Infomercial for Glycolic Acid
Sean D. O'Neil
amazingly like Dr. Proctor's formula for treatment of skin wrinkles.
The purpose of the infomercial is to peddle a line of skin care
products "formulated" by one Dr. Murad. The centerpiece of his line
of wares is called something like "Skin Care Glycolization Formula".
Listening to the advert it sounds like this thing contains at least
glycolic acid and retin-A. They do specifically mention the alpha-hydroxy
acid issue, can't remember what else they talk about.
What do you think, Peter? Has this guy been reading sci.life-extension
or he is just another industrious researcher?:-) If I hadn't been
reading about these substances here, I would have thought "just another
snake-oil salesman." I'm sure his stuff is way overpriced, though.
Sean
Kevin Goldstein
>From: s...@linus.mitre.org (Sean D. O'Neil)
>Subject: Infomercial for Glycolic Acid
>Date: 14 Feb 1995 18:03:33 GMT
>Sean
How much is it?
Bryan Shelton
:
: Good formula: 10 % glycolic acid plus 1 % alantoin.
: Use just a little bit. Your pharmacist may be able to
: make it up for you. The free acid is apparently required
: for activity, so don't get polymerized glycolic acid,
: amonium glycolate ( excet higher than 10%,etc. )
Hmmm...
Durk and Sandy's AHA product, "Look & Feel", contains at least half a
dozen: glycolic acid, lactic acid, tartaric acid, citric acid, malic
acid, and thioglycolic acid; and they are ALL the ammonium salts of
their respective acids; are you saying that this product doesn't work?
Bryan
proc...@delphi.com
>Durk and Sandy's AHA product, "Look & Feel", contains at least half a
>dozen: glycolic acid, lactic acid, tartaric acid, citric acid, malic
>acid, and thioglycolic acid; and they are ALL the ammonium salts of
>their respective acids; are you saying that this product doesn't work?
form ( I don't recall the reference ). There will be some present
in a salt formulation.
Story is this: When the work on alpha hydroxyacids was first
published, a bunch of companies came out with formulations with
the straight acids. These were complaints to the FDA, who basically
told the companies that they would allow them to continue marketing the
agents only if they did not cause substantial irritation.
So, some companies came out with "polymerized" glycolic
acid, presenting it as new and improved. Other caompanies used
the (e.g.) ammonium salts ( ammonium lactate in high concentrations
had already been FDA-approved for medicinal use ).
Also, there were patent problems using the pure acids.
At least ammonium lactate seems to be active, although not
as much as (e.g. ) lactic acid. It is reasonable to suppose
the same to be true of the other compounds. From the few
patients I have used it on, 20% sodium lactate appears to be
slightly less effective than 10% lactic acid. I do not
know about the rest.
Dr. Dr. Peter Proctor
Brian Manning Delaney
In article <pQ4acKJ....@delphi.com>, <proc...@delphi.com> wrote:
>Re: Dr. Murad's stuff
>
> Dr. Murad's stuff will probably do what they say. Although
>my research interest is hair, I use a lot of retin-A and glycolic
>acid. You really can improve skin appearance a lot with this
>kind of stuff. I've had patients in their thirties claim they
>have had their ID's checked after a while on the stuff.
>
> Mainly, what these things do is turn on wound healing mechanisms
>and your skin repairs itself. The "wound" repaired is
>mainly light damage ( free radical damage in general ? )....
But is it accurate to call the process a "repair," given that the skin
reverts to its pre-treatment state upon cessation of treatment? At
least this is the case w/Retin-A -- I don't know about glycolic acid.
My understanding is that, in the case of Retin-A, most of the visible
effects are the result of collagen deposition (tho' there are other
factors -- angiogenesis, etc.), which eventually reverses itself when
treatment is stopped.
That's not to say these treatments are worthless; rather, we just
don't have a means of "youthifying" skin yet.
Oder?
--
Brian M. Delaney <b-de...@uchicago.edu> [DO NOT cc: articles to me.]
<bmde...@midway.uchicago.edu> [Wrists: "Leave unambiguous typos."]
Note: All statements in this article are in jest; they are not
statements of fact. * "Mein Genie ist in meinen Nuestern." -Nietzsche.
proc...@delphi.com
>But is it accurate to call the process a "repair," given that the skin
>reverts to its pre-treatment state upon cessation of treatment? At
the "antiaging" effect is real and is accompanied be anatomical changes
characterized by younger ( or at least less sun-damaged ) skin.
If you got of retin-A, time and sun damage start the injury
up again and eventually it comes back. The repair is real.
We know from other work that Retin-A turns on wound healing
( e.g., I was first introduced to this drug in studies off
accelrated wound healing in experimental burns ).
A lot of sun damage will repair itself gradually if you
stay out of the sun. Retin-A ( and alpha-hydroxy acids ? )
may merely speed up this process.
IMHO, the effects are too specific to be some non-specific
action due to (e.g.) exfoliation.
>That's not to say these treatments are worthless; rather, we just
>don't have a means of "youthifying" skin yet.
light damage. The derm docs mimp out and call this " photoaging ".
It is this that retin-a, etc. primarily reverse. E.g.,
these agents generally don't work very well for lines. The
exception is lower ( but not upper ) crows feet. These
have a uniquely large component of sun damage compaired
to other facial lines. Once you realize that light damage
and not aging per se is what retin-A repairs, its properties
make sense.
Another way to look at this is these agents cause repair of
free radical damage. In the skin, this is primarily from
light damage, but there may be a metabolic component. In this
sence, they are "antiaging".
Dr. Dr. Peter Proctor