I have to make this post at this time as the topic and what I present is beyond my comprehension and disgusting: So here it goes...
Image Skin care is launching what they call to be a new technology called "Vectorize Technology" and it is a trademarked name and not a patent on this technology, they could have called it anything they wanted (more on this later).
In this video: http://vimeo.com/90234590
Marc A Ronert MD PHD says "My roll is to make sure that we are the most innovative skin care company in the industry" There is nothing to take away from this man on his education, experience or dedication to his craft or the skin care industry.
He goes on to add: Vectorize TechnologyTM is a revolutionary technology that is so unique to Image Skin Care. It refers to an innovative delivering system..." Please watch the video to see his eyes move as he watches cue cards. If what he says is true and possible he would not need cue cards to remember what he and his team have accomplished for the world. ANd he would be in EVERY Derm medical journal and across the news and NOT doing VIMEO press release videos. Further more he would license the technology to the world and MAKE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS!
What he is referring to is a massive biological event and one that would, if possible be handled by global pharmaceutical companies that would patent NOT 'tm' a name for this bio-technological delivery system and sell it to the world. It would be FDA approved in the United States and the EU and Asia. Further more, if this technology were true and its deliver system was provable it would have far reaching effects on the skin care and derm world.
The first product to gain FDA approval for its delivery was topical Rogaine and that product was designed by: "Rogaine is the brand name of a product developed by the Upjohn Company and is now owned by Johnson and Johnson."
How big was the UpJohn company?: The Upjohn Company in the United States and Pharmacia A. B. of Sweden said yesterday (1995) that they would join forces in a $13 billion deal aimed in part at selling drugs in huge quantities to H.M.O.'s and other organizations that buy medicines on behalf of tens of thousands of patients. The new company, to be named Pharmacia & Upjohn Inc., would become the world's ninth-largest pharmaceutical firm, with annual sales of nearly $7 billion. The merger is to be a friendly one, in contrast to other recent mergers of giant pharmaceutical companies.
Who owns Rogaine now? Johnson & Johnson
How big is Johnson and Johnson?: Johnson & Johnson NYSE: JNJ - Apr 17 4:00 PM ET 98.96+0.21 (0.21%) Worth: 295 BILLION DOLLARS
TO MY POINT:
How did a little skin care company from Florida doing roughly 10 - 20 million a year ( I am guessing, I have no idea how much they do a year but its an educated guess based on what I know others of there size do a year) develop this technology? A house wife turned skin care professional and a plastic surgeon turned "Medical Director" accomplish this massive task?
Further more... If what they did is true then the lab that did it would not give this miracle to JUST Image Skin Care and to that point every skin care company and pharmaceutical company would want it and BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WOULD BE MADE.
Back to their Video:
The picture below shows how they say the active ingredients are encapsulated. These ingredients have been the main stay of the skin care industry for decades. The event of delivery into the skin has been tried every medically known way possible. What they claim is impossible and the reason is that this IS the skin care industry and they can say it and trademark the name and as long as they stay away from specific language the FDA will not go after them and stop them for misleading the public.
IMAGE SKINCARE "IS" THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF SKIN CARE MARKETING WITHIN THE INDUSTRY!
He goes on to discuss the following
He talks about these spheres acting like an onion encapsulating the active ingredients and thus becoming time released. Time release technology has been a part of skin care and dermatology that big pharma has been after for DECADES and do to the skin's complex nature there is nothing that can claim this bio FACT! And if I am wrong please tell me the product line and I will bet the farm it is owned by a BILLION dollar company and Image Skin Care just infringed on GLOBAL PATENTS.
In this picture you see the 48 hour time period
In his video he never says WHICH layer of the skin and how deep. That is how this NEW technology avoids FDA regulation. THEY WILL NEVER SAY.
Now if this NEW TECHNOLOGY is all that, why would Image Skincare keep it to themselves and make millions when they could license it to every skin care company on the planet and make BILLIONS. Don't you think FDA approved medical topical creams that are developed to fight major skin issues could use this technology?
