![]() ![]() ![]() Moreover, this material is not brightly coloured. It is perfectly safe even to eat in moderation, never mind the tiny amounts that would be ingested from a cosmetic. None of these materials are appreciably toxic: actually an extract of Fucus vesiculous is still a permitted food additive and dietary supplement. There is no substance called "fucus-algin", nor "bromine mannite." Fucus is a genus of common brown seaweeds, and the rest is a slightly garbled list of typical components of an extract of brown seaweed: algin (a sticky gum), and traces of iodine (actually in the reduced form as iodide salts), bromine (also actually as salts) and mannite. However as given the claim is at best garbled and possibly complete nonsense. So at a minimum, a reference is required for this claim.Īncient Egyptians extracted red dye from fucus-algin, 0.01% iodine, and some bromine mannite, which resulted in serious illness.Īgain no source is given, however googling reveals that many websites make this claim, some of them citing Read My Lips: A Cultural History of Lipstick, Chronicle Books,, M. However the only source I have found that gives more detail about al-Zahrawi's solid sticks describes them as perfume it says nothing about colouring the lips. Al-Zahrawi was a surgeon, and his Kitab al-Tasrif is about medicine (mainly, surgery) but apparently it does include one chapter on cosmetics. The phrase "invented solid lipsticks" is linked to List of inventions in the medieval Islamic world, as if that contain supporting references but it does not. Djxerox ( talk) 07:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC) Reply Īt least two things in the history section seem rather doubtful.ĭuring the Islamic Golden Age the notable Arab Andalusian cosmetologist Abu al-Qasim al-Zahrawi (Abulcasis) invented solid lipsticks, which were perfumed sticks rolled and pressed in special molds, and he described them in his Al-Tasrif Anything used in access commonly destroys its purpose and should not be considered in its general use. Also the comment "it makes women less attractive" should take into consideration the importance of moderation. Anyone who is willing should investigate this further should do to its factual nature. ![]() I unfortunately only know this through a college psychology class and have not successfully found a good source. Lips plump, breasts increase in size, and usually a glow appears across the skin to show stimulation. When women are stimulated through sexual encounters they gain a "glow". Lipstick is a imitation of sexual stimulation. The program (Discovery or PBS) said that the application, because it is to the lips, simulated menses, therefore ovulation and fertility, and that the attraction carries second in the human brean because of that. I remember watching a documentary (no I cannot source it, so I'm not adding it) that said the attraction carey actually is a genetic holdover throughout the ages, like larger bosoms being symbolic of producing more milk, or large hands equating to endowment. This article takes for granted that lipstick makes women look more attractive sometimes usually its effect is exactly the opposite. Nothing applied to the body is a characteristic, secondary or otherwise. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |