'Damage' or de-hydration ... time to get honest with nail clients?

[geeg]

We all know the expression 'nail enhancements damaged my nails'!! We all leap in to defend nail enhancements and tell clients that, "it's not the product that damages your nails but a bad tech or bad clients".

I've said many times that I think as nail techs we should 'fess up' (confess) that although wearing nail enhancement products, doesn't cause thinning or pitting of the surface of natural nails when done competently; wearing nail enhancements certainly does dehydrate the nail plate in the same way that bleaching or colouring hair dehydrates the hair. Maybe we should be telling our clients this when they are new to wearing nail enhancements? Be more honest with them.

The thing that prompted me to write this today is that last night I watched an advert about a new shampoo from Dove that is especially made for colour 'damaged' hair. They openly talk about the 'damage' that is done to hair by colouring it which dehydrates it ... AND WOMEN ACCEPT THIS QUITE HAPPILY WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR HAIR ... they colour their hair again and again and don't think a thing about it. I do it! And I would be far more concerned if something happened to my hair than I would be my nails if it came down to a choice between the two. But I willingly submit every 4 weeks to having my hair coloured and bleached because I trust my professional hairdresser and she has the right products to combat any 'damage'.

Why shouldn't women accept quite happily, the news that the same type of 'damage' happens to nails when wearing nail enhancements , or any kind of nail coating for that matter, even polish?

Maybe if we professionals explained to all new clients, that they could expect the type of damage to their nails that dehydration causes (possible white surface patches, increased brittleness and breakages for a period of time when removed, etc), they would be more willing to look after thier nails with homecare items like Solar Oil .. regularly use it, and expect that any 'damage' after the removal of enhancements needs to be corrected by conditioning them for a few weeks with the products we recommend??

I think all professionals should be more honest with clients about what they can expect and relate the 'hair' analogy to them, which all women seem to understand will happen to their hair but they also know how to combat the damage with the right shampoo and conditioners. We need to tell them the same about their nails IMO. What do you think? I would love (persianista) dawn's input from the hair side of things too on this if she would oblige. :hug:

 

[FlawlessTSW]

Hi Geeg,

Totally agree with this! I don't think clients really beleive us when we say 'oh no they don't cause any damage' because the majority of clients have a friend who has ended up with damaged nails (be it from a bad tech, bad products or just the general dehydration of the nail). I think they will trust you more and that you will actually come across more professonal by telling the truth and explaining the possible damages that can occur and like you say much more willing to use solar oil and other products that we recommend for them!

Flawless x

 

[persianista]

Happy to oblige!

Yes I am truthful with clients in that ANY chemical service will do an element of damage to hair....as such.
I phrase it as;
"one dose of colour / bleach by itself will not create noticable damage, however, repeated or overlapping applications will, which is a good reason to have a professional do your colour."

My favourite phrase is "be realistic". What is the point of being blonde from black if the hair is breaking off in clumps. It ain't gonna look good.

People are accepting of damage with their hair to get the colour/ look they set their heart on. People are ALSO accepting of nail damage, hence the success of the chopshops. Many times I have had clients go there for acrylics in the full knowledge that their own nails will be dreadful afterwards.

With hair, we create the problem-damage
we get a reaction- eek help with split ends/dryness
we sell them the solution- pro products.

The same problem-reaction-solution situation exists in nails and beauty, I just feel that nail techs and therapists are very touchy about admitting they can cause any problems.
Hairdessers are far less defensive.

Geeg may have a really good point with this thread. Admit that nails are a bit manky after nails, then flog em a bottle of solar oil/ nailteques or the like. People respect honesty far more than you give them credit for!
I think people are far more relaxed about damage etc if they know what to expect and how to deal with it.

Would any client decline a head of highlights that they have set their heart on if I told them it would make their hair a bit dry? NO! but they would buy the heavy duty conditioner that I said would help.

 

[shedunlop]

I totally agree and have always told my clients that there will be a period, after removing nails, that they will need extra care and attention having been in an 'unnatural' state for whatever length of time. They do accept this quite happily.

My only problem with this is that for years, maybe even decades, our nail techs have been told by educators and manufacturers that as long as our clients use their oil there is no damage to the natural nail and that it is the bad nail tech that damages the nail.

It may be difficult for techs to now do a U turn.

Don't get me wrong I do agree but there are problems attached to this honest policy.

