hey guys! i was reading up on ways to dry my hair faster without resorting to my trusty hair dryer all the time when i ran into this scientific study... w ww.ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/pmc/articles/PMC3229938/
w ww.ncbi.nlm .nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3229938/figure/F5/
image B shows the bulging of the CMC layer
. No cortex damage was noted in any group, suggesting that the surface of the hair might play a role as a barrier to prevent cortex damage. The cortex might be more damaged with increased repetition of the process, when the barrier of hair surface is broken. The CMC was damaged only in the naturally dried group. This result was quite unexpected, because increased temperatures generally led to more hair damage. It took over 2 h to dry the hair tress completely under ambient conditions. The hair shaft swells when in contact with water, as does the delta-layer of the CMC. The delta-layer is the sole route through which water diffuses into hair16, and so we speculate that the CMC could be damaged when it is in contact with water for prolonged periods. Longer contact with water might be more harmful to the CMC compared to temperature of hair drying.
is this true? *stars*
sorry about the spaces in the links but im not allowed to post working ones yet
Posted : October 22, 2016 9:24 pm
if it has been published in a dermatology journal then it will be peer reviewed and means it is plausable. It makes sense that the CMC would get damaged the slower the hair dries due to longer contact with water.
Posted : October 24, 2016 3:18 pm
Yeah, I agree it's definitely plausible.
However, it's not set in stone and, as far as I can tell, they only mentioned the difference between air drying and using a hairdryer which is constantly in motion. There's a lot of hair drying that doesn't use lots of motion (defusing for example) and it leaves things like drying with a brush in question. And of course, using a brush is a bit damaging in itself. Does using a brush negate any benefit from drying quicker? I suppose as it's not likely to damage the inner cortex like the study is suggesting air drying does.
Does it really mention what the difference is? I couldn't work that out.
Also, which is worse, core damage or rough cuticles? If the outer layer is too roughed up with damage, that is damaging to the inner hair anyway, right?
Purely anecdotally, when I was only air drying my hair it was always in super condition... but I also wasn't bleaching all that much at the time! lol
I think if more studies are done and agree with the results I'll look more into it. Right now I'm not air drying often as I don't have a lot of time, so I'm not that bothered personally 🙂
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3229938/
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3229938/figure/F5/
Posted : October 24, 2016 5:06 pm
Also, I am doing a biology masters degree, so have a lot of experience finding papers and assessing the quality.
Just because one study found something does not mean it's always true. Even when published in a well respected journal you can often easily find conflicting studies.
So you need to look at what journal it's published in, what the affiliations of the people who wrote it are and where the study was carried out. (If it's funded or run by a company that wants you to buy hair dryers basically).
And at any rate it's cuticle damage that you notice as damaged hair so that's what you're trying to avoid really.
Posted : October 30, 2016 4:13 pm
Yeah, this ^^
"(If it's funded or run by a company that wants you to buy hair dryers basically)"
This was a thought of mine too. It's not always a disqualifier in terms of studies, but it does often require you to more carefully assess the results, right?
Posted : October 30, 2016 6:04 pm
Latest Post: 30 vol developer Our newest member: thevoguelounge Recent Posts Unread Posts
