# Help! Massive nose&cheek pores!



## tearsindecember (Apr 2, 2008)

Okay so I have huge pores  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 .. and i loathe them. Help me! How do I minimize them to the point of nonexsistent? I'll do anything at this point!

Thanks in advance!


----------



## averiejuli (Apr 2, 2008)

I have the same problem-sure hope someone responds to this!!! I could use this advice as well


----------



## Brittni (Apr 2, 2008)

I'm curious, too. Mine aren't that bad but it bothers me that I even have any, lol.


----------



## stacylynne (Apr 2, 2008)

I have big pores also. There is nothing that shrinks pores, any dermatogist will tell you that.

For special occasions such as an event or a wedding that you have to attend; I personally use Smashbox Photo Finish after I moisterize & before I apply my foundation. But please, special Occasions only.
This gives me a nice flawless look & it does make my pores appear smaller.
Hope this helps. Let me know how this works for you


----------



## xtiffineyx (Apr 2, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *stacylynne* 

 
_I have big pores also. There is nothing that shrinks pores, any dermatogist will tell you that.

For special occasions such as an event or a wedding that you have to attend; I personally use Smashbox Photo Finish after I moisterize & before I apply my foundation. But please, special Occasions only.
This gives me a nice flawless look & it does make my pores appear smaller.
Hope this helps. Let me know how this works for you_

 
Why only special occasions only? Because it's so expensive? Just curious...

I have large pores around my nose & I was going to buy the smashbox, but I found the thread on the Monistat Chaffing relief gel, and I've been using that. It actually minimizes their appearance (since nothing will actually shrink them) and it's cheap.


----------



## sweetie0716 (Apr 2, 2008)

I also have this problem
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Can't wait to see everyones tips on this!


----------



## Honey B. Fly (Apr 2, 2008)

*i had this prob on my nose & cheeks and didn't want to just cover them up. i tryed biores pore clearing astrigent and freaking fell in LOVE, my pores shrunk almost 90% in about 10 days of using it 2-3 times a day. im so happy i bought it, it wont kill ur bank account either.

i always use it right away after a shower, the steam opens up ur pores so much so the astrigent soaks right into them, i know thats what helped the most.*


----------



## tearsindecember (Apr 2, 2008)

Killjoy.. i didnt know id be stuck with these things forever! It makes me want to cry! haha..

I have photofinish.. but it seems to break me out.. (which I'm guessing is why you say only on special occasions!)

Feel blessed girls with invisible pores!


----------



## tearsindecember (Apr 2, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *Honey B. Fly* 

 
_*i had this prob on my nose & cheeks and didn't want to just cover them up. i tryed biores pore clearing astrigent and freaking fell in LOVE, my pores shrunk almost 90% in about 10 days of using it 2-3 times a day. im so happy i bought it, it wont kill ur bank account either.

i always use it right away after a shower, the steam opens up ur pores so much so the astrigent soaks right into them, i know thats what helped the most.*_

 

I freaking LOVE you! Thanks so much! I'm buying this tomorrow! lol


----------



## TamEva Le Fay (Apr 2, 2008)

Ahhhhhhh! Pore minimizing.

The endless quest. Well this is what you need – DMAE ( Dimethylaminoethanol). DMAE has powerful anti-inflammatory activity. This stuff is amazing. These large pores can actually absorb makeup/foundation making the pores to appear pitted. 

When DMAE is applied daily, even people with the largest pores will develop a porcelain-like appearance to their skin within a matter of weeks! Also, try Alpha Lipoic Acid. They have Alpha Lipoic Acid/DMAE combo creams out there that you can use topically. I’ve bought mine at a drugstore (Walgreens/Longs) Great for scars – acne or post-surgical according to some studies. 
I take Alpha Lipoic Acid as a supplement to assist in destroying any free radicals that are hanging around eating up/breaking down all of my healthy collagen that’s needed to allow my skin to look vibrant and not sag. 
If I can impress this principle onto any of you Brothers & Sisters in the Beauty Community it is this: *PROTECT YOUR NATURAL COLLAGEN AT ANY MEANS POSSIBLE, DO IT NOW, DO IT EARLY!* I don’t care how you do it, do the research involved in this principle. We could go on and on for hours on how do this. 
I would strongly urge anyone interested in beautiful skin to go out and get any of the books by Dr. Nicholas Perricone, M.D. – _The Perricone Prescription_, _The Wrinkle Cure_, and, of course, the ever fabulous, _The Acne Prescription. _Run, do not walk to get these valuable books. They’ll tell you everything you ever wanted to know about reversing skin damage due to aging and environment…but were afraid to ask! www.nvperriconemd.com 

Also, Try get some products that have both Glycolic Acid & Salicylic Acids in them. Toners, Toners, Toners! Any products out there that act as a kind of *Micro-Dermabrasion.* Which, in and of itself, is a wonderful way to minimize the pores*.* Also topical Vitamin C can be helpful as well. 

Please be careful with these types of acid products when using them because they can irritate the skin. After all - that is the name of the game here. If you are unsure how to use these products and unsure of how your skin would react to such products please ask a *Dermatologist*! 
There also a number of things in your refrigerator that may be of assistance when applied to the skin as well like tomatoes, yogurt, milk, lemon juice. These foods have natural acids in them that work wonders on the skin. The idea is to peel away the uppermost dermal layers, and, especially, all the dead skin cells that are just sitting on your skin making your skin look dull and/or clogging the pores. 
I would also suggest taking a closer look at your diet as well, especially, oily foods & sugar - they wreak havoc on the pores and skin. If you’re able to add Esther C / Vitamin C to your supplemental diet if you don’t think you’re getting enough of it in your natural diet. I swear by it. 
Oh, we could really go on for days here. Get the books, do the research you won’t be sorry.


----------



## spectrolite (Apr 10, 2008)

I think TamEva is preaching the truth! My skin's been looking extra gorgeous lately and I've been trying to think of what I've been doing differently for this miraculous change to have occurred. I've been taking silica tablets and recently I've started using pH Advantage pigmentation fader which is 10% Glycolic acid. I have noticed that my visible pores have significantly been reduced. They have not vanished entirely but they have reduced enough for me to notice they have reduced. I'm very pleased and my skin has _never_ looked better! So far there has been no skin irritation but my skin is not very sensitive. I just ensure to wear Prep + Prime spf 50 every day since the formulation leaves the skin vulnerable.


----------



## simplyeloquence (Apr 10, 2008)

try using Dermologica- Pre Cleanse, Daily Microfoliant, Medi-Bac cleanser products there made for all types of skin and are fda approved also you an use MD Forte by prescription it works wonders... what i do i usally get a facial once a week follow with the dermologica


----------



## ratmist (Apr 10, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_I would strongly urge anyone interested in beautiful skin to go out and get any of the books by Dr. Nicholas Perricone, M.D. – The Perricone Prescription, The Wrinkle Cure, and, of course, the ever fabulous, The Acne Prescription. Run, do not walk to get these valuable books. They’ll tell you everything you ever wanted to know about reversing skin damage due to aging and environment…but were afraid to ask! www.nvperriconemd.com_

 
Sorry, *Perricone is a quack*, and a rich one at that.  Do yourselves a favor, Specktra-ites, and look up these so-called doctors before you line their pockets with your hard-earned cash.

