[HN Gopher] Personal care products disrupt the human oxidation f...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Personal care products disrupt the human oxidation field
        
       Author : XzetaU8
       Score  : 175 points
       Date   : 2025-06-29 17:20 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.science.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.science.org)
        
       | flint wrote:
       | This is why I get outside and sweat every day.
        
       | peanut_merchant wrote:
       | Not well versed in the field, what are the basic implications of
       | this for health?
        
         | whitexn--g28h wrote:
         | The article does not come to any health conclusions, just
         | studies the impact on indoor air chemistry.
        
         | PaulHoule wrote:
         | In the 1970s there was a lot of talk about 'healthful negative
         | ions' and a fad for negative ion generators even though many of
         | those also generated hazardous ozone.
         | 
         | Hydroxyl ions are a significant kind of negative ion in the
         | atmosphere and they're known to be good because they react with
         | and clean out pollutants like methane
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxyl_radical
         | 
         | https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/144358/detergent-li...
        
           | thaumasiotes wrote:
           | How can something be a negative ion generator without
           | simultaneously being a positive ion generator?
        
             | giantg2 wrote:
             | .
        
               | rpnx wrote:
               | That isn't how chemistry works.
        
               | wizzwizz4 wrote:
               | Isosaccharinic acid has the same chemical formula
               | (C6H12O6) as glucose, which isn't acidic. However, they
               | both have the same net charge.
        
               | xvedejas wrote:
               | When something is an acid, it dissociates into both a
               | positive ion H+ and negative ion (rest of the molecule)
               | 
               | HA = H+ + A-
        
           | westurner wrote:
           | FWIU hydrogen plasma in water for hydrolysis would produce OH
           | Hydroxl radicals. (and H2O2, O3 (Ozone), and NO_x).
           | 
           | TIL that Hydroxyl ions bind to methane and thereby clean the
           | air?
           | 
           | Air ioniser: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_ioniser :
           | 
           | > _A 2018 review found that negative air ions are highly
           | effective in removing particulate matter from air. [6]_
           | 
           | But the Ozone. Ozone sanitizes and freshens, but is bad for
           | the lungs at high concentrations.
        
           | ryukoposting wrote:
           | Here's some more research, since I have a tiny ozone
           | generator in my fridge and I got worried:
           | 
           | Ozone concentrations as low as 70ppb are hazardous when
           | you're exposed to it for several hours [1]. Estimates for
           | Ozone's olfactory threshold aren't trustworthy, since you go
           | nose-blind to it pretty quickly [2], but it seems like it's
           | probably around 20-40ppb before olfactory fatigue sets in
           | [3,4].
           | 
           | My takeaway is that Ozone generators for rooms/basements/etc
           | are _definitely_ a bad idea. The best-cited olfactory
           | thresholds are all in the same order of magnitude as that
           | 8-hour hazard threshold, and with nose-blindness being a
           | significant factor, you just don 't want to mess around with
           | that.
           | 
           | Inside a fridge, though? As long as you don't actually smell
           | any ozone when you open the fridge, and you don't just shove
           | your head in the fridge for hours on end, I'd think you're
           | probably fine.
           | 
           | [1]: https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/facts/SH.html [2]: http
           | s://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-H...
           | [3]: https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/1960
           | 2703... [4]: https://spartanwatertreatment.com/ozone-safety/
        
         | GeoAtreides wrote:
         | if only there was a 'Discussion' section in the article, that
         | goes over the basic implication of the study results... if
         | only.
        
           | braaileb wrote:
           | Yeesh, who taught you to debase others.
        
       | parpfish wrote:
       | This won't lead to people using less lotion, but it will lead to
       | fancy lotions adding "OH precursors" as the new science
       | buzzmarketing term
        
         | AnotherGoodName wrote:
         | Which is funny since the exact opposite, anti-oxidants, have
         | been a fad to add for the past 20years.
        
           | thinkingtoilet wrote:
           | You eat anti-oxidants. So unless you're eating your lotions
           | this isn't related and can't be the opposite.
        
             | iinnPP wrote:
             | Skin absorbs. So it's at least partially related.
        
             | fredfish wrote:
             | If an actual nutritionist says you can eat it every monkey
             | in a lab coat knows they can sell it as a lotion with
             | substantially less work than testing something else.
        
