replacement.
Whether one decides to go the extra mile or not with dietary supplementation bear in mind that these anti-oxidants and beta carotenes also provide protection when applied topically, though studies are unclear on exactly how much protection is provided whether taken internally or applied externally, or even if the user does both.
Why anti-oxidants protect
UV radiation can lead to photochemical reactions, and the photochemical reaction products then intervene in skin metabolism. Such photochemical reaction products are chiefly free-radical compounds, for example hydroxyl radicals. Undefined free-radical photo-products which are formed in the skin itself can also show uncontrolled secondary reactions because of their high reactivity. UV radiation is furthermore counted among ionizing radiation. There is therefore the risk of ionic species also being formed during UV exposure, which then in turn are capable of intervening oxidatively in biochemical processes. Anti-oxidants scoop up these free radicals, thus preventing skin damage at the level of biochemical activity..
Sun protection at the surface
UVA rays can cause reactions on photosensitive skin. It has been proven that UVA radiation leads to damage to the elastic and collagenic fibres of connective tissue, which causes the skin to age prematurely, and that it is to be regarded as a cause of numerous phototoxic and photo-allergic reactions. The damaging influence of UVB radiation may be intensified by UVA radiation. The best way to protect against this type of damage is with a mineral sunblock that reflects the UVA rays at the surface of the skin, before they can penetrate and do damage. Chemical sunscreens may actually generate free radicals upon exposure to UV, which rather defeats the purpose of wearing sunscreen. Zinc oxide is safe and non-reactive and your best bet.
For total protection
Clearly, sun protection should be undertaken on two fronts. The best way to ensure as much protection as possible is to use a product containing effective anti-oxidants like Vitamin C and the beta-carotenes, in conjunction with a zinc oxide based product. Marie-Veronique uses the anti-oxidants Polypodium leucomotos, lycopene and astaxanthin as well as Vitamin C, emu oil, marula oil and red raspberry oil in order to provide a full panoply of natural and powerful anti-oxidant sun protection agents. But for complete protection MV also uses zinc oxide, for many tests exist to show that it is safe and non-reactive. It is also the only natural sunblock agent to provide complete UVA protection up to 400 nm.
Permalink
06.14.08
Posted in Rosacea Facts at 9:57 pm by Administrator
Rosacea, or vascular instability aggravated by an underlying inflammatory condition which may or may not be chronic, is on the increase. Many people are diagnosed with rosacea, at the rate of about 16 million per year in the US and climbing. Many others suspect they may suffer from rosacea because they have many of the symptoms—permanent or patchy redness and/or small eruptions on the cheeks that are not pimples—all suggestive enough that they should see a dermatologist to get a diagnosis.
While we do not know what causes rosacea we do know its identifying characteristics, and a primary one has to do with flushing episodes. Everyone is familiar with the sensation of blushing. The flushing may be triggered by UV exposure, exercise, certain foods, allergic reactions, emotional stress or heat, among other things. In normal skin flushing caused by capillary expansion recedes quickly–once the stressor is removed capillaries shrink, usually within minutes. With rosacea the capillaries expand and stay dilated for much longer periods of time. If you are still red after 10-15 minutes you may be dealing with rosacea.
Treatment
It is important to get a specialist’s diagnosis before deciding on a treatment course. An error common to people acting on their own is to treat rosacea like a case of adult acne, understandable because they can have quite similar symptoms. However, the goal of any treatment program for rosacea is to decrease vascular dilation through vascular constriction, which will minimize flushing of any type.
Diet
One of the most important factors in treating any skin condition is diet. Here are some recommendations for controlling inflammation.
1) Avoid heavy-meal flushing.