A Skeptical View of the Perricone Prescription

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_There also a number of things in your refrigerator that may be of assistance when applied to the skin as well like tomatoes, yogurt, milk, lemon juice. These foods have natural acids in them that work wonders on the skin. The idea is to peel away the uppermost dermal layers, and, especially, all the dead skin cells that are just sitting on your skin making your skin look dull and/or clogging the pores. 

I would also suggest taking a closer look at your diet as well, especially, oily foods & sugar - they wreak havoc on the pores and skin. If you’re able to add Esther C / Vitamin C to your supplemental diet if you don’t think you’re getting enough of it in your natural diet. I swear by it. 
Oh, we could really go on for days here. Get the books, do the research you won’t be sorry. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



_

 
With respect, there's almost no scientific basis for what you've just said.  To give you examples of what I mean, below are *statements from Perricone in bold black*, with *responses from Dr Harriet Hall and Dr Stephen Barrett of Quackwatch.org in orange.*


*Substances like olive oil "penetrate, strengthen, and   refresh your skin cells."* *[What do "strengthening"   and "refreshing "your skin cells mean?]* 
*You look puffy the morning after eating Chinese food because   of an inflammatory response to what you ate.* *[Any puffiness would probably be because the salt and MSG caused the body   to temporarily retain water.]* 
*When you are mildly dehydrated your metabolism drops and   you gain weight.* *[Actually, dehydration usually decreases appetite   and results in weight loss.] * 
*The Perricone program works by a synergy between diet, supplements,   skin care, and exercise. [Synergy means the combination works   better than the sum of the individual components. There are no   published data comparing the combination with   each factor alone or with other combinations.]* 
*Slow, steady release of insulin into our bloodstream keeps   us younger. **[He doesn't indicate how he thinks this could be   measured. It can't.] * 
*Sugar makes the insulin receptors on the cells burn out.* *[Untrue]* 
*The contemporary American diet rarely contains enough protein.     [Untrue. Americans tend to consume more protein than they need.] * 
*DMAE is your magic bullet for great skin tone. [A PubMed   search shows only one small study that showed an effect of topical   DMAE on skin [14]]* 
*There are probably unidentified components of salmon that   promote health and slow aging.**[This possible, but   he has no basis for saying it is probable.]* 
*Salmon improves manic-depressive patients who don't respond   to medication. [He mentions a study but doesn't give a citation   for it, and it is not listed in PubMed.]* 
*Socrates prescribed olive oil for various diseases.* *[So what?] * 
*Olive trees live for centuries and re-grow after being cut   to the ground. [Implied benefits from olive oil for human longevity   by magical analogy.] * 
*Adults should limit milk intake because they may have   lactose intolerance or allergies. [It would make far more sense   to base an individual decision on whether the individual actually is intolerant.] * 
*Alcohol is bad, so hard liquor is bad, but wine is OK. [A   glass of wine and a shot of whiskey contain approximately the   same amount of alcohol.] * 
*Avoid tap water; drink spring water. [Bottled water is not   tested as thoroughly as public water supplies and many brands   fail to meet tap water standards. Several surveys have found    more contaminants, bacteria, etc. in some bottled waters than   in tap water. Tap water is generally safer.] * 
*Spring water flushes toxins from the body. [What toxins?   What difference does it make whether it's spring water or other   fluids?]* 
*Everyone needs 8-10 glasses of water a day.** [A comparison   of two diets, one with and one without plain water, showed no   difference in hydration whether water was supplied by plain water   or other beverages [15]].* 
*The same substances work on the central nervous system and   the skin. [A personal observation, not otherwise supported. He   theorizes that the nervous stem and skin are alike because they   originated in the same one of three cell layers of the early   embryo.]* 
*Vitamin C deficiency causes wrinkles. [Untrue.  Sun exposure and tobacco   use are the only recognized factors known to cause wrinkles.]* 
*Growth hormone is the true "youth hormone." [Only   in the sense that it helps youths grow into adults!]* 
*Coffee causes weight gain, while tea cause weight loss.* *[Neither is correct.] * 
*Lack of essential fatty acids can cause miscarriage.* *[A PubMed   search for fatty acids and miscarriage showed only one study   in the blue fox; it showed just the opposite—that supplementing   the diet with essential fatty acids in the form of evening primrose   oil increased the rate of miscarriage.]* 
*Alpha-lipoic acid is an anti-aging drug. [There are no known   anti-aging drugs.]* 
Do the research, indeed.


----------



## ratmist (Apr 10, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *tearsindecember* 

 
_Okay so I have huge pores  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 .. and i loathe them. Help me! How do I minimize them to the point of nonexsistent? I'll do anything at this point!

Thanks in advance!_

 
I have huge pores on my nose.  I despise them.  

Every dermatologist will tell you that large pores are inherited and there's absolutely nothing you can do to tighten them up permanently.  Anyone else telling you anything else is looking to part you from your cash and sell you a load of bull.

Makeup *can* reduce the appearance though - but you have to give up the dream of actually possessing naturally poreless skin.  There's nothing wrong with having large pores, except that we think it's unsightly.  Dermatologically though, the skin is normal.  

The only methods that work up to 8 hours a day for me are as follows:

Silicone-based primer that goes under foundation/concealer.  The primer provides a "filler" on the surface of the pores and allows the foundation/concealer to slide on and usually stay on longer.  The idea is that it gives an unbroken top-surface before you apply the makeup. Sometimes my skin reacts badly to to silicone though.  Shop around and get samples of stuff before you buy, because primers tend to be very expensive.  Use Makeupalley - Street Smart Beauty - Homepage for anecdotal advice on Primers. 
During the day, I touch-up as necessary.  I use Chanel's Vitalumiere compact at the moment, and it has silicone in it too.  This reduces the appearance of my pores quite well.  It's my current Holy Grail foundation! 
If I'm greasy, the grease usually gets through the silicone base and the makeup slides off, leaving my giant pores for all to see.  There's no point touching-up if I've already got makeup on but have turned into a greaseball during the day.  I use translucent ricepapers to soak up grease without disturbing the makeup, or I use Dr Feelgood from BeneFit.  You have to be _extremely _sparing with Dr Feelgood on top of makeup though or you will get a nasty pilling effect.  Dab it on, do not smear or drag the product with the included sponge.  Touch-up your makeup after you deal with the grease, if you need to.


----------



## TamEva Le Fay (Apr 10, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *ratmist* 

 
_Sorry, *Perricone is a quack*, and a rich one at that. Do yourselves a favor, Specktra-ites, and look up these so-called doctors before you line their pockets with your hard-earned cash.

