Weird Product Wednesday: Marini Hair Revitalizing Conditioner

(The folks at Jan Marini posted a comment to this post and rather than leaving it where not all readers will see it, I've added their additions in red to this original post. I'm grateful to them for contacting me and clarifying several bits of information that I got wrong.)


Hold on to your ringlets, boys and girls. This product is poised to be weirder than Dr. Bronner's Magic Organic Shikakai Conditioning Hair Rinse (but for entirely different reasons)!

A rep from Jan Marini asked if I'd be interested in trying the company's new product called Marini Hair Revitalizing Conditioner. I don't have to tell you how difficult it is to say no to free products. I looked up the ingredients, found nothing that violated my no-silicone-or-polyquat 11 rules, and told the rep I'd be happy to try the product and share my experience with you nice people.

Here are the ingredients, by the way:

Water (Aqua), Butylene Glycol, Spirolac (7á-Acetylthio-3-oxo-17á-pregn-4-ene-21,17-carbolactone), Hydroxypropyl Starch Phosphate Ester, Steareth-100, Steareth-2, Mannan, Xanthan Gum, Diazolidinyl Urea, Methylparaben,Propylparaben, Retinol, Panthetine, Kiwi Fragrance (Parfum), Zinc PCA, Myristoyl Tetrapeptide-12, Myristoyl Pentapeptide-17, Hydrolyzed Wheat Protein, Japanese Green Tea Extract, Hydrolyzed Oat Protein, Dipotassium Glycyrrhizate, Niacinamide

Perhaps you stopped to pause at "Spirolac." I know I did. I had no idea what it was, and although it sounded like spirulina, which is a health food supplement, a quick look around the Interwebs told me that the last place I'd find Spirolac was in a health food store.

In a nutshell, Spirolac is spironolactone, which has been linked to cancer, according to Jan Marini's product specs. Spironolactone, primarily a blood-pressure medicine and a diuretic, is also prescribed for women who suffer from hair loss. According to Hair Site, Spironolactone "works as an antiandrogen by decreasing the production of testosterone by the adrenal glands and by preventing DHT from binding to its androgenic receptor. Some have suggested that Spironolactone can bond to the hair follicles before DHT can bind to the receptor." For this reason, it is not prescribed for men, although it is used topically to treat male-pattern baldness. It is a common component in hormone therapy for male-to-female transsexual and transgender people.

Okay, so we've got a product here that contains a topical application (something that's best used to treat male pattern baldness) of a substance that the company warns might give you cancer. Hmmm. An auspicious beginning.

When the rep wrote me, she stated: "I’d like to introduce you to a recent Jan Marini product release that immediately and dramatically improves the appearance of aging, thinning and environmentally and chemically damaged hair, and gives it renewed body and bounce! Marini Hair Revitalizing Conditioner, already a favorite of Hollywood hairstylists and their clients, immediately makes the hair softer and more manageable. Over time, the hair will appear significantly thicker, fuller, lusher and dense and results will become progressively more pronounced.

Marini Hair features the same proprietary peptide ingredient contained in our hugely popular cosmetic eyelash enhancement product, Marini Lash Eyelash Conditioner."

Is the "proprietary peptide ingredient" Spirulac? Nothing in my research refers to either Spirulac or Spironolactone as peptides. But tetrapeptide-12 and pentapeptide-17 are peptides. And from what I can find about peptides, they're nice additions to skin care products (they stimulate cell metabolism and protect against UVB damage) but they won't stimulate hair growth. More on this in a moment. (Jan Marini says: "Actually, peptides perform multiple functions, including hair and lash enhancement to promote the appearance of lusher, fuller, thicker hair and lashes.")

And maybe that's okay, because Jan Marini Revitalizing Conditioner isn't necessarily promising to stimulate hair growth. It is only saying that it will make hair "thicker, fuller, lusher and dense."

This is where product copy gets really fun. I know because I used to write it. There are distinct and specific boundaries that personal care product claims must stay within in order for them to meet FDA labeling regulations for cosmetics. You'll notice that no cosmetic ever says it will absolutely cure something -- that's because it can't and technically, only a drug can cure something. So, cosmetic companies have to be careful about their claims. (Things are a little different for the class of products called cosmeceuticals, but we don't have time to talk about that now.)

But wait. There's more.

