For a quarter of a century, I willfully deceived myself into believing that hair care was simple. I’d used the same Pantene 2-in-1 for a decade, didn’t own a blow dryer, and until two months ago thought Drybar — a fancy salon that does "blowouts" — was a place that sold Dippin’ Dots-like ice cream. I also didn’t know what a blowout was anyway.

Then I succumbed to vanity and, inspired by the rising number of women going platinum, dyed my pixie cut blond. I’m Asian, with hair so dark the stylist asked me if I dyed it blacker for effect. The bleaching itself was an ordeal, but nothing compared to the nightmare that awaited: being forced to finally navigate the world of hair care and trying to figure out what was marketing spin and what was real.

I quickly became a hair truther. I was skeptical of shampoo even as I shelled out for the "color-protecting" kind. I asked my friend Allison — whose flowing golden locks represent what heights of hair glory can be achieved — for deep conditioning recommendations, though I had no idea how it worked.

Finding solid answers to hair questions is hard. Since beauty products are such an everyday part of our lives, it’s easy to forget that they are a form of technology backed by studies. Our first instinct when trying to understand a medical breakthrough might be to read the research, but our first instinct when switching shampoos is to ask a friend with really nice hair what works for her. And the beauty industry spends millions to market products with clever wording that imply big promises.

Most beauty research is done by cosmetic chemists — the scientists that formulate and develop products — and a lot of it is published in academic journals like the Journal of Cosmetic Science. These journals are usually paywalled and access to the articles (which are dense and full of jargon) is expensive. No wonder it’s easier to watch commercials and ask around.

So, after watching my bank account dwindle from expensive treatments, I brought my questions to cosmetic chemists who actually understand the science behind the claims. One thing’s for certain: sorry Allison, but deep conditioning is a lie.

First things first, what exactly is hair?

Hair has three main components, says Randy Schueller, a cosmetic chemist who blogs at The Beauty Brains. It’s made of protein — mainly a kind called keratin — along with natural oils that keep hair flexible, and water.

The outside, or the part that everyone sees, is called the cuticle and made of five to 10 overlapping layers of protein like shingles on a roof. These protect what’s underneath, which is the middle section called the cortex. The cortex holds long bundles of proteins that give hair its strength and keep it from breaking. And at the center is an empty zone called the medulla that helps insulate the hair. Not all hair has the medulla. It’s usually found in coarse, dark hair, and I am certain my hair had medullas before I spent four hours stripping it with chemicals.

When it comes to hair products, the most important part is the cuticle. When the layers of protein lie smoothly against each other, hair looks shiny and smooth. Everyday things like brushing and washing hair makes the cuticle stand up straight. That makes it frizzy and more prone to breaking and split ends.

The best product for your hair costs $10 and is something you add to food

What are some of the trends in hair?

There’s one big one: abandoning shampoo.

Even during my days of blissful ignorance, I could tell that something was changing because suddenly the other shampoos were making claims like "gentle" and "sulfate-free." (More on that later.) People increasingly think that shampoo has harmful chemicals, or that we shampoo too much — whatever the reason, we’re using less of it, and using more conditioner.

The rise of conditioner is probably the biggest trend right now as natural-looking hair becomes more popular, says Margie Nanninga, a business analyst at market research firm Mintel. (This natural trend is bad news for me, considering the first question my sister asked when I texted her a photo was "Does it bother you that your eyebrows don’t match?") As processed hair falls out of favor, we’re all looking for "healthy" hair, which mostly means moisturized and shiny.

And people are shelling out. We bought 5 percent more conditioner in 2015, according to market-research firm Euromonitor International. And not just any conditioner, mind you, but a lot more "cleansing conditioners" that we use to "co-wash."

Co-washing sounds fancy, but just means skipping shampoo. It began around 2012 as a niche trend among the kind of people who are quick to try new beauty tricks, says Nanninga. It’s not niche anymore. Mainstream brands like Herbal Essences, Head and Shoulders, L’Oreal, and Wen have all introduced cleansing conditioners, and it’ll probably keep getting bigger. In Mintel’s most recent consumer survey nearly two-thirds of consumers surveyed said they’d be interested in trying cleansing conditioners.