A Skeptical View of the Perricone Prescription

Do the research, indeed._

 

Oh Dear! The Debunking Squad has arrived, …and just in the nick-of-time! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Oh we had such a laugh over the refutation! I knew, I just knew - that I should have put some kind of disclaimer on my 2 cents worth of advice, but I didn’t. Rats!

With respect – It seems, it is important for you to know, that while, even though, I work for a Dermatologist, I do not work _for_, nor am I affiliated _with_ Dr. Nicholas Perricone M.D. I have met Dr. Perricone, briefly, here in San Francisco at the Dermatological Convention while attending his seminars. 
I can assure you I’m am no more interested in advising anyone to throw away their hard earned money, as I am in giving anyone bad advice! But to go so far as to call someone a “Quack” is pretty _strong stuff_.

Especially, if you are basing it off a website called “Quackwatch”! 
I, usually, take a little pride in my appreciation for semantics. And based on the information you provided from, both, Dr.’s Harriet Hall & Stephen Barrett, I am left with the impression of a very bad case of sour grapes…I suppose? It, also, seems I’m not the only one who has a few questions for Dr. Barrett. 
Ahhhhh Bless ‘em! 

I want to premise this by saying that having worked for a Dermatologist for over 7 years, I have tried everything! I am always a willing guinea pig! From Skinceuticals to Jan Marini, Neocutis, La Roche-Posay, SkinMedica, Med Calia, MD Forte, Hide The Years, to Revision – you name it – if we’ve ever gotten it in…I’ve tried it!

I, personally, adore Dr. Perricones products, a line we do not carry, I might add. I’ve been using certain specific things of his for years – relating to undereye areas. They’re worth every penny to me. Mind you the only reason why I would’ve even known about the benefits of his products is by attending the Derm Convention a few years ago in which we were given generous samples in the kits provided by him in a cute little Dr’s Bag. I speak, only, from my own experience in applying just some of the most basic principles he outlines. Which he himself, admittedly, cannot take credit for!

What I do credit him for - is having the where-with-all to provide one with a fair resource of info on this subject in a few books. Which I can almost steak my life on – you may procure by going to your local library for free!

I do credit him for bringing to my awareness of things like retinoids, DMAE, and all things Anti-inflammatory. Funny thing, though, he didn’t invent any of these things. He did, on the other hand, allow me to be more informed of this subject matter. What I chose to do with this info was entirely up to me! 
This here is Dr. Barrett’s Overview of Dr. Perricone:

_Dr. Perricone has mixed a pinch of science with a gallon of imagination to create an elaborate, time-consuming, expensive, prescription for a healthy life and younger skin. There is no reason to think his program is more effective than standard measures. Although some of his advice is standard, most of his recommendations are based on speculation and fanciful interpretation of selected medical literature. He makes lots of money by convincing patients and consumers, but he hasn't succeeded in convincing critical thinkers, doctors, scientists, or anyone who wants to see hard evidence. Perricone's "prescription" isn't science; it's creative salesmanship._

Ohhhh Brother…really now? How predictable is that?!
Some of the comments from both Dr’s. Barrett & Hall seem somewhat like remedial criticisms typically resounded in the likes of _what, huh,_ and _duh!_ To say nothing of Dr. Hall’s _informal _polls and studies. 
Dr. Perricone states, quite upfront, that his publications are resources of information *only*. He also mentions that the information in his books should *never* be considered a substitute for the advice of a qualified medical professional.

I refuse to insult anyone’s intelligence here because, after all, knowledge is power! I apologize if I’m giving anyone the impression that I’m defending Dr. Perricone, he certainly doesn’t need it, but to call someone a “Quack” is _irresponsible research_.

Ratmist…I surely hope that isn’t your idea of doing the research? Have you ever even flipped through one of his books in a store simply to see how he presents the info? Or did Dr. Barrett brainwash you into thinking his books are only worthy of book burning parties? Hmmmmm?

I find it ironic that you’ve highlighted/pointed out my very own personal regimen, _not in Perricone’s book_, of cupboard/poorgirls tricks in helping skin look its best _on a dime_ as in having no scientific basis. 
Why, naturally, of course, because these are remedies taken straight out of my own “Witches Bible” from the chapter entitled “_How to use a little common sense and look Be-witching while doing it!_”
That I believe is self-explanatory considering I merely suggested using foods on your face to brighten a complexion based on – oh now you’re going to make me say it…(and it’s soooo un PC here)…”Old-Wives Tales”

I must be careful now – or I’ll be burned-at-the-stake for suggesting teabags or cucumbers on the eyes for - you guessed it…PUFFINESS, or, at the very least, for not providing a scientific citation for it!

Yeeeeeeesss Kids, please - by all means, take things with a grain of salt(_scrub_)! Question authority! Rail against conventional and unconventional wisdom of all kinds! _Good Grief!_ 

Sorry Darling…you’re going to have to do better than the likes of Dr. Stephen Barrett.

_Smooches, 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_
TamEva

*P.S.* I wouldn’t recommend simply, and solely, covering up the situation with makeup in hopes to disguise the issue. Yes, while it’s true that some people have a genetic disposition to have overly oily skin that will enhance and promote enlarged pores. Just as some of us have a genetic disposition to develop more *wrinkles* prematurely, that too, is considered “normal”. There isn’t anything you can tell me - that will make me *not* want to do something about it! Never-the-less that there’s *nothing* that _can_ be done about it! 

It’s untrue that there’s nothing that can be done to improve their appearance with the aid of modern treatments like retinoids. I feel, based on my own experience, that you can alleviate the appearance of enlarged pores with retinoids and Microderm-abrasion for sure. You have to understand the issue more fully before you can simply say “any” Dermatologist will tell you - that you *can’t* minimize the appearance of enlarged pores. I mean - really understand it. It is not the pores you are trying to _shrink_ - it is the skin around the pores that need the assistance in resurfacing - making it less likely for excess oils and debris to be trapped and to stretch the pores unnecessarily..

With respect, you sound just like Dr. Barret when you state _“Anyone else telling you anything else is looking to part you from your cash and sell you a load of bull.” _
There’s a world of difference between “poreless” skin, as you state, and a smooth, youthful, healthy looking skin that doesn’t appear damaged. To use a silicone to spackle the issue _underneath_ a makeup is a recipe for disaster and unbeknownst to you – you are making your pores worse. *You must, at the very least, agree that you should do more - than just - cover it up! *

*P.S.S.* _Don’t forget your friendly donation to Quackwatch!_





 Hmmmm?
Payment by check or money order can also be sent directly to:
Quackwatch
Chatham Crossing, Suite 107/208
11312 U.S. 15-501 North
Chapel Hill, NC 27517.
(I *do not* work _for_, *nor *am I affiliated _with QUACKWATCH!!!) _


----------



## ratmist (Apr 11, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_With respect – It seems, it is important for you to know, that while, even though, I work for a Dermatologist, I do not work for, nor am I affiliated with Dr. Nicholas Perricone M.D. I have met Dr. Perricone, briefly, here in San Francisco at the Dermatological Convention while attending his seminars. 
I can assure you I’m am no more interested in advising anyone to throw away their hard earned money, as I am in giving anyone bad advice! But to go so far as to call someone a “Quack” is pretty strong stuff._

 
I didn't take issue with you, I took issue with the idea that everything Perricone was saying is worth rushing out for and buying immediately.  I couldn't care less about where you work or for whom you work.