Jan Marini debuted a mascara called Marini Lash (which is what the rep referenced in her email to me) in 2005 and it was met with tons of accolades because it promised to make lashes lusher -- and apparently delivered on that promise. It used peptides that an early study showed to stimulate hair growth at the follicle. Hence, eyelash hair would ostensibly grow thicker and fuller. (I have not tried this mascara, mostly because, as you can see at Amazon, it sells for anywhere between $68 to $105 dollars. Working girls like me will stick with the L'Oreal Lash Out, thanks ever so. For a good review and highly scientific explanation of how Marini Lash works, visit FutureDerm.com. Let me know if it makes any sense to you if you are of a scientific bent.) ( From Jan Marini: "While we do make a Marini Mascara with the same proprietary peptide ingredient found in Marini Lash, the product that we sent you and which was reviewed was indeed Marini Lash, a clear-liquid lash enhancement product that is applied like an eyeliner.")

But here's the thing: the original formula of Marini Lash had to be taken off the market , and many believe it was because the subsequent studies of its primary ingredient -- a drug called latanoprost -- could not duplicate the initial findings of it as an eyelash growth stimulator. (From Jan Marini: "Peptides were not in the original formula. The key ingredient was “bimatoprost,” not "latanoprost".)

Um, I thought it was the peptides that made the hair grow? Nope, I guess not. I'm so confused.

Well, so as not to disappoint customers who were clamoring for the stuff -- which may or may not have actually made their lashes thicker and lusher -- the company put out a new version of it, sans the latanoprost. That's probably when the Spirolac was substituted. (From Jan Marini: "Marini Lash never contained Spirolac. Marini Hair contains Spirolac. Rather, the new Marini Lash contains a proprietary peptide blend, which in combination with other essential factors, produces extraordinary eyelash and brow enhancement.")

And here's another piece of weirdness: the rep's email said what I've disclosed above, but the the product bottle itself makes NO CLAIMS WHATSOEVER. I mean none. Every other product I've ever used on my hair addresses somewhere on the bottle or jar what I might expect from it. Luster, fullness, body, shine, elimination of life's little toxicities, whatever. But this one says nothing. The box that the bottle came in reads exactly the same as the bottle. The little insert that came in the box, however, says this:

Marini Hair Revitalizing Conditioner is a remarkable formula that targets thinning and aging hair. Now you can experience vibrant, lusher, fuller and younger looking hair.

Disclaimer:
Marini Hair Revitalizing Conditioner is not intended to stop, prevent, cure, relieve, reverse or reduce hair loss or to promote the growth of hair.

Isn't it funny that both claim and disclaimer are on an insert and not on the product itself? I don't want to accuse Jan Marini of anything underhanded, but the placement of that information raises some questions, in my mind. The box and bottle both say "patent pending" so maybe there are some issues caught up in that process.

The rep said she hoped I would use the product for 3 months to experience the full effects of it. I haven't done that, but I have used it for about a month, fairly religiously. I don't see much going on but I am so skeptical, I doubt I'll continue using it. I mean, the product doesn't claim to do anything, it costs a fortune, and an insert tells me my hair will be lusher and fuller but that I shouldn't expect a reduction in hair loss or the growth of new hair.

So, then, isn't this just a volumizing conditioner?

I do want to say that Jan Marini is highly respected and has been around since 1994. I don't believe the company is trying to be sneaky. More than likely, they encountered some resistance from the FDA and have had to reposition the product, and as as result, the mixed messages compromise the product's identity and allure. As you can see from the website, Ms. Marini, the founder, has a lot of celebrity endorsements (and all from people who look pretty damn good). Jan Marini Skin Research makes products that address the usual skin care problems, such as acne and rosacea. (It also markets a line of professional and clinical products that are available only by prescription.) The company's products are sold through distributors in more than 80 countries worldwide and directly to physicians and licensed skin care professionals. Major competitors are Clarins, Estee Lauder, and Kiehl's -- so we're looking at a very upscale product line here.

I also want to say a genuine "thank you" to the rep who sent this product to me. I'm not being sarcastic. As an author, I know what it's like to send out my "product" (at my expense) to a reviewer who may ultimately trash it publicly. It's a nasty fact of life that when you open yourself up to public scrutiny, you expose yourself to potential humiliation and criticism as well as appreciation and applause. I appreciate this opportunity to review the product and am flattered that the company took a risk on me.

