Well yeah it's dead, but it still absorbs moisture and if it gets too dry you get severe irritation if you try to shave. They definitely aren't exactly the same, but you definitely don't wanna shave dry skin any more than you would strop on dry leather. That was my point, not an exact comparison.
Water Penetration in Keratin: Revisiting the Scientific Data on Shaving
- Thread starter SiBurning
- Start date
Well yeah it's dead, but it still absorbs moisture and if it gets too dry you get severe irritation if you try to shave. They definitely aren't exactly the same, but you definitely don't wanna shave dry skin any more than you would strop on dry leather. That was my point, not an exact comparison.
Well actually the top layer of your skin IS dead skin and it can dry out like leather. Why do you think some people like face lathering and exfoliating face scrubs so much? Because some peoples skin carries more of a layer of dead skin and they benefit from the exfoliation and can get a closer shave. Others may not carry so much of a layer and may not benefit from removing the top layer of dead skin which may just lead to more irritation or razor burn. This is why different people shave in different ways, everyone's skin is different and why so many posts here state YMMV. We're talking about a few minutes here, not soaking in the bathtub for an hour waiting for our skin to get all pruney before we shave.
The top layer of your skin can NOT dry out like leather though, as they are supported by live oil glands and pores underneath and through. Water also DESTROYS leather, and water dries leather out. which is why you have to OIL leather when it gets wet, to restore the oils that the water strips out.
In my opinion, the only water necessary is that which serves to lubricate the sliding of the razor. Any water that swells the skin on your face will plump the skin up over the base of the hairs, resulting in a shave that is a bit less smooth when your skin calms down and returns to "normal." I don't really see how saturating your face with water, especially with a hot towel, does NOT make the skin less abrasion resistant. Which resists abrasion more... a dry piece of paper, or trying to write on a wet piece of paper?
Water is the universal solvent, isn't it?
eh, I'm out of my depth here, and I don't really know what I'm talking about. I just have found that I get the best shaves with minimal prep. Obviously, most other people have different results, so who knows what is going on...??
In my opinion, the only water necessary is that which serves to lubricate the sliding of the razor. Any water that swells the skin on your face will plump the skin up over the base of the hairs, resulting in a shave that is a bit less smooth when your skin calms down and returns to "normal." I don't really see how saturating your face with water, especially with a hot towel, does NOT make the skin less abrasion resistant. Which resists abrasion more... a dry piece of paper, or trying to write on a wet piece of paper?
Water is the universal solvent, isn't it?
eh, I'm out of my depth here, and I don't really know what I'm talking about. I just have found that I get the best shaves with minimal prep. Obviously, most other people have different results, so who knows what is going on...??
Very interesting. Thank you, Steve.
- Thread starter
- #45
We're all out of our depth here. In my mind, the most difficult thing about the skin is how soft, almost gel-like, it is when wet. Once you put a lather on your face, I have to wonder what kind of mix the skin makes with the lather in that boundary layer of dead skin.
There's a lot of complications...
"Shaving I. Study of Skin and Shavings" (see wiki) shows that a lot of the skin that comes off is donut shaped pieces around the hair follicles, often with a hair still inside. There's a mix of nucleated and non-nucleated cells, which roughly translates (by my recollection from Biology 101) that some of the cells (those with a nucleus) that come off in shaving aren't completely dead, or haven't been for very long.
On the friction/lubrication side, lather might smooth out any irregularities, making a smoother surface for the blade. But a smoother surface can give more friction simply because there's more contact area. I can't guess which one (smooth or irregular) causes more irritation. There's also different possible modes of lubrication for smooth vs irregular surfaces, making it more complicated. You could glide over a smooth surface where the lubricant prevents complete contact, or the lubricant could "fill in the gaps". But the irregularities are soft (dead skin cells) and there's no hard boundary if the lather and skin mix to form some kind of gel-like... whatever.
And does any of that matter? If we feel irritation, doesn't that mean that a nerve is irritated? I mean, it shouldn't matter what happens to the skin cells, we should only feel what the nerves detect.