           | woleium wrote:
           | Antioxidant supplements provide no benefit, may even be
           | harmful. See 2007 meta-analysis by Goran Bjelakovic,
           | Dimitrinka Nikolova, Lars Gluud, Rosa G. Simonetti, and
           | Christian Gluud, published in JAMA: "Mortality in Randomized
           | Trials of Antioxidant Supplements for Primary and Secondary
           | Prevention: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis".
           | 
           | https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-
           | abstract/20579...
        
             | robocat wrote:
             | A meta-analysis is just a dilution of facts, in the exact
             | proportion to have homeopathic efficacy.
        
       | dylan604 wrote:
       | The opening paragraph is precisely why so many people have moved
       | to natural ingredient products and fragrance free. Some fragrance
       | makers have new for formulas with "clean" ingredients, but they
       | are still proprietary and come with a "trust us" promise. It's
       | interesting to see the specifics of what these products can do
       | other than what's advertised on the tin.
        
         | kstrauser wrote:
         | [flagged]
        
           | anal_reactor wrote:
           | My skin care routine is "I showered in some not-so-distant
           | past" and sunscreen. You hit diminishing returns very
           | quickly. Showering more than once a week has no health
           | benefits, it's just so that other citizens of your
           | overcrowded city wouldn't complain about your natural smell.
        
             | iinnPP wrote:
             | Not showering for a week means I have a headache all day.
             | So evidently not everyone is doing it for someone else.
        
               | perching_aix wrote:
               | That doesn't sound normal? Why would you get headaches
               | from not showering? Never heard of such a thing.
        
               | cma wrote:
               | Could be muscle tension or something helped by the warm
               | water
        
               | iinnPP wrote:
               | It's not terribly uncommon. My wife also has it. It's
               | also related to the length of my hair, where longer hair
               | is significantly worse. Presumably it's the oil build up
               | as my hair is extremely oily and fine.
               | 
               | edit: I am fully aware that not washing leads to less oil
               | build up over time, but I have tried and doctors have
               | tried and that boat has sailed.
        
               | perching_aix wrote:
               | I'd imagine a hair wash in the sink also does the job
               | when in a hurry then? Do dry shampoos work too, or does
               | it need a wet wash?
        
               | iinnPP wrote:
               | Yes, washing the hair in any capacity works. Unsure about
               | dry shampoo.
        
             | xyst wrote:
             | Somebody needs to touch grass
        
             | cko wrote:
             | But what about dating? The nether regions should be washed
             | in anticipation for certain activities. There are no
             | diminishing returns for that.
        
               | kstrauser wrote:
               | Just date people who've had a bad case of COVID. Problem
               | solved!
        
               | jajko wrote:
               | All you need is a modest trauma to the nose in right
               | direction. Bones shifting a bit will cut forever hair-
               | like nerves going from your nose sensors back to brain,
               | effectively making you lose the sense of smell. When
               | asked some doctor friends they confirmed harm is
               | permanent.
        
               | zonkerdonker wrote:
               | Ok, so dont shower, and punch my date in the nose. Got
               | it!
        
               | immibis wrote:
               | Sir this is HN. Nobody is dating.
               | 
               | Also sex is a different thing from dating.
        
               | anal_reactor wrote:
               | When you realize that through most of human history
               | people married because of teenage sex drive or economic
               | necessity rather than emotionally mature relationships,
               | then the whole dating thing loses its appeal really fast.
               | 
               | Also, the smell of sweat of someone attractive turns me
               | on really hard.
               | 
               | > Babe I love it how you naturally smell
               | 
               | > That's great but I just bought a new generic cherry
               | shampoo
        
             | lurking_swe wrote:
             | some of us exercise, and have oily skin, and break out with
             | acne if we don't shower right away.
             | 
             | some of us live in hot climates where a cold shower
             | genuinely feels amazing and cools the body down.
             | 
             | some of us enjoy showering daily, because the bed sheets
             | get less dirty that way, which means less laundry to do,
             | and reduces my stress.
             | 
             | some of us are married to a lady and want a happy home life
             | (lol).
             | 
             | a sample size of 1 (you) does not mean it's true for
             | everyone. Just saying. :)
        
             | roughly wrote:
             | > it's just so that other citizens of your overcrowded city
             | wouldn't complain about your natural smell.
             | 
             | Yes, that's correct. You've cracked the code. People don't
             | want to smell you, that's why we shower regularly.
             | 
             | I'd suspect there are other parts of your life where you
             | could combine that keen perceptive wit with these
             | revelations to perhaps elucidate other social mysteries and
             | dilemmas you've faced.
        
