<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic New Wet to Dry Instyler vs. the Original Instyler in Beauty</title>
    <link>https://community.qvc.com/t5/Beauty/New-Wet-to-Dry-Instyler-vs-the-Original-Instyler/m-p/269398#M61325</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;If you have used both can you tell me how they compare for use on dry hair? Is the new one as good as the original for dry hair? I've read in some reviews that the brushes are different (original has soft brushes and the new one has stiff brushes). Some reviews have said that the new one damages the hair and that the original doesn't. Did anyone get damage from the original one? TIA&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2012 01:06:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>baby 2</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-11-16T01:06:37Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>New Wet to Dry Instyler vs. the Original Instyler</title>
      <link>https://community.qvc.com/t5/Beauty/New-Wet-to-Dry-Instyler-vs-the-Original-Instyler/m-p/269398#M61325</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;If you have used both can you tell me how they compare for use on dry hair? Is the new one as good as the original for dry hair? I've read in some reviews that the brushes are different (original has soft brushes and the new one has stiff brushes). Some reviews have said that the new one damages the hair and that the original doesn't. Did anyone get damage from the original one? TIA&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2012 01:06:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qvc.com/t5/Beauty/New-Wet-to-Dry-Instyler-vs-the-Original-Instyler/m-p/269398#M61325</guid>
      <dc:creator>baby 2</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-11-16T01:06:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