 

[Mrs.Clooney]

You have raised a very good point Gigi. You can tell the clients who do look after their nails between treatments and those who don't. The ones who don't always promise you that they have . Clearly you can see that they haven't.

 

[Deena]

Just curious, but how do you tell if they've been using their oil when wearing enhancements? The only thing I can think of is the skin appears better and less dry? Any other ways of catching the fibbers out? :wink2:

 

[JesseDavidNailDesign]

This is a very interesting topic!

Introducing gel polish has really made me think about this more, as I'm trying to explain the difference to my clients. When they ask me "Does this damage your nail like acrylics?" I usually say something to the effect of "this system is very gentle to the natural nail because we don't have to prep the same way as for enhancements" I used to say "prep as aggressively" but I dropped that LOL

Now when the client uses the words "ruin" or "destroy" the natural nail, I admit, I have gotten defensive. But really saying that wearing nail enhancements causes NO damage is a little ridiculous.

And even with the gel polish service, I've had a few clients give up on it. Maybe it is because I promised "no nail damage what so ever" and they could see for themselves that wasn't true. It made me into a liar in their eyes. Definitely food for thought.

Well, I'm stocked up on cuticle oil, and off to work in an hour. I will definitely re-think the verbiage I use at my station.

After all, as you say, no one expects "virgin hair condition" after chemical processing.

 

[tigi]

I tell my clients (and students ) this

wearing enhancements will not cause damage provided ALL 3 of the following have happened.

A enhancements have been correctly applied
B client has correctly looked afer their nails (cuticle oil+ no picking+no banging them around+ glove wearing for cleaning and washing up)
C nails have been correctly removed.

All 3 HAVE to have taken place or yes damage may occur.

I am frank and open with my clients and students and explain that unless all 3 occur then I cant guarantee the condition of the nails.

I feel I cant be anymore open and honest than that and geeg I LOVE this thread. its going in my scrap book of threads at the salon . Its perfect!

 

[VHunter]

Ditto ditto ditto.
I agree with you Geeg, whole heartedly.

I've shared a bit with clients. But I always thought they were 'flexible' after because they were protected and not dried out like natural nails that are exposed. Guess what I read was 'fluff'. I certainly questioned it at the time, but I figured if it was in print....?

Certainly makes more sense that they would be dehydrated given all that we apply to them prior to application.

YUP, I'm always sharing truths with clients. I don't want to be another one of those techs selling bulls**t to get them into my chair.

Would you mind if I shared your post with them with minor editing (to shorten) since you've said it better than I can?

In the end, clients are making a choice. If they can't grow their own nails, they get enhancements. There will be a trade-off. Just as there is with their hair. What I don't understand is why most will happily buy gallons of the most expensive hair conditioner, and can't be bothered with a bit of oil for their nails.

It doesn't only apply to nail enhancements though. It applies to nail polish and Shellac as well (when worn religiously). All the alcohol and acetone and everything else comes with a price.

Well said Gigi!

 

[geeg]

I totally agree and have always told my clients that there will be a period, after removing nails, that they will need extra care and attention having been in an 'unnatural' state for whatever length of time. They do accept this quite happily.

My only problem with this is that for years, maybe even decades, our nail techs have been told by educators and manufacturers that as long as our clients use their oil there is no damage to the natural nail and that it is the bad nail tech that damages the nail.

It may be difficult for techs to now do a U turn.

Don't get me wrong I do agree but there are problems attached to this honest policy.

I think we have to define the word damage because it is a general term and covers so many things.

The only type of damage I would ever expect to see on any of my good (non-picker) clients is surface dehydration and /or brittleness after enhancements have been removed. This has to be made clear.

As in chemical processing of hair, we nail technicians chemically process the surface of the nail so that it will accept a product that normally would not stick for long to an untreated surface; this chemical processing can be mitigated by the regular use of a product/products.

But if as a technician you are mechanically altering the surface of the nail plate (with heavy etching, drilling, filing or pulling a product off the surface instead of gentle removal) then this is damage that is completely avoidable and can't be put right again with a product. Clients have to wait until the natural nail has completely grown through before they see a difference in the condition of their nails.