There's no doubt about it! We're all out of our depth here. The one thing it makes me appreciate is that it makes sense to emphasize clinical studies, though fundamental research is still useful over the long term. So I can appreciate P&G's approach which supports both.
There's a lot of complications...
"Shaving I. Study of Skin and Shavings" (see wiki) shows that a lot of the skin that comes off is donut shaped pieces around the hair follicles, often with a hair still inside. There's a mix of nucleated and non-nucleated cells, which roughly translates (by my recollection from Biology 101) that some of the cells (those with a nucleus) that come off in shaving aren't completely dead, or haven't been for very long.
On the friction/lubrication side, lather might smooth out any irregularities, making a smoother surface for the blade. But a smoother surface can give more friction simply because there's more contact area. I can't guess which one (smooth or irregular) causes more irritation. There's also different possible modes of lubrication for smooth vs irregular surfaces, making it more complicated. You could glide over a smooth surface where the lubricant prevents complete contact, or the lubricant could "fill in the gaps". But the irregularities are soft (dead skin cells) and there's no hard boundary if the lather and skin mix to form some kind of gel-like... whatever.
And does any of that matter? If we feel irritation, doesn't that mean that a nerve is irritated? I mean, it shouldn't matter what happens to the skin cells, we should only feel what the nerves detect.
There's no doubt about it! We're all out of our depth here. The one thing it makes me appreciate is that it makes sense to emphasize clinical studies, though fundamental research is still useful over the long term. So I can appreciate P&G's approach which supports both.
Last edited:
I'm with Neognosis. Leather is a terrible analogy. Not only does your skin produce oils, but it is also perfused by a blood supply. Capillaries in your skin dilate in response to hot water, which can produce edema. Edematous skin is easier to injure.
There is no ex vivo model for shaving that comes remotely close to the complexities of the human skin covered with hair follicles.
Count me among the believers that over-prepping probably makes shaving more irritating, rather than less so.
There is no ex vivo model for shaving that comes remotely close to the complexities of the human skin covered with hair follicles.
Count me among the believers that over-prepping probably makes shaving more irritating, rather than less so.
The problem with shaving, and what makes the science around it very tricky is that YMMV. Everyones face is not the same and what works for one face may not work at all for another. As for me, if I don't do a decent prep job, my face gets torn up. Part of that may be due to only 6 weeks of practice and part is because I have a very tough beard that takes a good deal of work to get a clean shave. I do much better with a shower before and scrubbing my face and usually letting lather set on my face before shaving. Not for everyone, but it works for me,
- Thread starter
- #48
YMMV is no reason to not try.
Like Chief George, I shall endeavor to persevere.
Like Chief George, I shall endeavor to persevere.
So you are saying that shaving with a well watered face is better than going dry.
Great! I can continue to "wet" shave.
Great! I can continue to "wet" shave.
One of the most quotable of all movies.
Steve,
It sounds like there are no easy answers or certainties on the "best" way to prep or even how to plan for the most effective least irritating shave, but there do seem to be some answers to parts of the question. Heat, for instance, is less important to prepping the whiskers than we thought. That's a piece of data I can use. You also talked in this and in another thread about the nature of the cut on the whisker from the razor and the various ways the whisker could break. I'm curious what your opinion is on the greater or lesser effectiveness of a slant. I've only used one for about a half dozen shaves, but it did "seem" more aggressive as it did to another friend who borrowed it. Is that the placebo effect or is there something to it?
oake
- Thread starter
- #51
I use a slant most of the time. It's not so clear what the slant does. It seems to be designed with the idea of doing a push or slice cut, like how you'd push the knife forward while cutting a tomato. But no matter how I imagine it, even when I try twisting a piece of paper to visualize it, the edge looks straight just like on any other razor. I lay the blade on my face, and the razor ends up crooked, while the blade is straight against my face. I just can't wrap my head around how it works this way. On the other hand, it's slanted in a certain direction that seems perfect for doing a j-hook in one direction, where the outer, larger diameter part has the larger gap, and the inner, smaller diameter part of the curve has the smaller gap. I'm always complaining how I also want a left-handed or clockwise slant. At least it makes sense in terms of using a small gap on the inside where the blade doesn't move as much but more rotates, so a gentler gap makes more sense. Either way, slice or curve, gives essentially the same result--it's easier to cut like that. I use a lot of curves even without the slant because my face is curved, and the natural moves of the wrist and most of the body are really curved anyway.
