Dr Oz says gel manicures aren't safe!

SPA EQUIPMENT & MACHINES ✅ Beauty Salon Supplier in the US
SalonGeek

Help Support SalonGeek:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I used to totally like Dr Oz, but now I don't! Frustrated and irritated with him. I have several clients who love him...hope I don't lose their business. I've educated them about Shellac, Gelish etc just hope it works!
 
Devonnaydf said:
I used to totally like Dr Oz, but now I don't! Frustrated and irritated with him. I have several clients who love him...hope I don't lose their business. I've educated them about Shellac, Gelish etc just hope it works!
Click to expand...


Just keep giving them the correct info- if you lose them, I promise you will have someone SMARTER fill their space!! ;)
 
The interesting part is, Oprah said on her talk show she wasn't going to eat beef! The beef council sued her in court! Dr. Oz better be careful or the beauty industry will take him to court!
 
I haven't read through this thread to read all the responses but I just wanted to say...Dr OZ is what us Aussies call a Dimwit:)
 
HeatherDavis said:
One would need 250 years of weekly UV-cured nail sessions to equal one treatment in a tanning bed. Tested fact.

UV Nail Lamp Safety Information.

As of April 11, 2012.

• According to Dr. Robert M. Sayre, Ph.D., of Rapid Precision Testing Laboratories one of the creators of the SPF rating system: “UV Nail Lamps are safer than natural sunlight or sunlamps.”.

• Dr. David Valia, Director of Research and Development for CND, compares the exposure from a UV lamp to that of indoor fluorescent lighting. He explains, “The amount of energy from a UV lamp during a nail service would be roughly equivalent to the amount of UV exposure one would experience during a typical day of exposure in indoor fluorescent lighting.”.

• According to Dr. Sayre: “People who are indoors have little to no skin risk due to long term exposure to fluorescent lighting. People who sunbathe or work outdoors have real risks of excessive UV exposure, the cause of sunburn and skin cancer.”.

• “The CND UV Nail Lamp bulb emits almost exclusively (more than 99%) UVA-1, the safest part of the ultraviolet spectrum,” says Dr. Sayre.

• The exposure from a bi-weekly UV manicure is equivalent to “an extra 1-2 minutes in daylight each day between salon visits,” says Doug Schoon, CND’s Chief Scientific Advisor and author of Nail Structure and Product Chemistry.

• Although hands are the most exposed, they’re also the least susceptible to UV sensitivity. According to Dr. Sayre, “It would take 6 – 10x more exposure to your hands to produce mild sunburn than it would to produce a burn on your face, abdomen or back. UV Nail Lamps are used on one of the least susceptible parts of your body.”.

• Hands get more UV exposure holding the steering wheel of a car or talking on a cell phone outside than they do from the use of UV nail lamps.

• UV nail lamps have been on the market for over 30 years and there have been no proven reports linking them to premature aging or skin cancer.

• Just like you put sunscreen on your face, we recommend putting sunscreen on your hands throughout the day, especially after washing them.

ARM YOURSELF WITH FACTS. Print this and hand it to consumers with concerns!
Click to expand...

Brilliant advice! Thank you xxx
 
gillian w said:
Why do these people do this with these scares.
Worse one i remember was when Ann Diamond had a cot death and someone said it was linked to a chemical in foam mattresses.I had just had my first baby and went out and bought all new mattresses that were natural fibres.The cot,the baby basket,the pram all new mattresses.Cost a fortune,but I was scared as a new mother for my baby.

I wasn't the only one everywhere sold out of natural fibre mattresses and babies were sleeping on blankets because people chucked out their foam ones but all the natural ones had sold out.

It was all over the news in the papers but turned out to be a lot of rubbish the mattresses did not cause your baby to die.No evidence whatsoever.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry to take the thread off on a tangent but I feel the need to reply to the cot death situation mentioned above.

The problem with cot death or SIDS is that they don't know what causes it. They have no proof that anything is to blame, they have found some things reduce the risks (not smoking, a new matress for each child, use blankets not quilts, cool room etc...) but even those things just reduce the risk rather than put the child in the clear (& they change with time too - don't lay your child on their side/front/back etc..).

It is an awfull thing and having no answers to 'why?' is probably the worst part of it but the facts are they just do not know what causes it or why some babies/children die.

Just for info I have lost a sister & a nephew to SIDS and have had 4 children myself so I know of the panic you felt, I secretly coped for years with the fact that my first memory is of the day my sister died.
I could never put any of my babies into lemon clothing as I helped my mum put a lemon babygrow on my sister after her bath and tucked her up in bed & that was the last I ever saw of her as she died in the night.

Silly thing but I couldn't put lemon on my children because of the relation of a lemon babygrow and my sisters death - I would never expect anyone else to take that reasoning and belive there is anything in it but for me it was just a risk I was unwilling to take. So for me lemon clothing was a risk just as much as a room that was too hot or somebody smoking near my baby.

So to finish off I don't think you can compare the cause of SIDS with the outright wrong information Dr Oz has been spouting about gel manicures/UV lamps as there is no definative answer to the cause of SIDS but I understand that you were comparing your panic at hearing some information in the public domain wich you believed to be 100% and then later you discovered was not quite what it was made out to be.

I am thankfull we don't have this Dr Oz here in the UK but surely there are broadcasting rules that state he can't misslead the public or downright lie about these things. I would be looking at who I could complain to and sending them a copy of the fabulous information that was posted earlier in this thread, he may be forced to go public with an appology or a new programme stating that gel manicures/UV lamps are nowhere near as dangerous as he had made out.
 