Do you have any idea how much money it takes to get FDA approval on a topical cream. The research. The funding...let me just say it is in the neighborhood of 200 - 400 million dollars.
THIS IS A JOKE AND DISGUSTING. AM I JEALOUS? YES I AM. I WISH I COULD LIE AND READ OFF OF CUE CARDS AND SELL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF SKIN CARE TO PEOPLE AND SKIN CARE PROFESSIONALS WHO ARE TOO BUSY TO READ AND INVESTIGATE AND DO NOT KNOW THE INSIDE SCOOP ON THE SKIN CARE INDUSTRY.
WHAT WOULD I DO IF I COULD LIE AND READ OFF OF CUE CARDS LIKE THIS DR. DID? GO BY MYSELF A LAMBORGHINI IN FIVE DIFFERENT COLORS: ONE FOR EACH DAY OF THE WEEK!
SO IMAGE SKINCARE AND DR. RONERT....
I CHALLENGE IMAGE SKIN CARE TO DO A CLINICAL TRIAL WITH A MAJOR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY AND SELL THIS NEW TECHNOLOGY AND FURTHER MORE TO GAIN FDA APPROVAL AND A PATENT ON "VECTORIZE TECHNOLOGY" IF IT IS WHAT THEY SAY IT IS. IF YOU CAN DO IT YOU WILL MAKE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS....
AND IF THAT CHALLENGE IS TOO BIG THEN THIS ONE:
I CHALLENGE IMAGE SCARE AND THE NEW VECTORIZE TECHNOLOGY TO AN INDEPENDENT STUDY AGAINST THE FOLLOWING SKIN CARE LINES:
(Acne - Anti Aging - Moisturizing - 30 - 15 Women / 15 Men - 6 months)
Peter Thomas Roth
I'm sorry Marty. Maybe it's the toddler running around here or the lack of sleep (from said toddler) but I am not understanding your point. I get it, it's bad but why exactly? Because they are gonna make money? Because they what? Quit talking in circles and explain the technology for me.
I am sorry you did not understand this post and to be honest I get how you would not and that is not an attack at your experience or ?.
What they are saying is a LIE! BOLD FACE LIE. They know it but they can say it all and they WILL make money, and lots of it... There is not much I can say and I hope the owners of Image read this and take my challenge.
What I am saying is that if what they have is true, they would patent it. Sell it to the world and make BILLIONS!!
What they are doing is creating marketing and buzz and THE SOMETHING NEW so they can sell MORE PRODUCT.
That is it. That is all it is.
Here is the technology:
What they are saying is they have an ingredient that wraps peptides, stem cells, plant extracts and the lightening agents into a water soluble vehicle and when it is applied to the skin it unwraps like an onion in a time released fashion over a 48 hour period of time and releases it to the layers of the skin which need it most.
With that said...
Since they know that if they said what layer of the skin and talked in specifics they would violate FDA law and they are big enough to get into trouble. So the say everything BUT what would get them into trouble and draw pictures that do not label the layers of the skin or go to the specifics other then what is plausible but not provable. That is the line between the FDA and the skin care world.
There is nothing Scientific and proven as to what they are claiming.
If what that Dr and Image said is true he would be in every MAJOR derm and pharmaceutical magazines and he would be a BILLIONAIRE over night.
I will give Image Skin Care this: THEY ARE THE MOST 'FANTASTIC' SKINCARE MARKETING COMPANY! The absolute best. I have watched them for over 5 years. But this, I could not keep my mouth shut. Sorry.
Well, I got that it was a bunch of bunk, but I wasn't sure WHY you thought that. :D
It goes along the lines of "noncomodonegenic" which is a bunch of phooey. It's not like they TEST for that. There is no test.
Until I see proven double blind study proof. I usually don't believe any of the bunk in our business.
There is actually a test for the "noncomodonegenic" but in today's cosmetics just like asking if I test on animals. Its a thing of the past.
90% of skin care lines can say "noncomodonegenic" and they are based on the ingredients that they know they can use vs what skin care pros or the advanced public will never buy.