               | anal_reactor wrote:
               | I honestly think that this is actually valuable insight.
               | It's important to distinguish things we do just to fit
               | into the society from things we truly want to do. I'm not
               | saying we never should do the former, we obviously
               | should, but I think it's worth it to be aware of the
               | choice. Most people just follow mindlessly the current
               | social trends "because everyone does it".
        
               | roughly wrote:
               | A conversation I've had with several people is: do you
               | want to be right or do you want to get shit done? I
               | dabbled in management for a bit, and spending time
               | figuring out how different people communicated, how to
               | hear and speak to them, and what their motivations were
               | meant I could build a team out of anyone. Same here -
               | yes, it's all an ape dance, but we're all apes, and if
               | you know the dance moves, it's a whole lot easier to move
               | through the tribe.
        
               | anal_reactor wrote:
               | I want to be right, but I need to get shit done. I take
               | part in the social dance to the minimum degree that gives
               | me what I need. Regarding the rest of my time, I spend it
               | looking for people with whom I can be right. That feels
               | way more pleasant than the social dance.
        
               | roughly wrote:
               | One thing I'd say about this is that other people will
               | have perspectives that you do not that can help you be
               | more right if you can hear it from them. You've got one
               | life, one set of experiences, one brain, and the same 24
               | hours in the day as everyone else. Leverage other people
               | - even if they're not "right", they can help you be less
               | wrong.
        
               | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
               | > _I take part in the social dance to the minimum degree
               | that gives me what I need._
               | 
               | I guess if one doesn't want other people to enjoy being
               | around them a lot of things become simpler.
               | 
               | > _I want to be right_
               | 
               | Ok, well, framing body hygiene in terms of "health
               | benefits" is only right if you don't benefit from others
               | enjoying being near you. This is almost never the case.
        
             | 9283409232 wrote:
             | I worked with someone with your mindset and he smelled
             | horrible in the office to the point where HR had to step in
             | and talk to him about hygiene.
        
             | dghlsakjg wrote:
             | Your returns are nowhere close to diminishing, even for
             | people with close to no physical activity or sweating,
             | people can tell if you haven't showered for a week.
        
           | hackyhacky wrote:
           | I only use naturally-ocurring radium and free-range poison
           | ivy.
        
             | CoastalCoder wrote:
             | But is the poison ivy ethically sourced?
             | 
             | I'm wondering if you have its informed consent.
        
           | xyst wrote:
           | I see you are a man of culture.
        
           | mirekrusin wrote:
           | You're not using mixture of amygdalin from organic apricot
           | kernels, coca leaves mixed with unripe seed pods of opium
           | poppy? Does wonders.
        
           | riffraff wrote:
           | You jest, but there's a ton of people convinced they can use
           | rock alum which is natural and so is better than industrial
           | deodorants which contain aluminium.
        
             | kstrauser wrote:
             | My inner chemistry geek weeps.
        
             | kajecounterhack wrote:
             | I'm similarly puzzled by "uncured bacon" which afaik still
             | uses naturally occurring nitrites. How they're allowed to
             | call it uncured when it's clearly still cured is beyond me.
        
             | PaulHoule wrote:
             | I can't use those aluminum containing antiperspirants at
             | all -- they violently irritate my eyes if I put them on my
             | skin.
        
             | johnyzee wrote:
             | The rock alum works better, and I don't think you can get
             | it into a different form. The stuff in deodorant is a
             | different aluminium compound.
        
       | maipen wrote:
       | Unrelated: This is why reading comments is becoming useless.
       | People react to the news without opening the article. Its so
       | annoying.
       | 
       | Related: This article shows an interesting study but it's hard
       | for me to interpret what does this translate to? I think we
       | should minimize very complex and synthetic products to our
       | bodies. Although sometimes it's necessary when we harm our body
       | (e.g. long sun bathing sessions)
        
         | superkuh wrote:
         | Cloudflare products disrupt the human ability to read
         | science.org articles. The article text available to me:
         | 
         | >Enable JavaScript and cookies to continue
         | 
         | Turning on JS and doing the captchas just results in more
         | captchas, forever, with no end. I have emailed science.org
         | about this in the past but they only fixed it on the blogs, not
         | the main site.
        