As for calling Perricone a quack, I still stand by the remark, and not just because of Quackwatch, which I find to be in infinitely resourceful site because it seeks to educate us to make better decisions about our health and our wealth.  At no point has the site - or myself - advocated book burning, for goodness sake.  I do advocate a healthy dose of skepticism before looking for "cures" from the beauty industry.

If a doctor is selling products on the basis of "scientific research", which he or she says they have completed, I should at the very least be able to find their research on PubMed searches.  I should be able to corroborate their evidence with simple searches on PubMed.  Very often, I can do neither with Perricone.  *That's bad science, the very essence of quackery.  *Perricone can't have it both ways, in my opinion. He can't on the one hand say "this is just for your information" and then stand on his medical laurels as though he is an expert, and offer you beauty creams and medical advice. It's disingenuous.

I felt others in this thread should know about the possibility that they could be wasting their money on his products and books.  If that bothers you, then perhaps you should examine why you are so keen to defend him.  After all, you were advocating consumer education.  What's so bad about highlighting the other side of the coin - the fact that maybe the products aren't all they're hyped up to be?

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_Especially, if you are basing it off a website called “Quackwatch”!  I, usually, take a little pride in my appreciation for semantics. And based on the information you provided from, both, Dr.’s Harriet Hall & Stephen Barrett, I am left with the impression of a very bad case of sour grapes…I suppose? It, also, seems I’m not the only one who has a few questions for Dr. Barrett.  Ahhhhh Bless ‘em!_

 
Do a bit more research and perhaps you'll get some answers as to who Dr Barrett is, and what Quackwatch is about.  There are plenty of information links on the site.

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_I do credit him for bringing to my awareness of things like retinoids, DMAE, and all things Anti-inflammatory. Funny thing, though, he didn’t invent any of these things. He did, on the other hand, allow me to be more informed of this subject matter. What I chose to do with this info was entirely up to me! _

 
Great.  So he gave you some information, but did you examine that information any further, or just take his word for it?  I'm a natural skeptic, inclined not to do that.

So, if you had looked up the scientific research on DMAE using a simple PubMed search at the time Barrett and Hall wrote their page, there was only one small Belgium study (published 2002) comprised of 30 volunteers which sought to measure the effects of DMAE on the face.  They found that DMAE formulation at 3% increased firmness.  While those results may be valid, I would not put my health and wealth at risk on the basis of just 30 volunteers.  Yet that was exactly what Perricone was asking us to do at that time.

Looking again, there is a recent (2007) study published in the British Journal of Dermatology about DMAE, which shows  more information is needed about the effects of DMAE. (IngentaConnect The antiwrinkle effect of topical concentrated 2-dimethylaminoeth...)  I've reproduced part of the conclusions from the research below; since you work for a dermatologist, I'm assuming you can get access to this journal as well.
 In particular, "To our knowledge, no information is available
 on the systemic absorption of DMAE, but animal toxicology
 data for triethanolamine suggest efficient transdermal absorption,
 low systemic toxicity or carcinogenicity, rapid elimination
 in urine and ‘cloudy swelling’ (which may be synonymous
 with koilocytosis) in liver and renal tubule cells at high doses.4
 Diethanolamine, also commonly used in cosmetic formulations
 (1–25%), caused fetal wastage, decreased mitosis and increased
 apoptosis in fetal brain tissue when applied to the skin of pregnant
 mice.19 *The vacuolar cytopathology induced by concentrated**
 organic amines and its consequences (mitotic arrest,
 inhibition of the secretory pathway, minor cytotoxicity) may
 not be dissociable from the improvement of the skin appearance
** that is rapidly produced by topically administered DMAE.*" (emphasis mine)
​This may mean that DMAE is safe enough, but there are plenty of us on Specktra that tend to avoid as many chemicals as possible when using cosmetics.  Furthermore, a lot of us are animal-rights activists.  DMAE has been directly developed from animal studies.  The 2007 study I quote above uses rabbits, white mice and human tissue to measure the effects of DMAE.  Some of us would object to paying money towards that kind of research, no matter what the benefits are.  

Furthermore, the information about the fetal mice indicates that DMAE should probably be avoided by pregnant women entirely, at least until it is shown to be absolutely safe for pregnant humans.

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_Ratmist…I surely hope that isn’t your idea of doing the research? Have you ever even flipped through one of his books in a store simply to see how he presents the info? Or did Dr. Barrett brainwash you into thinking his books are only worthy of book burning parties? Hmmmmm?_

 
I am a scientist and a researcher.  A small 15 minute sample of my researching ability is reproduced above.  And again, no one was advocating book burning, merely a healthy dose of skepticism, which rarely does any harm to anyone.

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_I find it ironic that you’ve highlighted/pointed out my very own personal regimen, not in Perricone’s book, of cupboard/poorgirls tricks in helping skin look its best on a dime as in having no scientific basis. 
Why, naturally, of course, because these are remedies taken straight out of my own “Witches Bible” from the chapter entitled “How to use a little common sense and look Be-witching while doing it!”
That I believe is self-explanatory considering I merely suggested using foods on your face to brighten a complexion based on – oh now you’re going to make me say it…(and it’s soooo un PC here)…”Old-Wives Tales”

I must be careful now – or I’ll be burned-at-the-stake for suggesting teabags or cucumbers on the eyes for - you guessed it…PUFFINESS, or, at the very least, for not providing a scientific citation for it!_

 
All I advocated was a bit of scientific research that debunks a lot of the nonsense offered as sound scientifically-based advice.  If that offends you, you might want to ask yourself why.  

I use a lot of simple remedies because I am a self-confessed cheapskate.  I also know that using, for example, honey on my skin as a simple face wash, isn't going to cause me serious problems or affect the ability of my skin cells to reproduce (mitotic arrest) or give my skill cells any level of cytotoxicity. Same goes for an aspirin face mask.  In general, "witches" remedies are utterly harmless, relatively cheap, and often do work quite well.  I do not know that is true of DMAE, for example.  

I am quite skeptical of anyone telling me that by changing my diet drastically I will receive huge benefits to my skin.  The causal relationship between diet and skin is not well defined and varies from person to person.  Hence, I am quite adverse to hearing people tell me (or anyone else) what they should and should not eat in order to have healthy, clear, enviably beautiful skin.  The science doesn't back it up, and even well meaning advice can be dangerous.

