I don't think JC actually says anything negative about DCing on wet or dry hair...she says oil (as a prepoo) is best on dry hair and that dry DCing is fine but she believes shampooing makes better sense last.
I personally cannot think of a big difference between DCing with dry hair or wet. DCs usually contain water as the first ingredient, that is at least 50% water. The hair will get wet/moist with the DC on. I'm not sure I agree with wet hair causing such a dilution that it would make an already water-infused product work differently but...weirder things have happened. Lol.
Earlier Nonie you mentioned small molecules indicating a deep conditioner because it penetrates the cortex. I agree with that wholeheartedly, it's why I was wondering about the ingredients on the AOGPB. To me this product sounds more like a conditioner (ingredients that work on the surface) and not a DC. In any case...these terms can be so subjective, companies and marketing teams can call any product as anything. I find that many condishes with penetrating ingredients like coconut oil and hydrolyzed protein don't call themselves a "deep conditioner" and vice versa. It really is very much up to us to decide what works or not, companies will market in whatever way they see fit (I believe).
Uhm, and I think earlier I misread this thread as a "DC first or last" question.
Sorry!
Yes, I did mention molecules being small for deep conditioning to occur but I also mentioned that since strengthening products need patching up of holes on the surface of the strands aka in the cuticle, that perhaps this is why a reconstructor could have large molecules (in addition to the small ones) because they do not need to penetrate. I also stated that I don't understand how the magic works but common sense does tell me that "deep conditioning" means more than surface coating. Granted anyone can plaster a label on a product and it not be what it claims to be, but that is where experience becomes the best teacher and so far, GPB is a wonderful DEEP CONDITIONER.
Saying that some products that contain small oil molecules that penetrate hair don't have the DC label on them could be coz they do not deep condition. See, this is why looking at specific ingredients and assuming their existence means one thing may be the wrong way to look at products. JC said that water affects how oils are absorbed by hair. Maybe the products have so much water that these small molecules don't get absorbed. Maybe the product has other things that make the small molecules not easily accessible. I dunno (I did say that earlier, right?). I just know that the DCing method of GPB works on MY hair and that of many. And I know that if I were to leave a product like Trader Joe's Nourish Spa on my dry hair all day, I would not get the same effects I get from GPB's DCing method because TJNS is not a DCing product. In fact,
would you know(!)... I actually know this for a fact because I've done it. I wasn't trying to DC but to detangle my hair and had the product on my hair longer than usual.
I never let my hair tangle so detangling isn't part of my regimen, but in 2008, I made the mistake of breaking Nonie's rules and after wearing a twist-out all day, I went to bed with loose hair--a big nono in my life (Remember I don't use leave-in products) and that was the one time I had to work tangles out of my hair coz I woke up to a rat's nest. @
*Happily Me* had shared a tip of detangling on dry using conditioner so I applied TJNS to my dry hair and painstakingly used my fingers to separate my strands. The product was on my hair for a long time. When I washed it off, my hair was OK...but not the same way my hair feels when I rinse off GPB after DCing on dry. I don't know what the ingredients of Nourish Spa are but I do know, not just coz it doesn't say so on the bottle but also from experience, that a DC it most certainly isn't.
Percentage of water in a product does make a difference whether you think so or not. That is why Humectress conditioner and Humectress mask which is for DCing have different textures, the latter being thicker which would appear to mean less water. Also without even understanding the science behind this, anyone can tell you that applying lotion to wet skin will not give the same moisturizing effect as applying the lotion on skin that isn't wet. The water molecules would be in the way of the goodies in the lotion being absorbed by your skin not to mention that application would not be even as the lotion molecules would slide over the water molecules and only get to some parts and not as evenly as it would if there was no water. Also you don't have to believe it but if water didn't make a difference, then there would not be specific instructions for DCing with a product like GPB that state that there should not be any water. GPB does have water but the right amount for it to work as a deep conditioner. You add more water, you dilute it and make it less effective as a DC hence the reason why on wet hair it works like a regular conditioner.
As for what JC said or did not say, she did say in response to
Q: Can you condition first and then shampoo? this:
Yes you can but you will be removing conditioner that stuck to the surface of the hair from the initial conditioning process.
If that were true then conditioners like Nexxus Emergencee and GPB which have to be used that way for DCing purposes would be useless and one would have to use them again after shampooing to put back what was removed. Clearly shampooing doesn't remove the positive effects they just gave hair before shampooing coz one doesn't need to do use them again but rather one is supposed to use a regular conditioner after that. And since it is believed that protein treatments fuse into the hair and fill gaps in the cuticle ie on the surface, then surely these products would not be doing their job if shampooing was removing them since they are supposed to deposit protein on the hair where it's to provide strengthening. But they do do their job. Which means there's something deeper than JC's ken about how they work which cannot be understood just by looking at the ingredients or just by assuming it's as simple as "shampoo removes everything".
Anyway, can we agree to disagree as we decided to before and let everyone test the products for themselves and make up their minds from experience instead of just simply buying into what someone wrote? Unless JC stands for the Jesus Christ I know then she isn't a flawless guru so she can't be 100% correct on everything. And since my experience proves what she says isn't true, then for me she is indeed incorrect on this matter.
