Until recently, most purveyors of naturally based hair treatments offered their products for sale largely without attempting to substantiate their claims. This rendered it relatively easy to discern objectively proven treatment products from those less well-supported.
Instead of doing the hard work and sweating the details necessary to research and develop methodologically sound treatment compositions, such purveyors relied on less ethical means to generate sales. For instance, one of the most common tactics has been to set up internet domains that look like third party consumer review websites. Typically, such websites purport to compare several different competing brands but almost always find one advertised brand (unnamed in this article) as superior. Were this undertaken by actual third party reviewers wherein the purported 1st place brand had achieved something noteworthy and positive, all the better. Unfortunately, the reality proved otherwise. Not only were the advertised criteria unavailable for critical review, the actual website provided no ready means to determine who was behind its publication.
The obvious inference being that the "winning" product line was most likely directly or indirectly behind the scam. Now, a new even less ethical tactic is being used. Here, certain unnamed hair treatment lines are concocting "scientific studies" that once again purport to show clinical efficacy in their brand. They use science-sounding words and even associate themselves with scientific-sounding organizations. To the uneducated eye, these "studies" appear legitimate and valid. Here is why they're not.
The studies they reference are most typically conducted by themselves or by a closely allied organization. This is tantamount to the fox guarding the henhouse. Likewise, whatever purported data is supposedly published, is not actually published in the peer-reviewed medical literature. Turns out, this is just another smarmy way for certain parties to pull the wool over the consumer's eyes.
At HairGenesis, we are deeply disturbed by such used car salesman-like tactics. Not only does this give the entire category a black eye, but it puts the consumer at risk for relying on substances and compositions that actually have no proven clinical utlity. By way of contrast, HairGenesis is supported with actual third party research, conducted by legitimate entities such as the University of Albany. Moreover, whatever data is gleaned from this research is subjected to critical peer review by objective third party experts in the field. Only upon successfully running the peer-review gauntlet (no easy task!) is the research published.
An easy way for the consumer to discern legit research from "the other kind" is to see if it has been published on www.pubmed.com. Pubmed constitutes the sole worldwide clearing house for ALL legitimate medical and scientific research. Concisely, if its not on Pubmed, it probably isn't real.