Another shift is happening in the so-called "ethnic hair care" category. Fewer people are buying relaxants as black women, especially, are going for the natural look. At the same time, there’s more interest in styling products marketed as being especially for "ethnic" women, according to Euromonitor. L’Oreal even created a new "Multi-Cultural Beauty Division."



So this is connected to the people saying that we shouldn’t be using shampoo at all? What’s the science behind that? How do shampoo and conditioner work anyway?

Shampoos contain a type of molecule called surfactants. One end is attracted to water, and the other end is repelled by water and attracted to oil. The oil-loving end attaches to the grease and dirt in your hair, while the other end attaches itself to the water from the shower. That way, when the water washes out the shampoo, it also washes out the grease attached to it. Conditioners work by smoothing the outer layer so that the cuticle layers lie flat.

Remember those "sulfate-free" claims that we see on shampoo now? Sulfate is a very common type of surfactant, and people who are concerned about too much shampoo think it works too well. Supporters of the (badly named) "no ‘poo" movement say sulfate is too harsh and strips away a lot of the hair’s natural oil, called sebum, which makes us produce even more than we normally would to make up for it constantly being taken away.

That’s just what "people say," though. Is there evidence to support that shampoo is bad? What are we gaining or losing if we don’t use shampoo?

This really depends on the person, says Schueller of Beauty Brains. First, it’s important to understand that a lot of the hype about sulfates is fearmongering, plain and simple. They definitely don’t cause cancer and they are not toxic.

Personally, I don’t like how puffy my hair feels when it’s freshly washed. With this in mind, I tried to stop using shampoo a few years ago. The plan was to switch to alternatives like baking soda or apple cider vinegar. The plan did not work.

Even the "no ‘poo" evangelicals will admit that the first few days (or weeks) are hard, though a new world of hair magnificence can be found if you can push through. Yet I — like several friends and no doubt many other hopefuls — gave up after about five days because it felt too gross. So even if it’s true that many people over-shampoo, no shampoo at all is probably not an option for me and other quitters. Quitting cold turkey is especially hard if you exercise a lot or are just sweaty. All that extra sweat and dirt can end up matting in your hair and leading to more breakage.

The good news is that there’s little evidence that shampoos are all that bad. They remove oil and dirt from cuticles, but they don’t go inside the hair. They can’t completely strip hair like the bleach that I subjected myself to. That said, it’s true that certain shampoos, or shampooing too much, can make the scalp itchy and the hair feel dry. If you shampoo often and your scalp gets red or irritated, you should switch to a different kind. If you’re braver than me, you can stop using it.

Cleansing conditioners became popular as a halfway point between regular shampoo and none at all. They were for women shampoo their hair a lot and wanted something gentler.

Wait, what’s the difference between "cleansing conditioner" and just skipping shampoo and washing your hair with a conditioner? Is a cleansing conditioner just like a 2-in-1?

Cleansing conditioners are basically like a 2-in-1, but with much more conditioner than shampoo, according to Arun Nandagiri, a cosmetic chemist that runs Illinois-based Bria Labs. They have some surfactants, but the usual ingredients are conditioning ingredients. That’s why they’re usually advertised as being "gentler" and "sulfate free" and, again, more "natural."

As a heads-up, there is currently a class action lawsuit against the maker of the most popular cleansing conditioners, Wen. It doesn’t look good since the plaintiffs claim that the conditioner has made their hair fall out. But Nandagiri says the lawsuit seems to be particular to the brand, and probably shouldn’t leave a black mark on the entire category of cleansing conditioners.

All the extra steps are just to make us feel like we’re partaking in extra luxury

Cleansing conditioners are only one part of this conditioner trend, right? What about deep conditioning?

Say it with me: deep conditioning is a lie. Deep conditioning is just regular conditioning plus time plus the tricks our minds play on us when we dare to hope.

This is simultaneously the discovery I am most angry about (because I was looking forward to the wonders of deep conditioning) and most relieved about (because I haven’t gotten around to actually buying deep conditioner yet).

