Hi, Liana , never seen this before either but..... surely its unprofessional advice not to perform a skin test,
as long as there was a skin test performed and there was
no visible reaction
then it would seems like good idea to let the client make their own decisions,
but... as hairdressers we usually perform skin tests on a small area ,
which may not always show up as having a reaction , then when the hairdresser goes ahead on the skin test results and the person
is allergic
but.... why should the hairdresser feel guilty or get the blame and get sued ? after all he /she did the skin test and applied it according to manufactures instructions,
but..... as the hairdresser didn't actually make the product ,
it seems like professional manufactures are now copying the supermarkets and may have now found themselves a nice legal loophole ,
eg.. after the skin test is performed or not performed by the hairdresser
then ..... just blame the customer for choosing to go ahead anyway
also if this is going to set a precedence for other manufactures
the problem may have to be addressed and looked at carefully by some insurance company's
as there may be an urgent need for colour users to safeguard themselves against unforeseen allergy's or reactions and hospital treatment loss of work etc... involving the use of colours etc.....
as colour allergy's can sometimes be life threatening
it seems to be a very grey area indeed as to who's responsible for such an allergic reaction ?
also if there was a skin test performed (which we normally do)
and if a reaction came up for us to see , we know that any reputable hairdresser wouldn't do it at all whether or not the customer still wanted it hope that made sense
minky