           | mfro wrote:
           | I have this problem when using the JShelter addon if I enable
           | the privacy switches. Your browser is probably resisting
           | fingerprinting.
        
           | perching_aix wrote:
           | That is very curious, because I have both JS _and_ all
           | manners of clientside storage disabled, yet can access the
           | site fine.
           | 
           | I guess maybe my CGNAT IP is reasonably well trusted and
           | that's the difference?
        
           | userbinator wrote:
           | Hint: TLS fingerprinting.
           | 
           | (No problems with accessing this site without JS. You just
           | need to make your client look like one of the officially-
           | sanctioned browsers.)
        
           | benibela wrote:
           | the internet is being ruined everywhere.
           | 
           | This week I wanted to download some old HN front pages on the
           | command lines and only got "403 sorry"
           | 
           | although I do not get that now
        
         | heavyset_go wrote:
         | > _Although sometimes it's necessary when we harm our body
         | (e.g. long sun bathing sessions)_
         | 
         | Zinc oxide and titanium dioxide are basically crushed rocks
         | that absorb UV and are used in sunscreens.
        
         | neuroelectron wrote:
         | You get what you pay for
        
       | 12_throw_away wrote:
       | Heh, is this bad ... who knows? Chemistry, environmental
       | chemistry, and biochemistry are absurdly complex and full of
       | interlocking Chesterton's Fences. But the profit motive means we
       | don't really spend much time looking into them before tearing
       | them down.
        
         | EugeneOZ wrote:
         | Actually it sounds kinda good.
        
           | fwip wrote:
           | Not sure why you got downvoted. The researchers state:
           | 
           | "If we buy a sofa from major furniture company, it's tested
           | for harmful emissions before being put on sale. However, when
           | we sit on the sofa, we naturally transform some of these
           | emissions because of the oxidation field we generate," said
           | lead author Jonathan Williams, who heads the study of organic
           | reactive species at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry.
           | "This can create many additional compounds in our breathing
           | zone whose properties are not well known or studied.
           | Interestingly, body lotion and perfume both seem to dampen
           | down this effect."
           | 
           | Which, if you're worried about the effects of unstudied
           | compounds, lotion will help protect you against.
        
             | ricardobeat wrote:
             | That's like saying diarrhea will protect you against
             | ingesting unknown poisons. Disrupting natural processes
             | rarely comes without unintended side effects.
        
               | fwip wrote:
               | Sure, but it depends on what you consider to be "natural
               | processes," and what you don't. The oxidation of sitting
               | on a plastic^W vegan leather couch is not a "natural"
               | process, but sitting on wood probably is. It's also not
               | "natural" to be closed up with the results of that
               | oxidation for most of the day, as most of our evolution
               | happened with plenty of access to fresh air. We
               | definitely have evidence that people were using oils and
               | lotions for much longer than we've had modern synthetic
               | materials or "air-tight" building methods.
               | 
               | The science is definitely still out, but I don't think
               | it's unreasonable to think that inhibiting this reaction
               | might be beneficial.
        
       | giantg2 wrote:
       | With how bad for us the common fragrances are in regards to
       | things like cancer risk, endocrine disruption, etc, its
       | surprising that nothing has changed. Most products have fragrance
       | free alternatives.
        
         | alwa wrote:
         | In fact, it was specifically one of those alternatives which
         | was under test here:
         | 
         |  _"a fragrance-free body lotion containing linoleic acid
         | (Neutral, Unilever body lotion for sensitive skin; 0% colorants
         | and 0% perfume)"_
         | 
         | Sounds like they blame the phenoxyethanol? Which serves a
         | preservative kind of role?
        
           | giantg2 wrote:
           | Yeah, my comment was just to add that scents have so many
           | other issues than just what's in the article.
        
         | rowanG077 wrote:
         | This is the first time I'm hearing they are bad. Could you
         | share some research about this?
        
