Quantcast

EMA, MMA and supposed EU Ban

SalonGeek

Help Support SalonGeek:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pimlico Bat

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
As both EMA and MMA were banned by the EEC for use as nail emhancements as long ago as 1996; It doesn't seem very prudent to me to bring either product to the attention of Health and Safety Officers.

Although the law has never been implemented in the UK, some european countries have followed the directive. (It applies to fibreglass, silk and gel too, as resins, glues and gels also contain banned substances)

This has never been an issue between EMA and MMA. The real issue is price, not the price differential between the two products (in manufacturing terms there is very little price difference between the two products) rather the price charged by Oriental Nail Technicians and their European counterparts. Once we had a car industry and an electronics industry, now both are firmly rooted in the far east. Why? Because of quality, reliability and most of all price! We must compete on price!
 

The Geek

Grand Master Geek
Staff member
Administrator
Premium Geek
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Messages
13,264
Reaction score
666
Location
Leeds, UK
As both EMA and MMA were banned by the EEC for use as nail emhancements as long ago as 1996; It doesn't seem very prudent to me to bring either product to the attention of Health and Safety Officers.
Think you best double check that... Neither have ever been banned by the EEC.

(in manufacturing terms there is very little price difference between the two products)
Eh? You cant seriously think this is the case? Vanilla MMA vs. r&D'd EMA designed for nail plate application has a massive difference.

The last thing you want to do is compete on price. Ever. This is not a manufacturing industry. Your clients can't send their nail plates off to another country to have done.

I think you need to do some more research before you make such bizarre claims.

Toodles
 

geeg

Judge Gigi-Honorary Geek
Joined
Jan 12, 2003
Messages
32,641
Reaction score
1,033
Location
Benissa, Costa Blanca, Spain
Pimlico Bat said:
As both EMA and MMA were banned by the EEC for use as nail emhancements as long ago as 1996; It doesn't seem very prudent to me to bring either product to the attention of Health and Safety Officers.

Although the law has never been implemented in the UK, some european countries have followed the directive. (It applies to fibreglass, silk and gel too, as resins, glues and gels also contain banned substances)

This has never been an issue between EMA and MMA. The real issue is price, not the price differential between the two products (in manufacturing terms there is very little price difference between the two products) rather the price charged by Oriental Nail Technicians and their European counterparts. Once we had a car industry and an electronics industry, now both are firmly rooted in the far east. Why? Because of quality, reliability and most of all price! We must compete on price!

I strongly disagree with this whole post and the information contained in the first paragraph is inaccurate in part and certainly not up to date.

Benzoyl Peroxide or BPO (a chemical contained in powders) was put on the banned list of ingredients for cosmetic products used on the skin. At the time the authorities never even knew that BPO was an ingredient in powders used in nail enhancements, where it does not come into contact with the skin..

BPO was (and is) used in acne treatments like Clearasil and other stronger acne treatments being used by beauty therapists to treat the condition. It was felt by the authorities that beauty therapists should not be treating this medical condition which should be prescribed only by doctors, so they banned its use in cosmetics, doctors still use it in medical preparations ... it is certainly not dangerous.

Doug Schoon with the support of a very few others spent 2 years convincing the authorities (COLIPA) that BPO is perfectly safe in nail enhancement products and he has won the case for BPO and the 'ban' is due to be lifted very soon. This is why the authorities in most EU countries have not enforced the ban as they know it is going to be removed. Practically the only country who did not go along with this is Denmark.

The last paragraph is also inaccurate and misleading as there is quite a big difference in price between EMA and MMA monomers .... unless you are comparing price at the very LOW end of the scale.

I don't believe that price is where we should be competing at all!!

There is a lot more to providing nail services than the cost of the chemicals we use. Surroundings, education, service and experience to mention but a few. All of these added factors will affect the price we charge.

If we all want to lower our standards to those of the NSS, (which would include not giving a client consultation, not caring about the health of the natural nail, abusing the natural nail, not speaking to the client, working in unsanitary conditions, etc) then we can start to compete on price, but the people on this site anyway are far more conscientious than that.

Just because the house next door may look like a slum doesn't mean ones own house has to!
 

The Geek

Grand Master Geek
Staff member
Administrator
Premium Geek
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Messages
13,264
Reaction score
666
Location
Leeds, UK
While the EU didn’t want beauty therapists over here 'prescribing' BPO containing treatments for clients (prescriptions should only be done by a Dr.), in the US millions of teenagers clean their face daily with products that contain BPO (and have done for over 20 years). The concentration of BPO in these products tends to be around 4-5 times higher than the BPO content found in powder... couple that with the fact that it is being used daily... and you end up with exposure that is 20 times more than with nail products.... then to top it off with... these guys are putting it straight on their face!