Three small meals with breakfast being the most important and grazing or snacks in between is best for limiting this kind of flushing. This will maintain the proper blood sugar content for energy to prevent fatigue or exhaustion. The type of food that you eat is also very important as various foods stimulate blood flow differently. Bear in mind that simple carbohydrates such as donuts, sugars, alcohol, etc. enter the blood stream quickly causing hyperglycemia (high glucose spikes). This rapid influx of sugar into the blood stream is a potent vasodilator. Fiber intake decreases the amount of food that the stomach has at one time and prolongs digestion; therefore, it prevents the sudden influx into the blood stream with the resultant flushing.
2) Foods to add: apple, burdock, broccoli, celery, celery root, cold-water fish& flax seeds (contain Omega-3s which quenches inflammatory cascade), onions (contain high amounts of histamine-quenching quercetin which inhibits production of leukotrienes,) berries (high in bioflavonoids), garlic, (rich in sulfer and selenium), cruciferous vegetables–broccoli, cauliflower, cabbage, Brussels sprouts, bok choy, chard, mustard greens, rutabagas, turnips and kale– (contain antioxidants and the compound sulforaphane) turmeric (contains curcumin, a powerful, anti-inflammatory agent excellent for treating inflammatory problem such as arthritis, liver and gall bladder problems. It has been found to block the production of certain prostaglandins and to have effects on a par with cortisone and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs but without the side effects.)
Supplementation will also help, especially Vitamins A, E and C and the mineral zinc, known for its anti-inflammatory properties. Everyone should supplement with 1-2 tsps of cod liver oil daily to get sufficient Omega-3 EFAs.
3) Foods to avoid: nightshades (tomato, eggplant, peppers and potatoes) (contain solamine, a calcium inhibitor) dairy except goat and sheep, transfats and animal fats as a source of arachidonic acid, excess salts and sugars (they change cell membrane fluidity)
4) Liquids: Fresh juices such as carrot and apple are a good way to stay vitaminized and hydrated. Herbal infusions are another good way to maintain a high-level liquid intake and treat your skin at the same time. Skullcap, vervain and chamomile are good for the nervous system, burdock, yellow dock and nettle nourish the skin and cool the blood, and borage, licorice and evening primrose are good to maintain hormonal balance.
Don’t forget water. The myriad benefits of water include eliminating metabolic waste build up. Water is absolutely necessary for strong, flexible plasma membranes of all cells. Vary tea and juice intake with 3-4 glasses of water a day.
Topical Treatments
There are some treatment never’s when it comes to rosacea. Please never:
1) Treat rosacea like common acne. Sulfer-containing topicals, astringents and alcohol routinely used to control acne can seriously aggravate a rosacea-type condition and create setbacks in controlling it. Also avoid topical retinoids (such as tretinoin, Retin-A Micro, Renova, Avita, Differin), benzoyl peroxide, topical azelaic acid, triclosan, acne peels, and chemical peels.
2) Over exfoliate. Too much exfoliation compromises barrier function and increases susceptibility to UV rays. Avoid topical exfoliants (scrubs and enzyme peels), AHA’s, microdermabrasion.
3) Use certain chemicals. Rosacea sufferers often develop an intolerance to ingredients well-supported by the general population, including: toners and astringents that contain alcohol and witch hazel, chemical sunscreens esp. with benzophenones and/or avobenzone, and moisturizers and lotions that contain propylene glycol, D&C colors, PEG products, fragrances, alcohol, witch hazel, menthol, peppermint, eucalyptus oil, mineral oil, lanolin, sulfur, phenoxyethanol, hydroxybenzoates (parabens)
4) Use steroids. Steroids like hydrocortisone suppress inflammation so they may look like they are working at first, but it‘s quite possible that a “rebound effect” could make matters worse down the road. With a rebound effect the rosacea symptoms return with a vengeance and are very difficult to control.
Alternative Topical Treatments
Two factors play an important role in creating rosacea: UV exposure and compromised barrier protection. Taking these two factors into account a natural program of treatment topicals may work on four fronts: protection, anti-oxidant supplementation, barrier repair and combating inflammation.