Of course they did, but thank you for doing. I do not care what any skin care line does as long as it stays within specific boundaries. Take this skin care line - Dermaquest
A close personal friend of mine was the lead designer for their re-branding a few years back. So I had an inside path toward a few details on the company. The founder - (taken from website "As lead chemist and CEO, Sam Dhatt directs DermaQuest" ) is a good business man and does very well for himself. I never had a problem with a single thing he marketed since it fell within my personal boundaries and like Image I have never said a single thing bad or negative but then Sam Dhatt ran an advertisement in a major publication claiming to be the founder of Glycolic Acid use and basically ripped off the two dr.s that did and up until 2010 (Candad and US) held close to 125 patents on the use of glycolic acid.
HERE IS THE PROOF:
TriStrata, which holds more than 125 patents relating to alpha-hydroxyacids and other skin care technology, has licensed its patents to 40 companies in the cosmetics and pharmaceutical industries, including Avon, Beiersdorf, L'Oreal, Elizabeth Arden, Johnson & Johnson and Chanel.
See this link: http://www.neostrata.com/home.do
or read this link on Murad: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Murad+Settles+Pending+Patent+Infringe...
Where I am going with this is that the skin care industry is very new and really dates back to the early 90's and did not take off until late 90's early 2000 - 2002.
It was a just a bold face lie and something I had never seen before. I am not the skin care police and did nothing about it and besides being pissed that is about as far as it went. Something more, I think it ends this year but in Australia you could not sell a product that claims wrinkle reduction through the use of glycolic acid without either buying your glaycolic acid from the chemical company: DuPont or paying a royalty to TriStrata.
I posted this here so new esties could here the truth and its a forum I belong to. I never contacted Image or another to play skin care cop. But what they have done is beyond the boundaries and if this gets enough attention the FDA will come in and stop them. They might just have the marketing exposure to attract that attention. And if that heppened it wold destroy their company they have worked so hard to build and for that I would be sad for them. As stated, they are the #1 skin care MARKETING company and do a fantastic job.
Further more I know where this company started, the skin care line they modeled their early beginnings on and what they copied and what they did not. Through hard work they have come very far and that you cannot take form them nor will I, but THIS, they crossed the line. If the FDA comes in, and they could I would feel bad for them because they would have to pull it from the market and a lot would be lost.
The challenges as stated in my first email stand and I look forward to a response and I am sure the skin care lines I mentioned would also like the chance to challenge Image and their new Vextorize Technology and its revolutionary claims.
OK. So look at this from the Dermaquest website: BOLD ARE MY COMMENTS
We were the first to formulate with innovative ingredients that are now considered essential to the industry. THIS STATEMENT IS A DIRECT POINT TO GLYCOLIC ACID. The same remains true today. IT DOES THEN, WOW, WONT IMAGE HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT IT. No one else uses them in the same way and to the same effect that we do. REALLY. HOW ABOUT ME? DO I HAVE TO PUT ANOTHER CHALLENGE OUT HERE AND MAYBE IMAGE OR PCA MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT THAT TOO. Our ingredients are of the highest quality, ensured by our state-of-the-art lab and team of educators. REALLY? I HOLD THE MOST EXPENSIVE PRODUCTS AT MY LAB AND WOULD LOVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHALLENGE THE OWNER ON THIS ONE OR AT LEAST COMPARE. MY LAB LAUGHS AT ME AND THE MONEY I SPEND BUT I SAY, "IF THE MEDICAL BOOKS SAY IT HAS TO BE THIS TO DO ITS JOB THEN THAT IS WHAT IT IS AND COST IS WHAT IT IS. They are used to craft exceptional, luxury skincare products that address any client concern and ensure that skin realises its fullest potential. NOW THIS IS THE BEST AND TRUEST STATEMENT.
The point I am trying to make is that skin care lines can say anything they want and just about do anything they want so look for the basics and don't believe what you read so much and ask for proof then research it.
Take a look at this topic (google it) if you want to REALLY understand PIH:
"pigmentation" "neural crest" "melanocytes"
If you do take a look and google the above words and you have questions, please post it here and i will explain it to you and or do the best I can. But know that till this day there are parts that are not fully understood so I might just say: "I don't know" or "I don't know and neither does anybody else but read this for possibilities".