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_*P.S.* I wouldn’t recommend simply, and solely, covering up the situation with makeup in hopes to disguise the issue. Yes, while it’s true that some people have a genetic disposition to have overly oily skin that will enhance and promote enlarged pores. Just as some of us have a genetic disposition to develop more *wrinkles* prematurely, that too, is considered “normal”. There isn’t anything you can tell me - that will make me *not* want to do something about it! Never-the-less that there’s *nothing* that can be done about it! _

 
Do what your money and time what you want.  *shrug*  But that doesn't mean I am wrong to point out an alternative opinion about what can be done about the appearance of wrinkles, fine lines, enlarged pores, oiliness, etc., one that is supported by others in the medical field.  Others on the site may find it valuable to hear the other side of the argument, you know? 

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_There’s a world of difference between “poreless” skin, as you state, and a smooth, youthful, healthy looking skin that doesn’t appear damaged. To use a silicone to spackle the issue underneath a makeup is a recipe for disaster and unbeknownst to you – you are making your pores worse. *You must, at the very least, agree that you should do more - than just - cover it up! *_

 
First, poreless was meant in a sarcastic tone.  But it's fun to jump on a single word in my previous post and make it sound like I'm an idiot, right?  

As far as silicone goes, many products on the market contain silicone, from shampoo/conditioner to makeup itself, to almost every type of toiletry on the market.  It is a safe additive, even if a lot of people are now objecting to it.

My pores are absolutely fine, thanks.  The oiliness and the enlarged pores are normal, even if I find it unsightly.  My regime above did not include my cleansing routine because I did not feel it was necessary to include it.  Everyone has a very personalised cleansing routine dependant on what they feel works for them.  There was no point telling what works for me as far as cleansing goes - which does include microderm abrasion, face masks, moisturisers, foaming cleansers, etc.  My skin may behave very differently from the OP, so there was no point going into the cleansing routine.  The only thing I have in common with the OP, as far as I'm aware, is the fact that we both have large pores we do not like, and would like to do something about it.

Enlarged pores can be temporarily tightened (the skin around it, yes), but these are temporary measures, not permanent.  The OP seemed to be looking for a *permanent *solution.  I merely stated that *there is none*.  That is still the absolute fundamental truth of the matter.  Some people prefer not to go for the temporary solutions of the type you advocate because they are expensive, time-consuming, and potentially quite harmful to the health.  Therefore, "covering up" solutions (makeup) is an acceptable, safe alternative that can yield in a consistent manner the results we're after, and the whole reason why I would think we both ended up on Specktra in the first place.

That may cause you severe distress and anxiety because to you, there's plenty of help and solutions from a dermatology point of view.  From what I've seen and read however, like so much in the beauty industry, it's all an illusion.


----------



## ratmist (Apr 11, 2008)

Since you called my research skills into question, I thought I'd just take a few of your statements and look into them more carefully.

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_"Well this is what you need – DMAE ( Dimethylaminoethanol). DMAE has powerful anti-inflammatory activity."_

 
This is not supported in the literature outside of Perricone's exagerrations.
"In vitro studies in peripheral blood lymphocytes indicate that DMAE is a *moderately active* anti-inflammatory agent. [...] Thus, the benefits of DMAE in dermatology include a *potential anti-inflammatory effect* and a documented increase in skin firmness with possible improvement in underlying facial muscle tone. Studies are needed to evaluate the relative efficacy of DMAE compared with other skin-care regimens (e.g., topical antioxidant creams, [alpha]-hydroxy acids)." 1 (emphasis mine)  ​In other words, other treatments may be just as effective, but we do not know yet because very few studies have compared it against other available treatments.

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_ "When DMAE is applied daily, even people with the largest pores will develop a porcelain-like appearance to their skin within a matter of weeks!"_

 
This is an exaggeration at best, and pure fantasy at worst.  There is no clinical evidence citing if DMAE works for enlarged pores, and the trials do not support any statement such as "porcelain-like appearance".  

The Textbook of Cosmetic Dermatology (3rd Edition 2004) has a chapter on DMAE and notes a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled safety trial of 156 women, between the ages of 35 and 60, who had Fitzpatrick skin phototype I - III, with a skin appearance level between 3 - 6 (0 = no visible aging signs, 9 = severe signs of skin aging).  Fitzpatrick skin phototypes I - III are described as:  Type 1 (scores 0-7) White/Subject to sunburn, Type 2 (scores 8-16) Tan/Capable of tanning, Type 3 (scores 17-25) Dark/Capable of tanning.  

Quelle surprise, this test didn't include our lovely darker Women of Colour.  I guess they don't need the treatment, but more likely they're not in the target group of consumers.

The visible improvements were ranked by a dermatologist or evaluator on a scale from 0 - 9 (0 = no visible aging signs, 9 = severe signs of skin aging) during six consecutive visits at baseline and at weeks 2, 4, 6, 12, 16 and 18.  Treatments were stopped at week 16 to see how the skin would react.  The women themselves were at baselines between 3 - 6 before treatment began.  A dermatologist ranked the skin improvements from 0 - 9 as well and reported the statistical confidence levels for each skin parameter tested.

Of the 9 skin parameters tested over a one month period, six parameters came back statistically reinforced by Day 29.  These are:  "visible improvements to forehead lines, wrinkles around the eyes, cheek firmness, nasolabial fold appearance, perioral wrinkles, and increased firmness of the skin in the jaw area."2 

There was no mention of tightening of pores, or what the treatment offers to people seeking specifically to tighten pores.  Furthermore, the age group mentioned is between 10 and 35 years older than me.  I do not know how old the OP is, or any of othe other posters who were interested in seeing a reply.  The point is, DMAE may not work for them if they're actually not in the target skin-aging group.  The benefits may be very slight or non-existent for younger skin because in general, younger skin needs less "help" in elasticity or dermal "thickness", which is what DMAE really targets through the mechanical vacuolisation process.

The improvement levels are definitely not magical though.  At the Day 29 stage of using the product, they range from a dermatologist rank level of 3.26 (puffiness under eye at Day 29 was not statistically significant; only at Day 15 was Puffiness under the Eye shown to be statistically significant (p<0.01) with an overall dermatological rank of 4.45 out of 9) to 7.00 (between Day 4 and Day 29 the rank for firmness in the cheek fold area ranged from a dermatological rank between 6.81 and 7.11, ending at 7.00, at a statistically significant confidence level of p<0.01).  The average dermatological rank for the statistically significant at p<0.05 or better confidence level was approximately 5.94.  This means out of a scale of 0 to 9 for visible skin improvement, you may see an average improvement rank of almost level 6 depending on what area of the face you're looking at.

Bottom line, it is not a miracle product, though it can give some signs of improvement for the majority of users who have mild signs of aging (between 3 - 6), are between the ages of 35 and 60, and probably not very dark-toned in skin.  Exaggeration of effectiveness usually just leads to disappointment.  You could say I'm just taking issue with your tone, I suppose.  I think I'm just taking issue with the idea that anything is a sure-shot "cure" on the market today for something as simple as enlarged pores.