I could have been polite and just said that it was a cool product and that you should buy it. But that wouldn't have been honest. And I'm not saying the product is bad -- as a conditioner, it's certainly fine. And as a weird product, it most certainly qualifies.

Weird Product Wednesday: Boots Curl Creme

There are many ways in which a hair product can be weird, and Boots Essentials Curl Creme is guilty of several.

First, the makers of it certainly don't want you to find a picture of it on the Web. Maybe the product has some sort of spiritual quality -- like, maybe if you see a digital representation of it, you will be cursed. Or die. Or be destined to live out your life with bad hair. Hmmm. Maybe Boots Curl Creme is like a vampire and it cannot be photographed. (I tried photographing mine but the jar is clear, the print is white, and the product is pink. I think it would take more than my iPhone camera to capture its charms.) A site in Italy had this one up so I stole it. Although you cannot possibly read what's on the jar, you must trust me that it bears a striking resemblance in color, shape, and size to the one sitting in my bathroom.

Now, then. About the smell. It's not exactly unpleasant but it is perfumey. You could even say cloying. Definitely a product for girls and very pretty boys. I find it a little overpowering but that quality has not stopped me from using it.

When I was new to CG, I had no idea what a curl creme was. I don't think I'd even heard of curl creme. And when I started visiting NaturallyCurly.com and read about people using them, my initial reaction was, "Sounds like something for older people." For eleven thousandth time in my life, I was incorrect.

Curl cremes in general are moisturizing, smoothing concoctions that help to define and separate curls. They are best used in colder temperatures yet many a curly-headed human enjoys their benefits in warmer weather, as well. I prefer them in winter, myself, because I need all the help I can get in feeding my hair moisture and preventing it from getting flyaway and dry-looking.

Curl cremes are generally used after a leave-in and before gel. But I have heard of curlies who use curl creme over gel or who scrunch out their crunch with curl creme. This curl creme, in fact.

Which leads us nicely back to the topic at hand, which is: why Boots Curl Creme is weird. I have a bit of a beef with this product because the directions provide no guidance whatsoever about application quantity. And in this case, that information is hugely important because you need to use about half as much of this curl creme as your instincts tell you to use.

I was reading Katrina's Colorado Curly blog and saw where she reported product failure when trying to get this stuff to work its magic. From what she described, it sounded like overdose (the symptoms of which I knew all too well). Not only do you need to use a teeny tiny bit of Boots, you need to emulsify it before you apply it.

I shall demonstrate. Here is a photo of how much I use.


Basically, you dip a finger into the jar and use whatever coats that finger. Next you spread it over your palms. Here's what that looks like in the first swipe:



You see how my hand just looks wet and shiny. As you would expect upon spreading a slippery hair product between your palms. But then you rub your hands together for about 7 seconds and look what happens to the product:



It almost lathers! It seems to multiply and definitely becomes more than what you thought you were dealing with. It plays a similar role once it's in your hair, too -- when it's in mine, my hair has more volume (not lots more but more than other curl cremes give me).

Another weird performance feature of Boots curl creme is that it does contain alcohol. Not much, mind you -- it's the last item in the ingredient list -- but enough to prevent me from using it daily. I have to be sure to leave in a little more conditioner than I normally would whenever I use this creme or my hair gets a skosh dry if I use it more than one day in a row.

Other curl cremes define curls by, well, defining curls. But Boots gives you clumpage to the fifth power. Seriously. I used to think that Jessicurl Rockin' Ringlets was the ultimate clumper until I tried this. Only KCCC comes close to rivaling it in terms of clumps.

And now for the final reason why this product is weird. It's made in the U.K. and sold there in drugstores (or whatever they call them there!). It's super cheap -- kinda like the equivalent of Suave here in the U.S.A. I think it's available in other countries, too -- but you can't buy it here it in the United States. What is up with that? Not only is it unphotographable but it's also unavailable. I think the best word for this product here in the United States is elusive.

But you can order it online from a place in Great Britain called Brit Super Store. The Boots Curl Creme will cost you about $4. Shipping, however, will be considerably more. Is it worth it? I have to say it is, especially since you will have the jar for most of your adult life, even if you are now currently 16.

Let's review.

Pros: Great price, excellent clumpage factor
Cons: Perfumey smell, finicky application process, teeny bit of alcohol, not available in the U.S. (and let's not forget the no-picture thing)

See if you can score some on the swap board at NaturallyCurly...