"I’ve formulated these products and seen other companies do the same thing," says Schueller. "You take your regular conditioner, you make it a little thicker, you increase the conditioning so it’s more concentrated and maybe you sell it in a jar instead of a bottle where it squeezes out and then there’s your ‘intensive deep conditioner.’"

This doesn’t mean that putting a product on your hair for 30 minutes does nothing. It means that you could probably get the same effect if you used your normal conditioner the way you use a "deep conditioner" (which, yes, deserves those scare quotes).

It’s important to spread conditioner out through your hair, but after that, "your hair has absorbed as much of the conditioning agents as it’s going to, so adding more time or product won’t make it do much more," says Schueller. All the extra steps are just to make us feel like we’re partaking in extra luxury.

So it’s all marketing? Does any "deep conditioning" actually work?

There is one exception, and it turns out that the best product for your hair costs $10 and is something you add to your food, and something that black women have been using for a long time.

Your basic coconut oil, as it turns out, has "just the right size and structure that it can penetrate into the cortex," says Schueller, and therefore it can protect hair from the inside out.

One of the most damaging things for hair is a simple wash and dry it because the water swells the hair and messes up the cuticle. Coconut oil prevents water from absorbing into the hair and so reduces the swelling damage.

Just washing your hair is bad for it? What do we know about air dry versus blow dry then?

Common sense says that blow-drying is worse, for obvious reasons: it’s a lot of heat right next to your hair. Schueller agrees that air-drying is preferable to blow-drying, but he also said that air-drying itself can also cause harm.

There’s not a lot of data on this, but some think that air-drying damages hair because the hair remains wet for a longer period of time. That means more time for the water to swell inside the hair and mess up the cuticles. The longer the hair is wet, the more damage happens. But since hair needs to dry somehow, it’s still better to go for the one that doesn’t involve thousands of watts of energy right next to the cuticles.

Since it turns out that deep conditioning is a lie, what else is a lie? What about protein treatments?

Protein treatments are a mixed bag. They’re partly a marketing story, because you can’t actually repair damaged hair just by pouring on more protein. The protein doesn’t also get integrated into the hair structure itself to make it thicker, which is exactly what I thought it did before I went out and bought a protein treatment that smells odd and made my hair into a hard cap.

But it’s not all a waste. The proteins basically work like extra conditioner. They help form an extra protective layer on top of the hair and keep the cuticle smooth. So while it doesn’t change the inside, hair will be shinier and reflect light better. And my hair did feel better after I tried this, though not for long.

What about "purple shampoo" and color-protecting shampoos and conditioners?

This is a topic dear to my heart because I just went out and bought a bunch of both. To be clear, "purple shampoo" and "color-protecting shampoo" are different things. "Purple shampoo" is for bleached-blonde hair and it works because the purple tones even out the blonde color and keep it from turning orange.

But "color-protecting" doesn’t do much. The reason the color continues to shift is because the chemical reaction isn’t perfect for every molecule, according to Schueller. There will be some bigger color molecules, some little pieces, some will wash out, some will not — and that’s why your color will change and fade over time. Most color-protecting products don’t actually keep the color chemicals in the hair any longer. They don’t do much other than provide good conditioning, he says.

We’ve talked a lot about cleaning and conditioning, but I’ve also heard there are people who want you to add bacteria to your hair. What’s up with that?

There’s a startup called AOBiome that believes that we’re less healthy because most soaps and other cleaners kill off the natural ammonia-oxidizing bacteria on our bodies. It has a consumer arm called Mother Dirt, which creates mists and sprays that preserve this bacteria.

Mother Dirt also manufactures a shampoo. The shampoo doesn’t actually add bacteria; instead it just makes sure that the existing bacteria doesn’t get killed, according to Mother Dirt chief medical officer Larry Weiss. We don’t really know yet what types of bacteria, and what balance, are needed for a healthy scalp. The company just thinks that the first step is not killing off the ammonia-oxidizing bacteria they think are important.

Apple cider vinegar for example — a common hair-cleaning solution used by people who don’t use regular shampoo — does kill the bacteria. Weiss says that the team is looking into creating conditioners as well, but that there needs to be a lot more known about hair science.