           | amarcheschi wrote:
           | At least in the eu there are quite strict rules regulating
           | cosmetics. Hell, lilial in perfumes was banned just to stay
           | safe because they couldn't determine an "average exposure"
           | and went on by banning it in perfumes to reduce what would
           | have been the real exposure, even if it wouldn't have caused
           | issues by being used in perfumes standalone (so not how it's
           | used in cleaning products)
           | 
           | They might not be perfect, of course, and they're always
           | improving
        
             | rowanG077 wrote:
             | Yes of course, there are a ton of bad substances. But I as
             | not aware of something that is. Ubiquitously used, known
             | bad and not banned in the EU.
        
               | giantg2 wrote:
               | EU is much better than the US for ingredient safety. I'm
               | not sure of the EU stuff specifically, but it looks like
               | there's still some concerns over some perfume
               | ingredients, if not the fragrance itself. You'll probably
               | have to do more research yourself.
               | 
               | https://taenk.dk/system/files/2022-01/Whats-that-smell-
               | repor...
        
           | giantg2 wrote:
           | There's tons more than this, but here's some high level
           | stuff. The most concerning part is that some of the 4000+
           | fragrances in use are known and suspected carcinogens.
           | 
           | https://health.osu.edu/health/general-health/how-
           | fragrances-...
        
         | FredPret wrote:
         | I once worked for a large consumer goods company. We had a
         | conference about scents.
         | 
         | We saw a clear correlation between richer consumers and a
         | preference for subtler scents or even no scent.
         | 
         | This even applied across countries: third-world consumers liked
         | aggressive floral scents, but in Northern Europe and North
         | America, the scents are way less concentrated and tend to be
         | more toward subtle alpine or linen.
         | 
         | All this was 15-20 years ago; today I notice that no soap in my
         | house smells like anything at all.
        
           | amarcheschi wrote:
           | I'm a perfume fan (hobbyist? I don't know how to name it),
           | and I wonder if this still holds. Nowadays, the "luxury"
           | brands such as the Arab ones, and even the "western" European
           | niche catering to the biggest spenders are making a lot of
           | oud fragrances, gourmands, incense perfumes... Basically
           | anything thick, dense, almost syrupy. They don't limit to
           | this, of course, but ouds became much more common in the last
           | years
        
             | omnimus wrote:
             | Can you recommend some fragrances or a brand that does some
             | contemporary subtle forresty mossy but also is not crazy
             | expensive posh branding endeavour?
        
               | amarcheschi wrote:
               | I'm not entirely sure I understood your request,
               | something foresty? Not a lot into those, anyway
               | 
               | Helan vetiver and rum, don't know if it's available in
               | usa. Has a rum note as well as moss, I've definitely
               | heard people around me saying it smells like forest, to
               | me it's more of a mossy scent
               | 
               | Erbolario Periplo, but it's more Mediterranean bushes
               | 
               | Dsquared original wood
               | 
               | Maybe lalique encre Noire or encre Noire sport
               | 
               | I'd suggest to try them before buying them
        
             | an_aparallel wrote:
             | In Sydney. It has destroyed the olfactory field imo. I cant
             | stand the ambroxan(?)...it smells like IPA on PCP :/
        
               | amarcheschi wrote:
               | Sauvage is a big ambroxan offender, a cold sharp metallic
               | note that pierces the brains around the person wearing
               | it, who clearly has no brain for damage to be suffered
               | (/s)
        
             | washadjeffmad wrote:
             | There's a particular Middle Eastern market I visit where
             | the cash reeks to high hell of cologne.
             | 
             | It turns out a few of the customers douse their dollars
             | with their personal scents to remind everyone who's
             | spending money with them, and I suppose to see where it
             | might be circulating.
        
           | tyre wrote:
           | Personally, I prefer neutral lotions and detergents because I
           | wear my own cologne. It could be because
           | 
           | It could also be because we're using more products. If my
           | face moisturizer and sunscreen had different scents, that
           | would be unfortunate. It would limit my options to those that
           | went together.
           | 
           | I don't normally want my face to smell like anything (again,
           | cologne) but if I did I would choose only one product that's
           | scented. Probably beard oil.
        
           | jopsen wrote:
           | > today I notice that no soap in my house smells like
           | anything at all.
           | 
           | Same here, and all ja e store branded products certified
           | allergy friendly.
        