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_I feel, based on my own experience, that you can alleviate the appearance of enlarged pores with retinoids and Microderm-abrasion for sure._

 
That's a fair statement to make in the capacity of a consumer.  However, retinoids and microderm-abrasion (MDA) may not work for everyone, especially people that have darker skin, even if you saw satisfactory improvement to your own pores.  Those with roseacea or acne (if it's inflamed) are to be discouraged from MDA entirely, and those with darker skin can have hyperpigmentation problems.

Hernandez-Perez and Ibiett evaluated seven women with oily thick skin, dilated pores, and wrinkles for clinical improvement after five MDA sessions at weekly intervals. The women had moderate or severe dilated pores, which is the central topic of concern here.  They showed moderate to good improvement over a five week period, comprising just five sessions.3  This is a very small study and did not include treatments using retinoids.

1.  Grossman, Rachel.  2005.  "The Role of Dimethylaminoethanol in Cosmetic Dermatology". American Journal of Clinical Dermatology. 6(1):39-47.

2.  Cole, Curtis and Bertin, Christiane.  2004.  "Dimethylaminoethanol: a new skin-care ingredient for aging skin".  In Baran, Robert and Maibach, Howard (eds), "Textbook of Cosmetic Dermatology, Third Edition".  London, Taylor & Francis, 95 - 102.

3.  Hernandez-Perez E, Ibiett EV. "Gross and microscopic findings in patients undergoing microdermabrasion for facial rejuvenation."  Dermatol Surg 2001;27:637–40.


----------



## Kuuipo (Apr 11, 2008)

I have read all Perricones books. They quack like ducks (I am a medical professional with one of my degrees in Bio/chem). 
A few years ago he was promoting face lift effects by his diet of eating salmon three times a day, every day. He had Bruce Willis and Demi Moore on the diet. 
There really is no holy grail, but if it makes a psychological difference and you really believe a certain cream or supplement will work, it may have beneficial effects. (We call it the Placebo effect)


----------



## kokometro (Apr 11, 2008)

This thread is intersting but sort of mind blowing. 

Just throwing a product recommendation in. I like Cargo's Blu ray primer.
It does a good job on masking enlarged pores.  I like it better than the slicky smashbox primer myself. Even though the Smashbox is awesome and looks awesome, it gives me horrible milia. I don't have that issue with Cargo Blu ray.


I also read that talc is an ingrediant that is large and settles into pores and can make them larger. 

Many mineral makeups don't have talc.  I'm bummed because Mac's do. The talc is what binds them into the dome so they aren't lose. Even their new Mineral makeup coming out has Talc. Bummer. I don't need to make an already problem area worse. 

I am using Renova currently and am seeing a little improvement. I just started though.


----------



## elegant-one (Apr 11, 2008)

Well, without all the technical speak - I switched to using Dr. Perricones cleanser & it actually does appear to shrink the pores. It clears the skin & makes it look much better - glass-like. I am using it randomly with Chanel purifying line which also makes the pores appear smaller & my skin like glass.

Many have found actual visual results using Perricone products! To say that the product does not produce a porcelain-like appearance is not truthful. I've used it for years now - & thats exactly how it makes my skin look. You don't have to be a scientist to see the difference when you use it. And, I have no affiliation with anyone. I'm just saying that I used it & thats exactly what it did.

Also, nice finely milled matte powders help your skin to look smooth.

Also used The Wave by Neutrogena to gently exfoliate - its awesome! There is a thread about it. It will help your pores too.

So I guess thats all we really want isn't it???


----------



## frocher (Apr 11, 2008)

....


----------



## Girl about town (Apr 11, 2008)

clinique do a great product called intant perfector, its ore of a quick fix but works great, you put it on over or under make up in areas with large pores and it disguises them.


----------



## elegant-one (Apr 11, 2008)

I forgot..

Estee Lauder Idealist - pore minimizer - excellent! Yes, its like a quick fix too.

Go pick up a sample & see if it works for you.


----------



## mindlessgapgirl (Apr 12, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *stacylynne* 

 
_For special occasions such as an event or a wedding that you have to attend; I personally use Smashbox Photo Finish after I moisterize & before I apply my foundation. But please, special Occasions only._

 
why? I use it everyday and it's made a huge difference in the way my skin looks. I wouldn't go back to NOT using it...and it isn't harming my skin at all so I don't see why someone else couldn't use it all the time (obviously make sure you wash it off at night though!)


----------



## TamEva Le Fay (Apr 12, 2008)

First, I want to apologize to anyone brave enough to read this whole diatribe! TamEva was never to one to sit idly by and allow her good intentions to be tainted by _pseudo-know-it-alls _who do nothing but take redundant quotes from the research of others to make a mute point, which ultimately end with same thought – *“Don’t knock it till you’ve tried it!”* 

I’m going to give this up to you in the spirit of compromise shall we say. I will admit to you *all* that - Dr. Perricone has a tendency to overstate his claims…it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to observe that, especially when watching him in action! 
I will also admit that he has stepped on a few toes of many in the Dermatological & Scientific communities, with respect to how he has taken credit for some of his research. And, seeing as you, Ratmist, are in the field of Science and research I can appreciate and see your angle, quite clearly.

There was always a bone of contention, as to whether or not, he was touting himself as a _real_, legitimate Clinical Professor, or as an _Academic Professor in Dermatology_. I’m sure you, Ratmist, know the difference between the two, but to those who don’t - bottom line: an Academic Professor has more prestige in their given fields, and are recognized independently by other Academics in their field, due to their hands on experience in the their research and possible published works. 
Among other things, and there are many benefits to being seen as a respected Academic Professor, especially, at universities. There are also many cons to this as well, but that’s a whole other story!

In his books he states he is a *Former Assistant Clinical Professor* of Dermatology.
In this case what Dr Perricone had was a part-time teaching position with limited research responsibilities who invariably supervised students.

Be that as it may, it still doesn’t negate the fact the I’ve happened upon a resource of info that he has published that I have found helpful to myself. As a thinking adult I am able to distinguish what’s a clear sales pitch and what’s practical to my own health requirements.

Let me state this, though, to be fair, *had I not* mentioned Dr. Nicholas Perricone M.D. and his Books and had; _instead_, suggested using some miscellaneous Estee Lauder skin potion to remedy the appearance of the pores. Would you have gotten so uptight and demanded the science behind it? 

Or for that matter would we even be having this online discussion? 

For the record, (and surely you must be aware of this, because, _we are,_ in the Derm Field) - 
none of these Big Cosmetic Companies that provide us with of 80% of what is in our beauty cabinets are even, remotely, obligated to prove that it does what,_ *they claim*_ to us, it does, such as firming up the skin, tightening the pores, reducing fine lines, etc.,etc. 

