Beauty

[Mom2Dogs]

I will need to go back to the website and see if there is a phone number.

and maybe I will do another profile...I was interested in helping get rid of sun spots.....was also wondering, is everything 19.99...that is the price I was quoted.  Makes me wonder, hmmmmm

[Alison Wonderland]

---

@Nonametoday wrote:

The fact that it is used to treat cancer (which means it is a toxin) would raise a red flag for me.  

---

It's basically Vitamin A and and increases cellular turnover. It's not a toxin. There's also conflicing information about whether or not it does anything in terms of cancer.

[Harpa]

---

@JeanLouiseFinch wrote:

---

@Harpa wrote:

@Katilein

I'm just wondering what kind of expectation you had/have?

And what, if anything, you were using in conjunction with it?

Yes, about the converstion step retinol takes to form into retinoic acid. But from my understanding, this differs from individual to individual, and would be impossible to generalize. There are a whole host of things in play, and not just the condition of the skin.

If anything, I absolutely do not trust when someone advertises that they have 1.5% or 3% of pure retinol in their product, as though the higher percentage should equal effectiveness. (But this is a whole separate discussion.)

---

Where did you learn this, @Harpa?  I've never seen anything like that before in anything I've come across and really don't understand how the individual would impact the metabolic conversion of retinol to retinoic acid?  Since skin is skin and retinol is retinol, aside from any possible interaction from other products/ingredients that could nullify effectiveness, I believe it's generally accepted that retinol has to be converted to be accepted and used by the skin.  By the same token, Retin A is already retinoic acid so it doesn't need to be converted.  It doesn't change its composition based on the individual.  How individuals react to it, successfully or not, is a different discussion.

---

@JeanLouiseFinch

I read this in the ncbi studies about retinol. Other factors relating to the timing of conversion have to do with a person's general health, their diet, exercise/life style, environment, whether or not they smoke...

I guess skin is not always skin. I've always been intrigued with someone's "sensitive" skin (for instance).

I suppose, though, that retinol is retinol. It's what is buffered into and surrounding the retinol. Which is why I was wondering what @Katilein was using in addition to the PTR retinol product.

Another interesting study might be, what, if anything, a vitamin A deficiency (internally) or toxciity would play in those who seemingly cannot tolerate retinol topically.

[JeanLouiseFinch]

---

@Harpa wrote:

---

@JeanLouiseFinch wrote:

---

@Harpa wrote:

@Katilein

I'm just wondering what kind of expectation you had/have?

And what, if anything, you were using in conjunction with it?

Yes, about the converstion step retinol takes to form into retinoic acid. But from my understanding, this differs from individual to individual, and would be impossible to generalize. There are a whole host of things in play, and not just the condition of the skin.

If anything, I absolutely do not trust when someone advertises that they have 1.5% or 3% of pure retinol in their product, as though the higher percentage should equal effectiveness. (But this is a whole separate discussion.)

---

Where did you learn this, @Harpa?  I've never seen anything like that before in anything I've come across and really don't understand how the individual would impact the metabolic conversion of retinol to retinoic acid?  Since skin is skin and retinol is retinol, aside from any possible interaction from other products/ingredients that could nullify effectiveness, I believe it's generally accepted that retinol has to be converted to be accepted and used by the skin.  By the same token, Retin A is already retinoic acid so it doesn't need to be converted.  It doesn't change its composition based on the individual.  How individuals react to it, successfully or not, is a different discussion.

---

@JeanLouiseFinch

I read this in the ncbi studies about retinol. Other factors relating to the timing of conversion have to do with a person's general health, their diet, exercise/life style, environment, whether or not they smoke...

I guess skin is not always skin. I've always been intrigued with someone's "sensitive" skin (for instance).

I suppose, though, that retinol is retinol. It's what is buffered into and surrounding the retinol. Which is why I was wondering what @Katilein was using in addition to the PTR retinol product.

Another interesting study might be, what, if anything, a vitamin A deficiency (internally) or toxciity would play in those who seemingly cannot tolerate retinol topically.

---

Interesting.  Thanks for replying, @Harpa.  It still seems to me, those factors would have more to do with how the person's skin receives it and uses it rather than how the retinol converted, unless the point is that these certain conditions change the way or amount of conversion steps that are required.  I'll have to look up the article.