To Dawn's point (and thanks so much for the input) she is right, nail techs are reluctant to admit there is any damage and are defensive. We are the ones who also need to be realistic and as Dawn says, perhaps use words such as dry, brittle, flaky etc instead of the blanket term damage which conjures up all sorts of horrors in clients' minds because that word covers mechanical (which is what most people think when they hear this word) as well as chemical damage. Let's not use such negative words and instead start using the right terminology which would be dehydrated, dry perhaps brittle etc.

To the poster above, this is not a U turn for me .. I have been honest with my clients (as Dawn has been, for EVER) I have mentioned it on this site many times ...

It is others who may think it is a U turn because they have not been honest with their clients before but if you read what I have written here, it is not a U turn just a re-definition of what clients really might expect to experience after having their nails done regularly with ANY product be it polish, enhancements, SOG etc. We always have to chemically alter the surface of the nail plate for treatments to last. Fortunately, dehydration is a temporary thing and nails can be re-hydrated in a very short time with the right products.

 

[mrsm]

Totally agree. I always tell clients this and do compair it to their hair. You wouldn't have your hair dyed blonde then never use conditioner or have it regularly maintained would you? And they agree with you. some will follow your advice and others will simply ignore it. What really annoys me though is the horror on some peoples faces when you suggest nail enhancements to them. Somewhere down the line they are deing given wrong information especially when it comes to gel v acrylic enhancements. Hope this makes sense I'm using my mobile to type so there's bound to be a few spelling mistakes or missed words.

 

[persianista]

Most of us have by now tried nail enhancements, and know that nails are a bit horrid afterwards. By denying this, or blaming it on client care, you will
1. deny yourself a sales opportunity
2. look like you are in denial/ unaware yourself
3. look from a clients point of view as if you are defensive.

Clients use and abuse nails, just as they abuse their hair. When I am faced with clients who have home coloured/melted their hair with straighteners/ cut their own fringes, I don't feel in any way it is the fault of my hairdressing. I just suggest solutions.

Everyone knows that straighteners are hot. I don't sell GHD's saying they won't damage your hair, I sell them by saying they will make your hair look straight and sleek, but it is a good idea to buy heat protection spray and a good conditioner.

I don't understand why, when faced with a client with bitten stumps for nails, you try and sell nail extensions as "they won't damage your nails". Why not sell your services as "they will make your ugly fat fingers look nice and pretty, and you won't look like a navvy?!" ok, not that exact wording, but you get the idea!

 

[An*Gel]

Yes I absolutely agree that we should be honest with our clients... I've always told them that enhancements won't ruin/damage their natual nails if they are cared for properly and removed in the right way, instead of being prised or bitten off the nail.

I still get very annoyed when a client says that gel or acrylic ruins their nails and when I ask them how they were removed they go on to tell me that they were pulled off... they actually have themselves convinced that they've done nothing wrong with this... If I had hair extentions and pulled them from my head I'd expect damage!!

Anyway, as already said, there's a big difference between damage and dryness.

I've always told my clients that their nails may be dry after having enhacnements for a long period of time.

I find enhancement clients usually have bad nails to begin with, so aren't too concerned with this, but my Shellac clients are totally different.

Since getting Shellac in the Salon, I have a whole new range of clients coming to me... the natural nail clients and they are very concerned about their nails, so yes I am honest and think it's important to be... I try to encourage them all to buy a Solar Oil and explain the reason why they need it and if some of them come back to me after 2/3 weeks and their nails are dry after the Shellac is wrapped off.. they will look a little sheepish and admit they haven't used it.

I always know the clients that have used Solar oil... you can really see the difference!!

 

[geeg]

Most of us have by now tried nail enhancements, and know that nails are a bit horrid afterwards. By denying this, or blaming it on client care, you will
1. deny yourself a sales opportunity
2. look like you are in denial/ unaware yourself
3. look from a clients point of view as if you are defensive.

Clients use and abuse nails, just as they abuse their hair. When I am faced with clients who have home coloured/melted their hair with straighteners/ cut their own fringes, I don't feel in any way it is the fault of my hairdressing. I just suggest solutions.

Everyone knows that straighteners are hot. I don't sell GHD's saying they won't damage your hair, I sell them by saying they will make your hair look straight and sleek, but it is a good idea to buy heat protection spray and a good conditioner.

I don't understand why, when faced with a client with bitten stumps for nails, you try and sell nail extensions as "they won't damage your nails". Why not sell your services as "they will make your ugly fat fingers look nice and pretty, and you won't look like a navvy?!" ok, not that exact wording, but you get the idea!