(In my original post, I never mentioned his products *at all*, only his books, and in doing so, I also suggested doing the research, never stating this was the end of road in research) 

The reason I bring this up is the fact that 40% of the skin products suggested on this forum, MAC most definitely included, don’t have the wet blankets of skepticism thrown upon on it while cries for scientific citations are demanded and if not found – then it is assumed “quackery” is afoot! 

Again, as I stated, I am not, intentionally, trying to defend Dr. Perricone because he certainly does not need it, as he laughs all the way to the bank!

However, why does he get all the flack for trying to sell skincare products, and in addition, make an attempt to reason the science behind it with the books? The concepts he outlines are not new, in essence what he did was take a little research from here, a little from there and presented to us in a language somebody could possibly understand. Some will also argue that he never gave credit where credit was due except to the award winning Chef, Bernard Guillas,…but…hey - the world’s an unfair cruel place sometimes! What can you do?

You will never see companies like Estee Lauder under this same kind of scrutiny and skepticism. Is it only because he’s a Doctor that causes this kind of stigma and raises eyebrows.

Why is that?

Why, it’s a matter of fact that it’s considered a conflict of interest when a Dermatologist sells any kind of beauty products in their _own_ offices according The American Academy of Dermatology. They’ll have you believe that it’s an unethical thing to do so!

Why shouldn’t Perricone be given the same right to sell his products and be given the same consideration as the Estee Lauder Company would be given when choosing to use their skin products; responsibly, of course? 

Furthermore, why is it necessary for you to insult my intelligence and be sarcastic, as you did, when you quoted my original post. I would’ve never in a million years have pointed out in someone’s post, 
“_With respect, there's almost no scientific basis for what you've just said.”_ 
Especially, when suggesting simple harmless ways to exfoliate the skin.

Ratmist, you yourself just indicated, that you use honey to cleanse your face – and yet I was the one who couldn’t back up what I was saying with some scientific evidence?


No scientific basis? Well I’m the result of my own scientific experimentation. Years of it actually! I’ve concluded that when I eat sugary and oily foods, I feel like garbage and…_my skin looks like garbage!_ When I eat healthier foods without the unnecessary oils and sugars I feel better and…_my skin looks better!_ I do not need some other outside scientific data to quantify that conclusion. And, since I belong to the human race maybe others might be in my same position as well! Why would it be considered *“drastic”* to switch from eating poorly to say…more healthy?

What is it so harmful suggesting to someone…(and I quote myself here) “_To *take a closer look* at their diet”_ and “*If you’re able to*_ add Esther C / Vitamin C to your supplemental diet *if you don’t think* you’re getting enough of it in your natural diet.”_

_What’s really going on here? Must we all from now on, according to you - submit the science behind our recommendations when sharing on this forum? As much as I would like to it’s simply not going to happen in the real world is it?_ 

It is my hope, though, that people have an open mind when it comes to reading books on these topics. I really dislike being one of those people who says I’ve never said this, I’ve never said that…because the intention is still there. I also dislike when I have to reiterate what I’ve already stated. But will again: 

*I have suggested, merely suggested, to all that if you are unsure about how certain skincare treatments and/or products will have on your skin please, please, please consult your Dermatologist!*

*I will add this:*
*When a woman is pregnant it is my hope that her Doctor is advising her on what is safe and what isn’t. Especially, the wearing of cosmetics…makeup…to ensure the safety of their unborn child.*
*Lots of factors make a difference in this regard. Things we all take for granted every single day!*

*I would suggest to anyone to consult their regular Doctor regarding changes in their diets supplemental or otherwise if you are unsure of how to apply it and how it will effect you. *

I purchased my DMAE/Alpha Lipoic Acid cream at Walgreens, NOT a Perricone Product,
found on a shelf, most likely *not* evaluated by the FDA, for $13! I’m not only comfortable with my purchase, I’m ecstatic…best $13 dollars I believe I’ve ever spent! It did what I was hoping it would do plain and simple! But then, I’m easy to please!

Incidentally, the FDA never gives most dietary supplements the time of day for evaluation, and that includes Vitamin C, Ester C, or even OneADay vitamins. Does that mean we should stop taking them? Most often, when deemed necessary, they will indicate when it may be harmful to those who are pregnant, nursing, or taking other medications. 

Those of you who are sensitive to the plight of the animals and all of their sacrifices made – I commend you, as I also feel your pain in this regard. I won’t even begin scratch the surface of this topic in this thread, *what-so-ever*, for in doing so, I may as well just give it all up - stop wearing cosmetics and using grooming products completely, _shave my head_ and go live in a tree somewhere eating & wearing tree bark and leaves…
…probably couldn’t even do that due to the environmental concerns! 

My bottom line is that you implied that I may have intimated a “sure-shot cure” for – anything, never mind enlarged pores!

You’ve just about implied that I’ve disseminated bad, if not, dangerous advice on this forum. It was with *your tone* beginning, middle, and end of your original post acknowledging mine, Ratmist, which I found within the confines of just bad manners considering we are absolute strangers. 

I’m not here for your scrutiny, I certainly never claimed to be an expert or else I would have never encouraged people to look elsewhere to people who are much more knowledgeable on the subject. 

I’m not selling any of these products, even though I could make a strong attempt to do so with some of the lines that we carry in our office. That would be wrong on so many levels!!! I wouldn’t even dream of it unless we saw you in person on a patient basis. I certainly don’t think you have the right to tell me or anyone else how *they* should observe and describe their own results with the products they’ve paid for and used. 
While I appreciate your _other_ perspective, I feel your negative slant in telling me what you think is an exaggeration or pure fantasy is a little much!

Devoting time and energy in refuting what is questionable with every single alternative beauty methods is only half of what I feel is truly responsible reporting on the subject. Furthermore, from what I read from your refutations of my _opinions_ I find them rather weak considering I’m actually am able to read words such as *moderate, potential, possible*. Under these circumstances, that’s strong language to me! 

An improvement level of roughly 30-60% to me, personally, is a God-forsaken *miracle*! It is better than nothing had one not been proactive with these kinds of treatments at all. Especially, for a timeframe of only 16 weeks! Most solid studies will show you, that in order to reap the benefits of most skin products that promote anti-aging effects, one must use it for 3-6 months to show improvement! I can live with a level improvement of 3-6! Couldn’t you? 

As for the lovely women of color, I believe in my _heart of hearts_ that their own Dermatologists who are truly qualified to administer such treatments such as Micro-Derm Abrasion and prescribing *prescription only* skin treatments will tell them what is or isn’t appropriate or suitable to there skin.

It is not my job in pointing that out on a makeup forum, nor should it be your job in telling me to point that out! 
Especially, when I feel I’ve done my duty by already suggesting to consult a Dermatologist *when in doubt!!!*

Honestly - if you’ve ever read *any* of my own _personal_ posts on this forum you’ll read everything I say has a flair of exaggeration and drama. I’ll be the first to admit that – and is all in the spirit of fun and a sense of humor to make people smile. I am very serious now. 