         | cma wrote:
         | > Most products have fragrance free alternatives.
         | 
         | That itself is a big change that took a while.
        
           | giantg2 wrote:
           | They've been around for a while, but they were harder to
           | find. Even as a kid there was stuff like arm and hammer
           | washing detergent that was scent free. Although now there are
           | at least 5 free and clear choices at the Walmart.
        
       | drabbiticus wrote:
       | For a slightly more digestible take, see
       | https://news.uci.edu/2025/05/21/lotions-perfumes-curb-potent...
       | 
       | But really, I wouldn't worry about the result of this study _at
       | all_ in daily life. It's quite surprising to me that this would
       | be the top HN article at the time of this comment.
        
       | muhdeeb wrote:
       | This article has a headline engineered with shock value
       | connotations, but when you read it carefully, it takes pains to
       | rein the suggestions of the title in as much as possible while
       | still stirring the pot. It's a kind of artistry you need to get
       | papers published these days.
       | 
       | All that aside, it's an interesting thing to think about but it's
       | not a basis for any kind of personal health recommendation and
       | the authors state that. I have relevant expertise and this is a
       | very complicated area that people routinely want to be boiled
       | down into black and white simple advice. What this article seems
       | to say is that lotion can affect the oxidation chemistry nearby
       | it, but it's not yet known if that is an effect with consequences
       | that are on the whole negative or positive.
       | 
       | I would criticize the authors for their use of the word disrupt,
       | because of the negative connotation carried by that word when
       | talking about human biological systems. They use a softer, more
       | neutral word, perturb, to express the same idea later in the
       | article, which I think better expresses the idea without an
       | emotional tinge to it.
        
         | hackernewds wrote:
         | Just posting to not just upvote, but also say that you have a
         | very calm thought process and write with clarity
        
           | mannycalavera42 wrote:
           | posting to upvote the upvote
        
         | photochemsyn wrote:
         | "A commercial lotion composed of aqua, glycerin, Brassica
         | campestris seed oil, Butyrospermum parkii butter, ceteareth-12,
         | ceteareth-20, cetearyl alcohol, ethylhexyl stearate, Simmondsia
         | chinensis seed oil, tocopherol, caprylyl glycol, citric acid,
         | sodium hydroxide, acrylates/C10-30 alkyl acrylate crosspolymer,
         | sodium gluconate, and phenoxyethanol was chosen for this
         | experiment."
         | 
         | Personal health recommendation: You'd be better off rubbing
         | down with olive oil or sunflower oil than with that concoction,
         | most likely. The ancient Greeks got some things right.
        
           | BugsJustFindMe wrote:
           | > _Personal health recommendation: You 'd be better off
           | rubbing down with olive oil or sunflower oil than with that
           | concoction, most likely_
           | 
           | What evidence can you point to that supports this "most
           | likely" assertion that isn't purely naturalistic fallacy?
           | 
           | > _The ancient Greeks got some things right._
           | 
           | The pantheon of capricious gods living on mount olympus?
           | Harvesting the sweat of wrestlers to use as treatment for
           | genital warts?
        
       | metalman wrote:
       | wow!, we are emiting a potent biocidal gas strait through our
       | skin!.....it explains so much! and ya, O3 is going to chemicaly
       | break almost anything it touches, which will definitly yield some
       | bad to have on you stuff if the precursor is just wrong. also ,
       | most definitly there is a wide diference in peoples indidual
       | chemistry, so this phenominon will join many others in waiting
       | for a more nuanced understanding of how human biochemistry works.
        
       | 8bitsrule wrote:
       | "the human health impacts of many such chemicals remain poorly
       | understood"
       | 
       | The effects of ritual bathing (soap, scrubbing with washcloths,
       | etc.) on the skin may also be "poorly understood". Many people
       | also wear regularly-washed clothing.
       | 
       | When I look at the laundry-list of chemicals in personal-care
       | products (soaps, shampoos) (and in foods ... sometimes, wow!) I
       | often wonder how much effort goes into testing all of this gunk.
        
         | amarcheschi wrote:
         | >When I look at the laundry-list of chemicals in personal-care
         | products I often wonder how much effort goes into testing all
         | of this gunk.
         | 
         | A lot of effort
        
           | hiddencost wrote:
           | Good news (sarcasm), they laid off all the people responsible
           | for that.
        
