1. The only control group you could have (which since so many woman, by the time they're diagnosed with breast cancer, have at some point dyed their hair) would be women with "virgin" never-dyed hair and see their rate of breast cancer.

  2. Did any of these studies look at the people who work at hair salons, the kind of people who are exposed to these products every day? They seem like they could offer a better idea of the potential harms of those products.

  3. I whole heartedly agree that such a small signal should not equate a forgone conclusion; but surely the disparity in numbers between women of color and white women should be enough to instigate further research? Specially since there’s so little research on the specific effects of chemical on specific groups?

  4. What we would have needed more is to know the effects of dyes on asthma, migraines and people with weaker immune systems. Not to mention the health of hairdressers.

  5. Honestly, this seems like an ignorant study if the idea is to figure out whether chemicals might be carcinogenic. The accuracy and precision of self reporting is just too lacking generally. If you want to find measurable data in the real world, you look at the most exposed vs the lesser exposed vs the minimally exposed populations. Once you identify a measurable difference in numbers of cases between these types, then you drill down to identify potential correlations. If I wanted to know if all or some hair treatments, unacceptably increased breast cancer risk, I would try to inquire about incidences among the manufacturing employees or you know HAIR STYLISTS and other salon workers who would have a notably higher exposure level.

  6. The day I click on a healthcare triage vid totalled “does X cause X” and the concussion is it definitely does, I will fall off my chair :p

  7. Part of the problem is when people who don't understand science try to interpret the findings of science. You can't just read the abstract. You have to dig deeper and understand how that particular study would apply to the population as a whole. Often these studies are written using scientific language that gets misinterpreted in layman speak. So these studies are a good jumping off point for other studies, but not really that useful in suggesting how to live our day to day lives. Lastly, we should always wait for followup studies to verify the findings. You can cherry pick any study to fit a narrative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.