What bothers me about him, other than the obvious remarks about our industry and our practices, is that whenever he has something on his show that isn't directly "medical" related, he only goes for the sensational aspect of the story. If he was a true scientist, he'd listen to both sides of the reports, not just the negative ones.
But....sensational stories raise ratings.
 
Did you guys see what Gelish posted on their FB page in reply to this? As much as I agree that remover other than pure acetone is better for soak off removal, their claims are ridiculous. They are saying to NEVER use pure acetone or a file to remove soak off gel and that their remover is better. The thing is, their MSDS sheets clearly states the remover is 95% acetone and 5% fragrance... I will never buy anything Gelish, ever. They are now supporting the consumer, not the professional in my eyes.

https://www.facebook.com/GelishOfficialPage/posts/466392566754310?

And Zoya is on the bandwagon too because he had their polish on their show. I won't be buying that either!
 
Melissa82 said:
Did you guys see what Gelish posted on their FB page in reply to this? As much as I agree that remover other than pure acetone is better for soak off removal, their claims are ridiculous. They are saying to NEVER use pure acetone or a file to remove soak off gel and that their remover is better. The thing is, their MSDS sheets clearly states the remover is 95% acetone and 5% fragrance... I will never buy anything Gelish, ever. They are now supporting the consumer, not the professional in my eyes.

https://www.facebook.com/GelishOfficialPage/posts/466392566754310?

And Zoya is on the bandwagon too because he had their polish on their show. I won't be buying that either!
Click to expand...

Why are you upset with HNH Gelish? They are correct that one should never file off soak off gel polish and that their remover is better for their product. Pretty much every gel polish line says that. And although I think they're a bit strident about it, acetone is more drying than most other removers; it is a powerful defatter. And informing consumers of the correct use of their product (especially when the product is sold at Sally) is just being responsible.

Look, this is not a consumer vs professional thing and consumers are not the bad guy. DIYers are a tiny percentage of the population and barely make a dent in the market for professionals. The bad guys here are people like Dr. Oz who spread malicious misinformation, not to mention "professionals" who don't know their craft and do the damage that lends credence to this nonsense.
 
They are saying NEVER, which many people will group all gel polishes together. It's just their way of wording. I don't like it. I know many professionals that use e-files to remove their soak off gels with no problem and do it safely. It just puts a bad rep out there for any good professional out there. And the fact that they are bashing acetone when their remover is made up of it by 95%.
 
Melissa82 said:
They are saying NEVER, which many people will group all gel polishes together. It's just their way of wording. I don't like it. I know many professionals that use e-files to remove their soak off gels with no problem and do it safely. It just puts a bad rep out there for any good professional out there. And the fact that they are bashing acetone when their remover is made up of it by 95%.
Click to expand...

All removers are 90+% acetone, but that small amount of other stuff makes a big difference. Zoya, Gelish, the new Shellac remover, even the loodies homemade remover are overwhelmingly acetone, but are much less drying than pure acetone. You only need a drop or two of glycerine or oil or whatever to make acetone behave differently.

You may know "professionals" that use e-files to remove soak off gels, but it is absolutely the wrong way to do it and all manufacturers recommend against it. Techs do it not because it's better for the client, but because it saves them time. Personally, I would never go to a tech who uses an e-file to remove a soak off gel, because it says that she doesn't follow the manufacturers' instructions. I think that is the point Gelish was trying to make.
 
Ok the link just takes you to the site sorry- but doug has written a post on his Facebook for those that want to check it out xx
 
NancySyd said:
All removers are 90+% acetone, but that small amount of other stuff makes a big difference. Zoya, Gelish, the new Shellac remover, even the loodies homemade remover are overwhelmingly acetone, but are much less drying than pure acetone. You only need a drop or two of glycerine or oil or whatever to make acetone behave differently.

You may know "professionals" that use e-files to remove soak off gels, but it is absolutely the wrong way to do it and all manufacturers recommend against it. Techs do it not because it's better for the client, but because it saves them time. Personally, I would never go to a tech who uses an e-file to remove a soak off gel, because it says that she doesn't follow the manufacturers' instructions. I think that is the point Gelish was trying to make.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't take sog's off with an e-file on natural nails but what about taking them off of acrylic or hard gel enhancements? They didn't even go there. So, some client could misread the info and think that someone using an e-file to do that, is in the terrible wrong. It's in their delivery of the info that can be taken too generally.
 
Melissa82 said:
I wouldn't take sog's off with an e-file on natural nails but what about taking them off of acrylic or hard gel enhancements? They didn't even go there. So, some client could misread the info and think that someone using an e-file to do that, is in the terrible wrong. It's in their delivery of the info that can be taken too generally.
Click to expand...

That's true, I did not consider removing a SOG with an efile from an enhancement as we don't put gel polish on enhancements. I had a tech come at me with an efile to remove it from my natural nails. I had to stop her and leave.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

R
Allergy or irritation
Replies
1
Views
5K
AcidPerm
A
E
Builder gel removal, what am I doing wrong?
Replies
6
Views
29K
KIB
K
The Ed.
Nails | BABTAC Releases Official Statement In Response To Scare Stories
Replies
0
Views
2K
The Ed.
The Ed.
E
UV Product Summary
3 4 5
Replies
82
Views
48K
anniepops
anniepops
C
LCN gel: problems doing a French!
Replies
5
Views
1K
LindUSA
L

Latest posts

Back
Top