I'd imagine whiskers end up getting cut cleaner when you do a slide, slant move, j-hook, or do any other kind of sideways or crooked motion just like you get a cleaner cut on a tomato. In a way, both have a (relatively) harder shell and a softer inside. And it certainly allows me to use less pressure, especially on those few areas of tougher hair. I think this is all true of cutting most anything, even wood, which you really saw. Of course there are exceptions, such as cheese.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #52
I tried twice. No thinky me know talk about the whatsit.
Thanks for the read, some great info there. Yes, it is tough to really get down to why lather works so well, but odds are that the hair itself has less to do with it than the relation between skin and razor. I wonder whether the PH of a soap does anything positive for the shaving experience at all, or has any noticeable effect - I know the study found little proof, but there are limitations inherit to focusing solely on the hair follicle. Great to see someone else is thinking more about shaving than we are!
- Thread starter
- #54
Most of these do a thorough test at room temperature, let's say with 6-30 subjects depending on which project. Then to compare at different temperatures, they do several tests with a smaller sample size, say samples from 3 people at 5 different temperatures. Something like that. The good ones make sure to do a statistical analysis to make sure the test size is reasonable. If they pick out 3 people that fit the normal pattern, and use them for the temperature test, somehow it doesn't feel like a proper test to me, though the math says it is. (But there has been some criticism on B&B about some of the "scatter" in these tests.)
Since I'm skeptical, I try to stay away from anything that's only reported by one test. That's also part of the reason I looked for data from the keratin research that supports the shaving tests, but also to get at possible reasons to explain the results. I'm just an amateur that doesn't really know what a proper test is, but I try the best I can. I'd welcome any criticism or whatever. Sorry if I stray into details of what I'm thinking, but most people aren't going to read the reports, and anything I say should be even more suspect and open to peer review than the research Gillette & others sponsor. (Not talking about their marketing.)
But getting back to your question about measuring a single factor... If the internals of hair soften by 30%, but the keratin doesn't soften at all, shouldn't the cutting force be reduced by less than 30% because the keratin is still just as hard as before? So it's really not clear from this one data point (the force to cut hair) what exactly is happening. I could explain it away by saying that plain water might soften the cuticle by 30% (though not the keratin in the cuticle) but I'd be making that up, or at least need to do more research. This is the kind of thing that makes me hesitant to write these kinds of posts.
Last edited:
Oooohh, no, no, no. Don't stop doing that. Don't focus on whether you're right or not in your analysis. You presented it with all the appropriate caveats and uncertainties. The service you provided is getting us to think about what we do and to call into question the efficacy of certain rituals. Invaluable service.
Exactly.
If I worried about whether of not I was actually right about what I was posting, I'd have about 17 posts to my name....
and I would be struck permanently dumb.
- Thread starter
- #59
Maybe I've been overly cautious with this. The original idea for this came from Jim about a year ago. He asked if I could write something scientific based around Kyle's Prep. I was already doing some amateur shaving science stuff, started the disorganized science of shaving wiki page, and even had a custom title of "Resident Mad Scientist" or something like that. Jim suggested it as a way to be focused and useful. I took it as a challenge. It was a complete surprise to find the research disagree with the conventional wisdom about keratin & the cuticle. It's pretty bold to claim that conventional wisdom is wrong, when almost everyone says its so. So that's where the caution comes from.
The perfect pre-shave?
Right here:
Right here:
Similar threads
