Tuesday, December 16, 2008

The Matter at Hand - Are hands the new face?



Sometime in college, I went home to visit my parents in LA. At some point during the trip, I got into the car with my mom to go shopping. As we started the car and settled into the driver's seat, I saw her pulling on these ridiculous gloves that covered the back of her hands, all the way up to her her shoulders. They were a lightweight, beige cotton and had holes at the fingers, allowing the fingers freedom to securely grasp the wheel. I commented how embarrassing the gloves were and I hoped she wouldn't be walking around with them. She just shrugged and said "I don't care."

This encounter occurred B.S.E.---Before Skin Enlightenment---the dark time when I thought sunscreen was the only protective product I needed. Of course, I've evolved and am comfortable enough with myself to say "I don't care what people think about my skin care habits." If I'm in a car, I cover up my hands and arms because windows do a lousy job of protecting you from those damaging UV rays. Even though I've achieved a certain level of comfort with my sun practices, I do sometimes think to myself, "Am I crazy? Am I being fanatical? Is this really worth it?"

Well, I've had official confirmation that my glove wearing is indeed worth the time, effort and strange looks. I stumbled upon the article below, which addresses the increase in anti-aging procedures dealing with the hands:

The Fountain of Youth at Your Fingertips, New York Times

Aside from the face, the other major indicators of age are the throat, chest and hands. It's easy to protect the face, throat and chest with a large hat or parasol, but your poor hands are usually exposed to the sun. The most practical solution is sunscreen. I use sunscreen on my hands as if it were a moisturizer---whenever I wash my hands and I'm going outdoors, I'll apply and reapply it. The more drastic option is using gloves, which I've only employed in the car, although some brave souls may take to wearing them outdoors on a daily basis.

For those women who have already experienced visible damage, there are various options to reverse those signs of aging, some painful and invasive, and others less so.

Option 1: Sclerotherapy
Since the skin on the back of your hands is quite thin, veins become more prominent as you age. Doctors can inject a saline solution into your veins to shrink them. Cost: not given, but a quick Google search says it's about $100-$200 per needle used.

Option 2: Restylane
Restylane adds volume and makes veins and visible tendons less noticeable. Restylane injections, cost around $3,000 and the results can last up to a year.

Option 3: Injecting one's own fat into ones hands (eww)
This is pretty self-explanatory. Developed by Dr. Sydney Coleman of New York, this procedure is done in his office and costs at least $12,000. But the high price tag seems to be worth it---the results last over 10 years.

Option 4: Laser therapy
Used to reduce brown spots and/or stimulate collagen production in the hands for more volume. Cost: not given, but usually depends on the type of laser used and what doctor you are seeing.

Option 5: Anti-aging and/or damage reversal products
Generally painless and much more cost effective, this option takes effort and patience. The results aren't instant, but it's more affordable and infinitely less invasive than the aforementioned options.

If you're like me, you want to do everything possible to avoid medical procedures. I always encourage my customers, friends and family to take as many preventative measures as possible because reversing the signs of aging is both costly and painful. People may find it crazy to use gloves in the car or anywhere else, but if you want to preserve those beautiful hands of yours and save some money in the long run, then you better start slathering on the SPF or putting on some gloves. Read More

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Skin Cancer Vaccine!!!!

Here are some of the highlights from the article:

"Professor Ian Frazer, of the University of Queensland, said tests of the vaccine had proven successful on animals and that human trials could begin next year.

Mr Frazer, who delivered his findings to the Australian Health and Medical Research Congress, said a vaccine for children aged 10 to 12 could be available in 5 to 10 years.

The jab would protect against squamous cell carcinoma, the second most common skin cancer, but not the more deadly melanomas.

Professor Frazer warned there was still no substitute for staying out of the sun.

'In the future, just as the cervical cancer vaccine will complement the cervical cancer screening program, I hope that a skin cancer vaccine will be available to help in the prevention of skin cancer, but we'll still need to stay out of the sun.'"

While this is a potentially HUGE breakthrough, you'll still have to slather on the SPF and shelter yourself under parasols and hats. There is no 100% guarantee that you won't get skin cancer, but you can certainly do your part by covering up and staying healthy!

Click HERE for the full article.

Read More

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Sunscreen is unsafe?! And most aren't effective?!

According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), 4 out of 5 sunscreens provide insufficient coverage or contain too many hazardous materials. If their results are true, this could be an enormous blow to the sunscreen industry, and a shock to me, the girl who is addicted to slathering and spraying on a UV shield.

I'm not sure how accurate the EWG findings are, and I need to do a little more research on the EWG to see what sort of organization they are and what sort of testing methods they've used. But their results have surely shaken up the cosmetics world and lots of people are talking about the findings. It should be noted that there are some doctors who have challenged the validity of EWG's results.

According to the EWG's results, my trusty EltaMD UV Shield and UV Physical got good scores for protection and low toxicity. One surprise loser was my Neutrogena Ultra Sheer Dry Touch Sunblock in SPF 70. Not only did it have a high rating for potential health hazards, but its effectiveness has been called into question. Click HERE to find out the results of your sunscreen. (Disclaimer: I'm not sure how accurate these findings are!)

Even if my Neutrogena is okay to use, I've begun to introduce more and more natural products into my daily beauty regimen. Because it's very cold in New York and I've taken shelter under thick layers of clothing, I haven't had to use any sunscreen on my body (except on my face!). I bought #5 on the EWG's list, Badger All-Natural Sunscreen in SPF 30 ($16 for 2.9 oz), and tried it on my hands. I'm pretty happy with my purchase. It is mostly natural, water resistant, and has a rather strong lavender scent, which I like (though others may not). It is quite thick, a little oily and leaves a thin, white film on the skin until it gets absorbed because of its 20% zinc oxide content. The white film is a bit annoying and it takes a good deal of rubbing to get it to mostly disappear, but I'm willing to put up with this if it means that I'm using an effective, safe form of sun protection. I could see myself using this on my arms and chest in the summer, but it's too expensive to use it all over my body everyday.

I'll eventually try Mexitan SPF 50, #21 on the EWG's list. The results say it's as effective as the Badger, but for $20 you get 5.4 oz. I will get back to you with my review of this sunscreen when I buy it. Read More