Hi, just to start the post by saying I’m not sure if this is being posted in the right place, I struggled to find a forum for this type of question. I am a layman about most of this stuff, but I figured this was the right place to ask.
I have been looking at hair glues (adhesives used to attach non surgical hair replacement systems to ones head), and researching the toxicity of some of the glues. We (have been discussing it on a hair loss forum) came to the conclusion that a brand called “ghost bond” was probably the safest, as it is water based not acrylic based. Having read the MSDS sheet for it however, it apparently contains “Acrylate/Copolymer-dispersion” or “Chemical characterisation (substance): Dispersion of acrylic polymers in water.” (listed differently for different products). Having researched this a bit, I found out this in itself probably isn’t harmful, however the monomers used to create it are, and some can be left over after the polymer is produced. I found a study that mentioned this (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/10941612_Final_Report_on_the_Safety_Assessment_of_Acrylates_Copolymer_and_33_Related_Cosmetic_Ingredients) found this exact text block on multiple sites, not sure if there is an original study available for free.
Based on this, and the usage of hair adhesive, I have a few questions about the possible implications of this in regard to health:
1. Would it be likely that applying an adhesive (which according to the study can be in concentrations of 25% of the polymer in glues), potentially could pose a risk, considering the fact the hair system is re-applied with the adhesive once or twice a week?
2. I have heard that most of the absorption of chemicals from substances placed on the skin happens in the first few minutes, and that once the glue has set then there is no more absorption. However as this glue is water based it can sometimes “re-liquify” (not to the original extent, but it can go from solid to “a gooey mess” (direct quote from people who have used it). Would this “gooey mess” potentially mean more chemicals can be absorbed?
3. How applicable are studies like this to humans? They are done on mice, is there a possibility that the chemicals could be much more carcinogenic to humans and therefore be dangerous at lower concentrations?
4. Why is the amount that is dangerous quoted in terms of concentration? Is the volume not also important?
5. If the chemical is dangerous at x concentration, how some it isn’t dangerous at all concentrations? Is it something to do with the liver flushing the chemicals out of the body?
6. If the chemicals are carcinogenic, is there anyway to know how carcinogenic they are (i.e. do they increase your risk 40%, 400% or 4000%)?
I appreciate any and all help with this, we have been discussing it on another forum for a while but I figure some more specific insight could be helpful. Apologies again if this is posted in the wrong place, if there is a better place to post this I am happy to remove it and repost.