1) Protection: With rosacea prone skin we are probably looking at years of UV exposure that has done considerable cell damage. In particular UVA exposure (in the range between 320 and 400 nm) damages the elastin and collagen fibres of connective tissue, which causes the skin to age prematurely. It can also cause numerous phototoxic and photo-allergic reactions, and the damaging influence of UVB radiation may be intensified by UVA radiation. Sensitive, mature and rosacea skin types especially require UVA protection daily and year round. Zinc oxide provides protection up to and even past the 400 nm range, and is the best non-allergenic ingredient available for protection against the longer wave-lengths of ultra-violet light.
2) Anti-oxidants: UV radiation is also implicated in the formation of ionic species (free radicals), which are capable of intervening oxidatively in biochemical processes. To prevent these reactions additional antioxidants and/or free-radical scavengers should be incorporated into cosmetic or dermatological formulations. All skin types should look for anti-oxidants like Vit E, Vit C, alpha-lipoic acid, and Co-enzyme-Q (idebenone) in their topicals.
3) Repair: Sensitive, dry or problematic skin often starts with a compromised “permeable” barrier (the top layer of the epidermis, the stratum corneum, which retains moisture). Products having an occlusive action or lipid-substituting products which lower the TEWL (transepidermal water loss) are recommended for barrier regeneration. Sensitive, mature, rosacea and even acneic skin types should be aware that lipids are the skin’s first line of defense against invasion by bacteria, pollution and UV exposure. Lipids with a good Omega3/6 EFA ratio like emu oil and krill oil are the most effective repair oils as they replenish the ceramides in the stratum corneum.
4) Combatting inflammation: topical products containing effective anti-inflammatories like curcumin, licorice root and Sophora flavascens can help to minimize flare-ups when they occur.
Marie-Veronique topical products that are excellent for treating rosacea-prone skin may be found at:
http://www.marieveronique.net/index.php?page=skin-care-protocol–rosacea-prone-skin
Permalink
06.13.08
Posted in Skin Aging Facts, skin care news at 3:55 pm by Administrator
Scientists in South Korea claim to have uncovered a fat molecule with strong anti-aging potential from tests on the ability of lipids to fight skin aging (see page on column right for full story). The study, published in Volume 49, June 2008 issue of the Journal of Lipid Research, looked into the role of fat molecules in protecting aging effects of skin, with the most promising results coming from phosphatidylserine (PS). Their findings suggested that ‘PS may be a simple and natural way to fight wrinkles.’
This study points to the direction natural anti-aging skin care is taking. Whether your issue is rosacea, eczema, aging, sun damage, wrinkle prevention, skin maintenance or sun protection the future is in lipids and essential fatty acids (EFAs). EFAs are the precursors to the regulatory prostaglandins, which provide the communication and control necessary for a group of cells to stay together. In the skin itself, EFAs form ceramides which are the barrier-forming lipids of the epidermis. To make an increasingly long story much too short, here is what we know:
1) The composition of lipids compromising the extracellular matrix are 50% ceramides, 25% cholesterol and 15% free fatty acids.
2) Essential fatty acid deficiencies have been identified as resulting in abnormalities in the proper functioning of the stratum corneum (barrier function properties obtain primarily in the SC, the top layer of the epidermis).
Studies have demonstrated that when certain lipids are applied topically they will be incorporated into the intercellular lipid matrix and lipid barrier. Once incorporated they will assist in repairing the matrix and barrier, thus increasing the moisture binding properties of skin leading to reduced moisture loss and improved skin health. The question then becomes: which lipids critical to barrier function should be part of a “lipid mix”?