           | 12_throw_away wrote:
           | >> how much effort goes into testing all of this gunk.
           | 
           | > A lot of effort
           | 
           | Into testing the long-term biochemical and environmental
           | consequences? lol no absolutely not. Source: I work in this
           | field.
        
             | amarcheschi wrote:
             | At least in eu, regulation is present to at least try to
             | ensure that products are quite safe for the customers and
             | for the environment
        
               | thefounder wrote:
               | I think there are no long terms and that's the case for
               | food as well
        
         | dvh wrote:
         | Occasionally when I shower I get this vivid vision: a man comes
         | home from hard days work and takes a shower. Grabs his shampoo
         | but only squirts out half of his usual amount because shampoo
         | bottle is empty, he thinks it will be enough but after applying
         | it instantly feels it's not enough, so he grabs his wife's
         | shampoo, squirts the second half and rubs it onto his hair. Few
         | seconds later his hair bursts into fire because different
         | chemicals in two completely different shampoos reacted
         | together. How plausible is this scenario?
        
           | tyre wrote:
           | I love this website
        
             | mannycalavera42 wrote:
             | yeah bro, we besties
        
           | bdangubic wrote:
           | I am not bald because of hereditary reason but this! :)
        
           | droopyEyelids wrote:
           | This happened to me and the water itself caught on fire
           | somehow
        
           | jemmyw wrote:
           | I don't think it's very plausible for shampoo but it's
           | relevant for toothpaste for sensitive teeth. There's are two
           | mechanisms for sensitive teeth, one is to flood the nerve
           | with potassium ions using potassium nitrate, i.e. saltpetre.
           | The other method is to block access to the nerve endings with
           | other chemicals. You could potentially mix toothpaste and get
           | your mouth to warm up slightly.
        
           | davrosthedalek wrote:
           | No worries, the stuff in the wife's bottle is the same, just
           | more expensive.
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | Didn't the Joker contaminate personal care products so they
           | did in a Batman movie?
        
         | WalterBright wrote:
         | I agree. We should go back to the Roman days when clothes were
         | washed in urine.
        
       | userbinator wrote:
       | This sounds like a good thing, in contrast to the doom-and-gloom
       | "scary chemicals!!!11" articles that seem to have flooded
       | journals and news in the recent years. I believe it's basically
       | saying there is an antioxidant effect from lotions and perfumes.
       | 
       |  _Globally, PCP usage is widespread_
       | 
       | Skimmed the article at first, and this made me chuckle. I wonder
       | if that was deliberate.
        
         | rsync wrote:
         | "I believe it's basically saying there is an antioxidant effect
         | from lotions and perfumes."
         | 
         | Which would be of no value.
         | 
         | There is no mechanism - no pathway - for ingested or applied
         | "antioxidant" delivery into the cell where we believe we see
         | oxidation or damage due to free radicals, etc.
         | 
         | ... _and even if there were_ it would probably have a terrible
         | impact because it appears that the oxidation and free-radicals
         | are an _essential cell signaling mechanism_ which triggers
         | apoptosis.
         | 
         | Which is a fancy way of saying: cells use these tools to kill
         | themselves when they are performing badly. You would not want
         | to interrupt this process.[1]
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power,_Sex,_Suicide
        
       | fiatjaf wrote:
       | This is impossible to read.
        
       | 867-5309 wrote:
       | limonene, linalool, "parfum" are the scourge of this age
        
       | indus wrote:
       | Is soap included? I seldom use body soap during a shower.
       | Probably once a quarter, when my SO threatens me with
       | consequences.
       | 
       | I am not a researcher, but I have a simple evolutionary theory
       | that soap was invented in the last few thousand years and became
       | a mass-market product after the beginning of industrialization.
       | 
       | If we survived and evolved without the use of something in the
       | last few million years, then why is that thing needed?
        
         | sjducb wrote:
         | Lots of plants can be used as soap with minimal processing
         | (crush the plant in your hand while rubbing it on something).
         | It's likely that most of our ancestors used soap and we evolved
         | to expect it. Just like we evolved to eat cooked or ground up
         | food.
        
         | pandarus wrote:
         | jesus
        
         | xeonmc wrote:
         | Is your name Richard, by any chance?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-06-29 23:00 UTC)