And to the point of this thread: That is why Image should not be saying what they are and so goes it for a large part of the skin care industry. TILL THIS DAY THE SKIN HAS PARTS WHICH BAFFLE AND CONFUSE MODERN MEDICINE.
they should have listened today's webinar... lol
Not sure I understand your post. :)
yesterday's webinar with Dr. Diana Howard was "Ingredient Facts & Fiction."
she talked about these 'better than botox" creams and how they don't work.
the only thing that has proven to work are peptides and retinols, AND BOTOX. lol
Actually there is much more that works but the only thing you can base it on is the history of an ingredient and how long it has been used for skin care by both MD and Esthetics inside the US, Asia and the EU. There is a point in all skin care where time in market is your only proof of efficacy but all skin care mfgrs know when they are just marketing a BS ingredient or technology...ALL OF THEM.
And when in doubt all you have to do is follow the FDA and their guidelines.
To your points:
Botox is an injection so we know is proven, but the others are based on time in market. The peptide you speak to is probably M. 3000 which is the patented peptide ingredient used by 99% of the skin care industry. I use it at 6% in my peptide cream and from 1% - 8% is the range the mfgr says to use. I looked at the clinical trials and decided based on a few remarks that above 6% saw no noticeable increase in efficacy. Why waste the money?
As for the retinols well we all know the history there.
But for all others, time or years used is something you can base your formulas on. For me, 15 years or more is what it takes to prove an ingredient and with that said, all mine pass that test. Does not make mine better or ?, its just a different philosophy.
I have a few rare ingredients I use which are straight from Medical books so I base the usage on those findings. When I say rare, I am saying rare to the skin care industry as in most lines do not formulate with them or at high enough percentage due to cost and or knowledge of the facts surrounding their use.
I have always said boring is what a skin care line should be but the problem is boring has a harder time growing. But at the end of the day when you are speaking to a new skin care pro or a twenty year veteran you have to be able to look yourself in the mirror about what you are talking about, asking them to use in their back bar and sell to their clients.
What ever line your using: PCA, Glymed or ? ask them about this new Vectorize Technology and see what they say. I doubt they will be as vocal as I am but I am sure you will be surprised at what they do say and I know it will not be: Its amazing and I wish I developed it!
This is such an example of why this industry frustrates me. It's so hard to explain to clients that so many "miracle ingredients" aren't. I covered it briefly in this article I was quoted in:
Also, Marty, I still plan to get ahold of you and order some serums. I truly appreciate your knowledge and passion :)
Right now I'm carrying a few ayur-medic products I like (their sheer tint spf and pumpkin and papaya exfoliants) & a friend's local organic line's face wash (very gentle) and a few of her creams (not sure if I will continue with them or not tbh). I'm in a very sophisticated market that isn't necessarily a very spendy one- brooklyn. Lots of artists and graphic designers and highly educated clients who want cutting edge technology, sexy packaging, and affordability all-in-one. I've been considering doing a few private label products but being honest that they are just that; basics that nearly everyone should be using like hyaluronic serums, vitamin c serums, and retinols that I could sell for 1/2 as much as even a reasonably expensive line while still making a profit.
Serene is one of the only smaller lines I trust isn't just made in the same labs as private label products at this point haha. A lot of people on here recommend botanical science, but when i go on amazon it's full of private labelled botanical science (and my sacred fig and etc etc ) products. Skin Script seems like a lovely line ingredients-wise but the packaging (see also: lines like farmhouse fresh) just doesn't appeal to my client demographic. They want sophisticated, no-nonsense, scientific skincare. To that end I've looked into Osmosis, and I think Ben Johnson seems knowledgable, but I can't find enough info to completely drink the Kool-Aid and the protocols are soooo complicated- also the web videos etc are just plain strange.
Anyways, sorry to go on a tangent, but this industry is full of it and unless an esthi is a chemist themselves it's very hard to find a profitable line that also has integrity.