A recent Johns Hopkins’ study points to characteristics of aging occurring as a result of:
‘1) accumulation of very long chain fatty acids (VLCFAs) in states of toxicity, 2) Omega-3 and Omega-6 imbalance/deficiency and 3) disturbed prostaglandin synthesis.’ These findings as well as the North Korean finding quoted above should be borne in mind in the formulation process. A truly effective anti-aging oil blend provides solutions to many of the problems associated with premature aging. For example:
1) Problem: VLCFAs tend to accumulate in the body due to over-consumption of transfats. Solution: Naturally occurring saturated fats like emu oil and coconut oil are excellent substitutes for hydrogenated oils.
2) Problem: Of the two basic fatty acid groups: omega-n-6 and omega-n-3, the former tends to be well-represented in the modern diet while the latter, where the source is mainly fish oil, tends to be in short supply, hence the imbalance. Solution: Oils taken from animal as well as plant sources help to right the imbalance.
3) Problem: An excess of dietary omega 6 fatty acids (particularly arachidonic acid) saturates the two glycerol fatty acid positions on membrane phospholipids, disturbing the normal PG pathway, which may result in excess production of pro-inflammatory prostaglandins. Solution: Providing oils high in omega-n-3 fatty acids restores the desired ratio. An ideal ratio would be in the 2:1 range, with omega 6s predominating.
4) Problem: Finding a source of the phospholipid phosphatidylserine. Solution: Again, the animal source versus plant source debate rears its head, with the animal source emerging the clear winner. Soy lecithin may have some beneficial effects, but the fatty acid profile is not ideal. Better options are krill oil, squalane from shark liver oil and snails, all of which have a more utilizable fatty acid profile.
Below are just some of the lipids Marie Veronique uses for their beneficial properties:
Sea Buckthorn oil–The major EFAs contained in seabuckthorn oil are oleic and linoleic acids. It also contains the following essential fatty acids: pentadecenoic, palmitoleic, heptadecenoic, linolenic, eicosenoic, eicosadienoic, erucic and nervonic. Among the carotenes found in Seabuckthorn are alfa- and beta-carotenes, lycopene, cryptoxanthin, zeaxanthin, taraxanthin and phytofluin. Tocopherols are primarily vitamin E and gamma-tocopherol. Phytosterols of seabuckthorn oil include beta-sitosterol, beta-amirol and erithrodiol.
Marula oil’s high content of palmitic acid creates a protective coating on the surface of the skin. It also has a high concentration of anti-oxidants.
Red raspberry seed oil possesses an exceptionally high proportion of alpha and gamma tocopherols (Vitamin E), vitamin A and omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids. Red raspberry seed oil offers the skin broad spectrum protection from damaging UV-A and UV-B rays.
Cranberry seed oil is rich in tocotrienols (vitamin E) and other antioxidants, and possesses a unique balance of omega 3, 6 and 9 EFAs not found in other oils.
Emu oil possesses the balance of omega 3, 6 and 9 EFAs that is ideal for healing skin and promoting skin, hair and nail growth. It is anti-inflammatory, anti-microbial, has a natural SPF, is a natural emollient and moisturizer, penetrates multiple layers of skin, is non-comedogenic, hypo-allergenic, prevents and diminishes scarring/stretch marks and more. It is recommended for use in a variety of skin disorders and allergies.
Pomegranate seed oil is high in lipids including pucinic acid. Its high polyphenol content makes it a strong anti-oxidant, and it contains conjugated fatty acids which gives it strong anti-inflammatory properties.
Krill oil (from a crustacean) contains vitamin E, vitamin A, vitamin D and canthaxanthin, which is, like astaxanthin, a potent anti-oxidant. The anti-oxidant potency of krill oil is such that when compared to fish oil in terms of ORAC (Oxygen radical absorptance capacity) values it was found to be 48 times more potent than fish oil. The phospholipid profile for krill oil is: PC 42%, PS 5.2%, PI 15.8% and sphingomyelin 10.4%.
The astaxanthin found in krill oil provides excellent protection against ultraviolet light and UV-induced skin damage.
Squalane from shark’s liver oil is an excellent source of phosphatidylserine.
Permalink