[Suebdoo]

---

@Katilein wrote:

I know that retinol is the “it” product when it comes to reduce lines and wrinkles, along with exfoliation and spf. I’ve been using PTR retinol pm serum for at least 6 months now, and there’s absolutely no change in my skin. I also tried skinceuticals retinol, and that doesn’t do anything either. So my question to you is, which retinol product is really making a difference in your skin? When I see the presentations from PTR and how they’re praising the retinol pm serum like a godsend that everyone needs to have I always laugh cuz it has no effect on me. Please let me know   Thank you. 

@Katilein you mention retinol as having spf as a benefit.  That's not true as far as I know.  In fact you need to make sure you apply adequate spf if you are using retinol.  Maybe if you weren't, that's why you never had results?

---

[JeanLouiseFinch]

---

@Suebdoo wrote:

---

@Katilein wrote:

I know that retinol is the “it” product when it comes to reduce lines and wrinkles, along with exfoliation and spf. I’ve been using PTR retinol pm serum for at least 6 months now, and there’s absolutely no change in my skin. I also tried skinceuticals retinol, and that doesn’t do anything either. So my question to you is, which retinol product is really making a difference in your skin? When I see the presentations from PTR and how they’re praising the retinol pm serum like a godsend that everyone needs to have I always laugh cuz it has no effect on me. Please let me know   Thank you. 

@Katilein you mention retinol as having spf as a benefit.  That's not true as far as I know.  In fact you need to make sure you apply adequate spf if you are using retinol.  Maybe if you weren't, that's why you never had results?

---

---

@SuebdooWhere do you see that?  I don't see anywhere in her comment that retinol has SPF benefits.  Without putting words in her mouth, what she said was that those three things (retinol, exfoliation, and SPF) are needed for wrinkle reduction.

[maestra]

For skin cancer treatment it is used to increase cell turnover and helps keep skin cancer development at a lower rate.

[Katilein]

Correct, I never said that retinol has spf benefits. To be exact a spf is needed if you use retinol. Someone asked which other products I was using ( for the retinol not to be effective). I had the pads from PTR, a night ream from ELEMIS, and a spf 55 spf daily which I’ve been using for years. I also do use a mad hippie vitamin serum in the morning and I know that retinol and vitamin c compliment each other. 

[Katilein]

@JeanLouiseFinch

I wash my face morning and night with cerave hydrating cleanser, At night I did use the PTR retinol pm pads, nighttime moisturizer from ELEMIS. In the am I use vitamin c mad hippie serum and a spf 55 moisturizer. I just recently bought the drunk elephant tinted moisturizer as well. I will not go out without spf lower than 30. Maybe my skin is just being weird...

[SahmIam]

I don't use Retin A for many reasons but I DID ask my Primary Care for an Rx a few years back (before I decided not to use it). He's been my doc for 25 years (almost) and I love him; have suggested him to many- they love him too.

He refused to write one.

Why? I asked and his answer was that 1)  he's not a derm and yes, they DO get contacted about writing Rx's that aren't within the "scope" of the practice. Meaning, some Rx's are written predominantly by certain specialists. It can raise a flag so, his practice won't do it.

The product is supposed to be used as a regime with follow-up; they don't do skincare follow-up, they would refer you to a dermo or other specialist.

Also, my insurance won't cover it, I found out.

Now, this may just be my state. However, the number of Rx's that doctors USED to write and now won't is starting to become more common and causing patients to see specialists in order to get those drugs. 

For those that can get it without issue, lucky you. I hope it stays that way.

Edited because I forgot this part:  I know 3 women who get Retin A Rx's from their derm. One can't get it any longer. The reason she was told was due to the fact she doesn't have a skin condition that warrants the Rx (she doesn't, she was using it for lines/wrinkles). One of the women using it as horrible acne scars; she can get it without issue. The third woman (my MIL) has been told that unless her doc can find a true need for it, she will refer her to someone else because she won't be able to write an Rx without need. My MIL also uses it off and on for lines/wrinkles. I'm wondering if this is something that insurance companies/prescription plans are cracking down on and that's why the docs are refusing to write the scripts.