Halo gel polish?

[Alison Pilkington-Child]

I don’t have any problem with Chinese products, I buy many and have even been a UK product tester for a number of Chinese wholesalers. However I wouldn’t have the concern that shoes, phones and jeans would increase my chances of acquiring a life long autoimmune condition.

Given the amount of previous contact I’ve had, and having seen a quite few cosmetic products and gadgets as a sampler, I would say perfume and beauty is one area that needs a bit of a sort out to say the least. I’m sure it will come together eventually because the greater the demand for genuine product safety the bigger the competition will be to provide it.

It is not enough to say that a product has been tested, that’s fairly common lip service in this particular market. Verifiable documentation needs to be made available to back it up.

The recent emergence of miracle gel remover with benign and even wholesome sounding ingredient lists to describe what is essentially ammonia mixed with paint stripper or industrial grade oven cleaner is a good example of how far China has to go to embrace real, effective product control.

 

[user 25446]

The MSDS above states 40-45% HEMA, and that is higher than the 35% maximum recommended by the SCCS in Molko72's post. So clear the product exceeds the maximum amount recommended by the EU SCCS (the scientists and dermatologists who decide which ingredients are safe for cosmetic use).

Fact is, products with an excessive amount of HEMA always come from China. This suggests the products are design to wear for a long time, rather than be designed for safety. USA/EU products tend to state between 10% to 20% HEMA. Anything above this is considered by most US/EU product chemists I know to be too high risk (the majority of these stopped using HEMA years ago in favour of HPMA).

Marian is of course correct that if there is no skin contact of uncured or under cured methacrylate, or product dust; then it is not possible to get an allergy. But according to the BAD report there is a nail product allergy epidemic - and HEMA is at the heart of this, together with poor education, using incorrect UV lamps and products with excessive amounts of HEMA.

But the fact remains, that across Europe there is an allergy epidemic and the #1 allergen is HEMA. Nitrile gloves do not provide 100% protection, nor do professional dust/vapour filter systems (note that manufacturers do not state effectiveness). So even if a NT works cleanly, they are exposed to risk. That risk is only increased when excessive amounts of high risk ingredients are used.

This comment is not about a specific brand - it is about nail products that are high risk, despite using legal ingredient and legal amounts. Because this allergy epidemic wrecks careers, causes financial strife and can severely damage the nail industry.

All brands have a choice what products they choose to sell. Unfortunately, so are so ill informed they are importing high risk products.

 

[user 25446]

BAD article in Daily Mail:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/...s-causing-allergy-epidemic-charity-warns.html

Summary of BAD report with key points highlighted:
https://ikoniqnails.com/blog/post/d...ng-about-uk-artificial-nail-allergy-epidemic/

 

[Beautiful-you]

The MSDS above states 40-45% HEMA, and that is higher than the 35% maximum recommended by the SCCS in Molko72's post. So clear the product exceeds the maximum amount recommended by the EU SCCS (the scientists and dermatologists who decide which ingredients are safe for cosmetic use).

Fact is, products with an excessive amount of HEMA always come from China. This suggests the products are design to wear for a long time, rather than be designed for safety. USA/EU products tend to state between 10% to 20% HEMA. Anything above this is considered by most US/EU product chemists I know to be too high risk (the majority of these stopped using HEMA years ago in favour of HPMA).

Marian is of course correct that if there is no skin contact of uncured or under cured methacrylate, or product dust; then it is not possible to get an allergy. But according to the BAD report there is a nail product allergy epidemic - and HEMA is at the heart of this, together with poor education, using incorrect UV lamps and products with excessive amounts of HEMA.

But the fact remains, that across Europe there is an allergy epidemic and the #1 allergen is HEMA. Nitrile gloves do not provide 100% protection, nor do professional dust/vapour filter systems (note that manufacturers do not state effectiveness). So even if a NT works cleanly, they are exposed to risk. That risk is only increased when excessive amounts of high risk ingredients are used.

This comment is not about a specific brand - it is about nail products that are high risk, despite using legal ingredient and legal amounts. Because this allergy epidemic wrecks careers, causes financial strife and can severely damage the nail industry.

All brands have a choice what products they choose to sell. Unfortunately, so are so ill informed they are importing high risk products.

Thank you Bob for your clear explanation. Although It's so worrying that no matter how many times this is explained to nail techs, many just don't want to believe it . We can't stop trying though!

 

[user 25446]

Some refuse to accepts facts even having developed allergies and many go on to choose to rebrand using what I would consider potentially high-risk brands. As a result, it is increasingly common that they develop even more allergies, or salon clients develop onycholysis and they then have to rebrand and re-educatate a second or even third time.

10 years ago we didn't have issues like this, because all products were manufactured in the USA or EU and the chemists did their best to produce low risk products. Some went even further and developed hypoallergenic products. But those companies were professionally managed, by owners who understood business law and understood the need to follow international regulations. Plus, they didn't want to be sued.

How to sue a factory in China? Impossible.

10 years ago to start a brand meant investing at least 100,000 Euro. Why? Because the factories only sold gels (and later gel polish) in 4 litre or 1 US Gallon (3.85L) containers. That amount would fill more than 250 gel polish bottles in 15ml size.

So to obtain 100 colours you would need to buy 100 x 4 litres of gel polish, 25,000 bottles, pay to get these all filled and labelled. That alone would cost in the region of 60,000 to 80,000 Euro, before you add liquids, sculpting gels, dehydrator, primer, files, etc. Or had a webshop professionally designed. And you would need a 2000 sqft warehouse costing £2000 per month - which you would have to pay even in the first year when making low sales and probably a loss.

Today a new brand can buy 1 bottle of each colour from China, costing $1/15ml for a total cost of $100. They can work off their kitchen table. Then they can see which colours sell and reorder as necessary. This low cost of entry has brought some people into the industry who have little knowledge about the products, but also won't or can't pay for expert advice.

 

[Alison Pilkington-Child]

I wish it were necessary to have a nail product analysed and passed by a UK professional body before it was legal to import it. What a difference that would make!

 

[user 25446]

I wish it were necessary to have a nail product analysed and passed by a UK professional body before it was legal to import it. What a difference that would make!

That is exactly how it works in Ukraine, Russia and many former Soviet countries who are not in the EU. The importer has to submit product samples for analysis to a government accredited laboratory, in order to obtain a certificate authorising ability to sell in the country.