Polysorbates 60 et 80

Potential efficacity for hair loss : ⭐⭐

My recommendation

I would advise against using polysorbates for hair loss. The available studies are quite limited and often provide conflicting information. It's better to consider more effective treatments until we have additional research and clear, conclusive evidence.

Home 9 Medications and others 9 Polysorbates 60 et 80

Polysorbates 60 and 80

Polysorbates 60 and 80 are synthetic compounds used as emulsifiers, surfactants, or additives in food, medications, and vaccines. For instance, they are employed to thicken food products, maintain the smoothness of sauces, or even to bind certain ice creams and yogurts to preserve their creamy textures. These compounds are generally considered safe for human consumption.

Within the same family, there are other polysorbates like polysorbate 20 and polysorbate 40. The numbers 20, 40, 60, and 80 correspond to the total count of oxyethylene groups -(CH2CH2O)- in the molecule.

In the context of alopecia, polysorbates 60 and 80 have fallen out of favor, despite being once considered promising treatments a few decades ago.

Is it effective against hair loss?

In the 1980s and 1990s, polysorbates 60 and 80 gained popularity thanks to the Helsinki Formula. This was a shampoo and conditioner designed to combat hair loss, developed by Dr. Ilona Schreck-Purola. The Helsinki Formula created quite a buzz upon its release, and numerous companies produced and marketed various versions of this formula.

However, the popularity of polysorbates declined due to lengthy legal battles against companies using the Helsinki Formula. Eventually, the FDA banned its advertising, and the Helsinki Formula disappeared from the shelves.

This situation appears to involve conflicts of interest between pharmaceutical groups and the FDA, making polysorbates even more intriguing in my opinion. You can learn more about the lawsuits in this article (source), and the intricacies of the case are quite astonishing.

How polysorbates 60 and 80 work

Three theories have been proposed by Dr. Ilona Purola and others to explain how polysorbates promote hair regrowth:

They clear hair follicles of DHT hormone.
They stimulate histamine production.
They break down cholesterol.

Theory 1: Clearing Hair Follicles of DHT Hormone

According to this first theory, polysorbates may have the ability to clear hair follicles of DHT hormone.

Dihydrotestosterone (DHT) is an androgen hormone naturally synthesized by our bodies from testosterone in various tissues. The enzyme responsible for this conversion is 5-alpha-reductase (5aR).

According to the most popular theory, DHT is considered one of the primary factors in androgenetic alopecia as it is believed to cause gradual hair thinning, a process referred to as miniaturization, in predisposed individuals.

It is thought that by inhibiting the function of the 5-alpha-reductase enzyme, one could reduce the formation of DHT and consequently decrease hair loss.

Unlike DHT blockers, polysorbates do not reduce DHT by inhibiting 5aR. According to the theory, they do so by either detaching DHT from androgen receptors or by clearing accumulated excess DHT.

Theory 2: They Stimulate Histamine Production

According to the second theory, polysorbates may trigger the release of histamine, which increases blood flow and nourishment to hair follicles.

While histamine is often associated with seasonal allergies, it plays a crucial role in cell growth and replication. In fact, histamine acts as a growth factor. Therefore, applying a substance to the scalp that stimulates histamine release can promote hair growth.

Theory 3: They Break Down Cholesterol

According to the third theory, polysorbates may break down cholesterol on the scalp and clear hair follicles. This process could promote cell division and facilitate hair regrowth. Cholesterol buildup can also clog blood vessels.

What Do Scientific Studies Say?

As of now, there is only one accessible study, and finding studies conducted by Dr. Ilona Schreck-Purola is challenging. We can only gather fragments of information regarding these studies.

Study 1

In a study conducted in 1974 by Dr. Ilona Schreck-Purola at the University of Helsinki, 110 patients with alopecia used a topical solution containing polysorbate 60.

Researchers noted hair regrowth in 42% of the subjects after 16 weeks of treatment, according to some sources. However, other articles suggest that 65% of the patients noticed hair regrowth.

However, the absence of a placebo control group was a significant limitation in this study. Additionally, it is unclear whether the subjects had androgenetic alopecia or another form of alopecia.

Study 2

In another study conducted 11 years later, H.D. Groveman and colleagues tested the effects of polysorbate 60 on hair loss. This study included 141 men, with a control group receiving glycerin as a placebo.

After 16 weeks, no significant difference was detected between the subjects treated with polysorbate 60 and the control subjects treated with glycerin. The study concluded that polysorbate 60 was ineffective.

Among the 141 subjects who completed the trial, 25% felt they had new hair, 67% did not, and 8% were uncertain. The perceived growth of new hair reported by the subjects was not correlated with measurements, suggesting that this perception may have been due to the placebo effect.

Closing Thoughts and Verdict

Despite the three theories mentioned earlier, studies on polysorbates are not convincing. To the best of my knowledge, no other studies have been conducted.

Since the 1980s, many individuals continue to claim that the Helsinki Formula is effective and has helped them prevent hair loss. On the other hand, we also have testimonies from people stating that the use of polysorbates had no effect on their hair loss.

Personally, I believe you should explore other treatments until new studies emerge.

Today, some products use formulas similar to the Helsinki Formula. It is also possible to purchase polysorbate 60 or 80; however, these compounds have a very viscous consistency and are difficult to apply, similar to honey. Even if given a chance, the comfort of use would be very low, and the experience would quickly become unbearable.