I think most of us do sell nails on the positive note that they will make your hands and nails look more attractive etc ... what most technicians don't do is ever give the whole story which is that wearing nail products for extended periods of time will leave your nails dehydrated;I don't think there is any need to apologize for this ... it is a consequence.

I have never had a hairdresser ever apologize for the fact that my hair would be dry after having it chemically processed ... it just IS the way it is and a consequence of making that choice. Women understand it, they know it when it comes to hair.

When it comes to nails, they don't know it and its time they did, but with no apology and a good comparison to hair colouring which will make the whole thing easier to understand.

I have worn nails for more than 25 years and my nails were not 'horrid' or 'manky' when I removed them. lol. They were, surprisingly to some, not even too badly dehydrated (but I am a serial ' Solar oiler') and I went straight on to wear Shellac and I'm sure they will be no more dehydrated after a year and a half of wearing Shellac, more or less constantly, than they were before. It is my choice and I am aware of the consequences of that choice.

 

[Sarah22]

Great thread!! xx

 

[persianista]

Surely people get nail enhancements because their nails are not looking great in the first place?

In hair, because hair can be exposed to all sorts of damage, we do a lot of covering up work. EG, hair gone orange in the sun, we can put a colour on to make it appear healthy and glossy. We don't then tell the client that there hair is now perfect condition. We tell them that we are making it APPEAR perfect, however there is still orange porous hair there. If they use the correct aftercare, it will last longer.

People accept this quite realistically.

I would phrase the nail damage issue as "Any nail covering will cause temporary dehydration of the nail, which if you use the correct care , we can minimise, but your nails will just not look as perfect left natural as we can acheive using enhancements/shellac" "If you want perfect looking nails, the only realistic way to acheive this is to extend them"

I cannot see why techs would think this is an issue.

 

[geeg]

Surely people get nail enhancements because their nails are not looking great in the first place?

In hair, because hair can be exposed to all sorts of damage, we do a lot of covering up work. EG, hair gone orange in the sun, we can put a colour on to make it appear healthy and glossy. We don't then tell the client that there hair is now perfect condition. We tell them that we are making it APPEAR perfect, however there is still orange porous hair there. If they use the correct aftercare, it will last longer.

People accept this quite realistically.

I would phrase the nail damage issue as "Any nail covering will cause temporary dehydration of the nail, which if you use the correct care , we can minimise, but your nails will just not look as perfect left natural as we can acheive using enhancements/shellac" "If you want perfect looking nails, the only realistic way to acheive this is to extend them"

I cannot see why techs would think this is an issue.

I don't think it would or should be an issue either.

"Any nail covering will cause temporary dehydration of the nail, which if you use the correct care , we can minimise, but your nails will just not look as perfect left natural as we can acheive using enhancements/shellac. " If you want perfect looking nails, the only realistic way to acheive this is to extend them."

Excellent. No apologies, no defensiveness no U-turn. Thanks so much.

 

[VHunter]

I would phrase the nail damage issue as "Any nail covering will cause temporary dehydration of the nail, which if you use the correct care , we can minimise, but your nails will just not look as perfect left natural as we can acheive using enhancements/shellac" "If you want perfect looking nails, the only realistic way to acheive this is to extend them"

I cannot see why techs would think this is an issue.

If you don't mind, I should like to quote you as well, and borrow your words for my FB Note to clients?

 

[persianista]

If you don't mind, I should like to quote you as well, and borrow your words for my FB Note to clients?

Of course you can. :hug:

 

[sarahpoppy24]

I already do this! And I use the conditioner/solar oil comparison too. I cant lie to clients and tell them that their nails will be the same after enhancments, however most of my enhancment work is rebalances now anyway so they are not bothered about their natural nails becuase they want to wear enhancments all the time. I think I said in another thread about what I say to them about cutting the nail down after removal, continuing to use oil after removal and waiting until the nail re hardens again, just keep them short untill they do. I also warn my clients that with l and P that if they fall down or slam in a car door or something that if the enhancment is lifted off then it could take layers of the natural nail with it. Do you know what I have never had someone turn round and tell me they have changed their mind about having them on. Becuase we understand the anatomy of the nails and hair etc we know that any "damage" will be temporary and that as with hair that has split, you trim it and make sure you use more conditioners etc and it will be all good. X