Ratmist, forgive my immature way of starting this post, but I really felt singled out, still not even sure why…my tone? If you were asking me in person how to remedy the appearance of enlarged pores…I would probably sound like I was talking to my Sister in the bathroom very casual and off the cuff and I know exactly how I’d say it, _“Girl…this is what you need, let me break it down…”_ It’s hard to do that online and not appear as though it’s exaggerated, my apologize!

I never intended to make you look like an idiot on this forum as you say, I simply do not know how to capture multiple quotes in a reply post and had to rewrite what you stated so that we were clear. I respect you as an individual and as a human being and appreciate what you have to contribute to society as well as to this forum. 

I think it’s beyond great that you showed another perspective and that these types of things can and should be questioned. I’ve made peace with what Dr. Nicholas Perricone M.D. has to offer to the world and what his intention is and I know that I don’t really need to eat 3 tons of salmon to reap the benefits of Omega 3 Fatty Acids – when they simply come in a supplemental form. However, please do not _use me_ to make a point. That - I don’t think is so great. There are other ways to show people what a genius you really are. 
Maybe we can agree that I will continue to believe in miracles - as you will continue to refute the existence of them! 

Be well~ 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




Yours, 
TamEva


----------



## ratmist (Apr 12, 2008)

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_You will never see companies like Estee Lauder under this same kind of scrutiny and skepticism. Is it only because he’s a Doctor that causes this kind of stigma and raises eyebrows.

Why is that?_

 
 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_What’s really going on here? Must we all from now on, according to you - submit the science behind our recommendations when sharing on this forum? As much as I would like to it’s simply not going to happen in the real world is it? _

 
Absolutely not.  I did not intend for this to get as out of hand as this has become.  And I do think both of our tones in our posts have been interpreted by each other as rude, petty and condescending.  I think that's unfortunate, and I sincerely apologize to you if you have been hurt by my tone.

As you describe your tone is "Sisterly", I guess my best description of my tone is "dispassionate".  In that spirit, I hope you can read the rest of this post without feeling I am trying to upset you, fight with you, or otherwise behave in a negative manner that you do not deserve.  Really, truly.

Perricone, his "philosophy" and the "science" he purports are behind his products are a hot topic.  The key to this topic is his credibility and whether the products deliver what he claims they do, both scientifically and in the visible "proof" one can see in the mirror.

I think one has to be willing to accept that people will present different opinions on something that is held to be credible, scientific knowledge.  That is the core aspect of what bugged me about your first post, and what prompted me to give my first post.

What people will accept as visible proof is on a different scale of acceptance.  This is why I don't have any problem with someone saying "Estee Lauder Potion 1" worked for them.  They aren't saying that it is scientifically proven to make them look like they have better skin.  They're just saying it made them happy, and they're offering it as anecdotal guidance to someone who's asked for help.

In contrast, when someone says "Chemical A" has "this property" and "does this" and "is important to make X happen", my alarm bells go off.  This is wholly different from saying, "Estee Lauder Potion 1 worked for me... maybe it's the Chemical A they say is a key ingredient on the back of the box?"  

The threshold of acceptance for "common" knowledge, of which the "Witches" remedies is a good example, is much lower.  You point out that this is unfair, and make some fair points, which I'd like to respond to now.

The blurring of the lines between the two industries has been going on for a very long time, no more so than in the anti-aging area of the field.  I find that worrying, because bad science in whatever form it comes is to be resisted.  

The threshold of acceptance in a comparison of claims is based on the difference between cosmetics and medicine, between a Cosmetic Company (+ Products) and a Medical Professional (+ Products).

Consumers want to be told that science backs up these products, not least because it offers  some protection to their wallet, if not their health.  The problem is, science usually does not to back it up to the level that is advertised on the bottle.

I fully support the difference in plausibility between the two.  Sane people do not expect a miracle from a Cosmetic Company or its products.  This is because a Cosmetic Company does not have the same magnitude of authority that a medical professional has.  However, when a medical professional says something works and points out that "science has proven it", most of us will tend not to question it as closely.  Many don't even know how to look up whether the claims are valid or not.  We're left in a sea of misinformation, which leaves us vulnerable.

Even if Perricone is no longer practicing medicine, he still uses his medical credentials and fluffs good science into bad science as a basis to back up his claims.  This is where scientists - those who produced those results and worked hard to make sure that their results are empirically correct - get huffy and annoyed, but all too often scientists simply shut their mouths and just get on with their research.  

I assume that everyone can understand the science, no matter how complicated it may get.  I also assume that people armed with new information can make more informed decisions.  I think I have as much right to point out, where I feel appropriate, claims that can be potentially harmful - whether that's to someone's wallet or to their health.  

That means that if an improvement of the magnitude of 3 - 6 out of a maximum 9 is good enough for you, great!  It would not be for me, or my money.  That's the beauty of being told what science actually says, instead of reducing it down to less complicated language.  I simply do not believe consumers can't understand the complicated language.  

Either way, being more careful about thinking about and making claims about what a product can do from a scientific basis is something I honestly think makes good sense, both financially and health-wise.  The same logic does not apply to simple anecdotal information, because (for lack of a better term) our bullsh*t filters are firmly in place when someone says, "Have you tried Clinique's latest cleanser?  It worked wonders for me".  

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_Honestly - if you’ve ever read *any* of my own personal posts on this forum you’ll read everything I say has a flair of exaggeration and drama. I’ll be the first to admit that – and is all in the spirit of fun and a sense of humor to make people smile. I am very serious now. _

 
I will keep that in mind if I ever come across another post of yours.  I tend to take these topics quite seriously indeed, however.  It's just part of who I am, not a response to you personally.  I truly hope you can believe that.

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_Ratmist, forgive my immature way of starting this post, but I really felt singled out, still not even sure why…my tone? If you were asking me in person how to remedy the appearance of enlarged pores…I would probably sound like I was talking to my Sister in the bathroom very casual and off the cuff and I know exactly how I’d say it, “Girl…this is what you need, let me break it down…” It’s hard to do that online and not appear as though it’s exaggerated, my apologize!_

 
When I read your first post, it sounded so much like a sales pitch my back was instantly up.  It felt like you were presenting your opinions as facts, not anecdotes or opinions, for anyone reading these posts.  It felt like your tone was authoritarian, as though what you were saying should be taken as gospel and should we just look it up, we'd find it to be true.  Again, the perception of tone has as much to do with my responses as yours, I'd imagine.  

 Quote:

   Originally Posted by *TamEva Le Fay* 

 
_Maybe we can agree that I will continue to believe in miracles - as you will continue to refute the existence of them!_

 
Miracles aside, thanks for your reply.


----------



## TamEva Le Fay (Apr 13, 2008)

Ratmist..._you're awesome_! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




I'm _very_ honored to share this forum with you.

Keep up the great research, and for keeping us on our toes, me especially, but don't forget to take time to do something nice for yourself!


----------