Anyhooo... The EU were unaware that BPO was used as a catalyst in powders when they made the ban. This is why they are reversing it... it was an oversight and never a safety issue.
Some European nail distributors that did not sell L&P systems tried to use fear mongering tactics to dissuade people from buying systems because of this.

also.....

The price per application of MMA versus your high end EMA liquid is around the 10-40 pence mark. Why bother?

I am now going to split this thread away from the watchdog thread as it is wayyyyy off topic now ;)
 

Pimlico Bat

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Your right, I've just spoken to the EEC and BPO, HQ and BHQ were removed from the banned list on October 2nd, just 5 days ago. We are all, especially me, grateful to Doug Schoon and the committee for all their work on this issue.

This was not my point. Damage sustained by the natural nail plate by excessive use of drills is the real issue here. It borders on criminal negligence and should be banned. Inexperienced or careless filing can also be as aggressive and should also be addressed. Banging on about MMA only clouds the issue. If it is banned it will only add .50p to the treatment cost, if that, we will still have a price issue.

Lets not be coy, NSS is a euphemism for Vietnamese. Within the M25 ring 4,500 Vietnamese Nail Technicians are operating, soon to spread nationwide. Not all are unsanitary, non caring nor use MMA. But most are new and inexperienced. Although we find they are more conscientious students than Europeans. Often training for six months, eight hours a day, before touching a single client. Our real issues lie with; Why do droves of customers use Vietnamese salons?

We have the advantage of language but how much of the treatment time is spent informing clients of the inflexibility of MMA and the role of a natural nail and EMA's flexibility as a shock absorber? Do we advise logically on the damage done by drills on the nail bed? Instead of just condemning the use of drills.

We must educate ourselves and our clients, respect their time constraints of a bi-weekly appointment and address our pricing policy. Again we must ask ourselves; Why are droves of our clients going to Vietnamese salons? The answer may be more painful than drinking a bucket full of MMA.
 

The Geek

Grand Master Geek
Staff member
Administrator
Premium Geek
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Messages
13,264
Reaction score
666
Location
Leeds, UK
Interesting points you have brought up though I don’t agree with you completely on all of them.

Damage sustained by the natural nail plate by excessive use of drills is the real issue here. It borders on criminal negligence and should be banned. Inexperienced or careless filing can also be as aggressive and should also be addressed
Personally, I couldn’t agree more with the statement that drills are so bad for the natural nail plate.
Whilst using a drill on product is a choice for the technician that is well educated with using drills, it is something that should never be used on a natural nail plate. Personally, I just don’t ever use them.
Careless filing can also do as much damage to the natural nail as you have pointed out.


Lets not be coy, NSS is a euphemism for Vietnamese
No way, no how. Though it may appear that all NSS's are of a particular nationality, it is not the case.
I know of countless Asian technicians that are perfectly top quality techs that should be admired and appreciated for their professionalism and I know just as many American and European techs (actually more) that do as much... if not more harm to the industry and their customers.
A NSS is a salon that creates nails that are not safe to wear, with application and sanitary techniques that leave everything to be desired.
It is not a nationality problem. Thinking it is will only cause more problems than solve.

We must educate ourselves and our clients, respect their time constraints of a bi-weekly appointment and address our pricing policy. Again we must ask ourselves; Why are droves of our clients going to Vietnamese salons? The answer may be more painful than drinking a bucket full of MMA.
This is a very important and volatile question/statement...
In my opinion, discount salons fill a massive gap in the marketplace.
Think of it like this:
If the only place anyone could ever have their hair coloured was at a mid to high range salon... only a relative portion of people would have their hair coloured.
If suddenly... some salons started opening up and doing it for half price (and half quality so to speak) then there would be a massive upsurge of people having their hair coloured.
Sure, some may leave the mid range market (those that were barely able to budget/receive perceived value for the service)... but some would leave the low range market once they formed an opinion on their quality or were able to budget more for their service.

If your customers can barely budget time and money on your service... and they do not identify the value in your service (i.e. they could care less if they are thick and ugly... just as long as they are long and red... they are the same to them) then those customers will be at risk to going to NSS's or discount salons.

The good news is that the more people have their nails done... the more people want them done. That is why there are almost more discount hairdressers/barbers then there are mid range and upper end hairdressers.

Food for thought anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top