Or why cross-over double blind studies are the real deal
Have you ever wondered when you lay down your hard-earned money why many skin care brands claim to spend years of research on developing a range of beauty solutions, which are guaranteed to give you the results you are looking for? It’s true that many but not all of them do invest a considerable amount of money into understanding skin better, formulating anti wrinkle products that can give faster results or exploring the properties of new ingredients. But how do you know if you can fully trust the many claims that a brand makes? In many cases you will discover it is just science PR spin and that on closer inspection the details remain unsupported.
Watch out for the proofs that are being presented to you!
Scientific studies and clinical trials are hardly the same thing and you should be aware of the difference between them so you know when you get just an advertising trick and when you hold a real working skin treatment.
Scientific Study is the most common method of research used.
A scientific study on skin care products simply refers to different techniques that are used to investigate a claim or a theory and which are meant to enhance our understanding or knowledge about the subject itself. In fact, this is the preferred method of research that many renowned brands resort to, as it is believed to be foolproof. Scientific studies depend heavily on experimental evidence, where every claim or idea must be supported with ample proof at every stage of the research. But actually, most so-called scientific studies do not cut it in real scientific world and produce unsupported claims, unless the study protocol is designed to test the active claimed ingredient benefits against a placebo.
The term supported or unsupported claim can only be determined by comparing an active compound against a placebo in a closed Double blind clinical study. That is why manufactures stay away from conducting such a telling and difficult study.
Double Blind Clinical Trials are the only foolproof method of research.
A scientific method of study may not always be accurate as it leaves plenty of room for bias or inaccurate observations on the part of the observers and volunteers. A Double Blind Clinical trial on the other hand, rules out any such inaccuracy as this trial eliminates any possibility of bias at all. This method of research is so called because neither the researcher nor the volunteer knows if the actual active claimed compound or a placebo has been administered. In fact, so fool proof is this trial that it is only after all the data has been recorded and studied, that researchers come to know whether a participant belongs to the control group or not. This study has been found to be very effective in greatly reducing any prejudices or preconceived notions as well as in producing objective results. One can safely trust any brand that successfully passes a double blind clinical trial test, simply because the results are as scientifically accurate as possible and are not influenced by any person participating in the study.
You should know Double Blind Clinical Trial is the top end of science proving a products claim is supported. The still tougher method of conducting a scientific study to support a products claim is a double blind “cross over” clinical trial. It is the same as a Double blind study except the trial product is applied randomly on either the right or left side of a persons face and thus confusing the researchers as to which side of the face is receiving an active compound and which is not.
What about Narhex Australia claims on its Cross-Linked 10/1™ skin treatments?
As it turns out the Australian national newspaper Weekend Australian found Narhex was the only company not only to provide a double blind study but a more difficult cross over double blind clinical trial on both women and men. Extract from Weekend Australian stated in its review article “After contacting Estee Lauder, Christian Dior Clarins, Elizabeth Arden, Helena Rubinstein and Revlon Narhex Australia was the only one which could provide evidence of a double blind clinical trials preformed on its cross-linked 10/1™product”.
Besides containing unique ingredients – NarAHA™ and NarElastin™ – which are proven to gently reduce any aging symptoms on your skin, Narhex is also the only skin care brand to have passed Cross Over Double Blind clinical trials conducted independently in not one country but in three – Australia, UK and France. This also helped in understanding the effectiveness of Narhex antiaging products on different types of skin. The Narhex Eye Cream which contains 3% NarElastin™ and a placebo which consisted of the same ingredients without NarElastinTM, were administered to volunteers between the ages of 27 to 50 years. The volunteers were asked to apply both creams individually to both areas of the face; especially on the skin just under and on the side of the eyes. They were asked to apply the antiwrinkle creams in this manner, in the morning and evening daily for a period of four weeks. Silicone casts were taken of the treated area before and after the study in order to carefully analyse the surface of the skin, measure the wrinkles and to tabulate the data.
Not surprisingly, the volunteers both women and men did not have any skin irritation or other side effects during the trial and were amazed at the visible improvements in their skin. After four weeks of treatment, 63 % and 77% of the Australian volunteers had noticeable improvements in their coarse and fine wrinkles respectively. Similarly, 65% of the UK volunteers showed improvement in the coarse wrinkles on their faces whereas 73% of the subjects showed a reduction in their fine wrinkles. The results proved that the 6359876-Crosslinked-Elastin-Skincare-Research was a success. Finally, here was an anti wrinkle product that actually worked!
Have some fun and test for your self who is selling you a story and who is selling you a real performance product.
Next time you’re in a store talking to a cosmetic consultant representing one of your favourite brands like Estee Lauder, Christian Dior Clarins, Elizabeth Arden, Helena Rubinstein and Revlon ask them to see the detail that supports their products claims. You will most likely discover their claims are unsupported scientifically. You will discover more then likely they never even heard of a double blind clinical trial let alone conduct one.
You do not have to be a scientist to see their reaction to your question is. You will most likely discover they have nothing to show as supportive clinical evidence conducted in a Double blind clinical trial. They will produce Just shiny glossy graphs that look impressive but will contain no scientific reference as to how they conducted there studies. That is when you should walk away as you are being sold hope and not a real proven solution.
So if you are ready to use an antiaging product that has proved its effectiveness in a double blind clinical trial and by removing the signs of aging for so many Australians; Narhex Australia antiaging skin care products are all that your skin really needs.
