How to not wear deoderant for the rest of your life...

If you just use regular deoderant v.s. an anti perspirant, you don't have to worry about aluminum, e.g., Old Spice, it's essentially the same thing as what you are doing. I've never been comfortable with anti perspirants, if your body needs to sweat, then it's probably good to let it sweat. When the stink is stronger than the deoderant, time to shower or bird bath. Or just don't worry about it, depending on the circumstances.

I'm naturally skeptical of herb remedies in general. While some no doubt work, people need to be careful that they know what they are doing. Many things can become toxic when the concentrations change. I do trust the large drug companies, they spend many millions of dollars on research. My wife worked for several, and they have always been very stand-up.

Having said all that, if this works for you, that's great. Just don't hurt yourself playing with the concentrations.
 
Alum Rock- my wife and mother use it.
Also a lemon works better than any deodorant. It will clean your pits and use it for a few days and you won't stink even if you skip a day.

I believe it is alum as well. If you can remember the sticks that you can use when you cut yourself years ago it tastes the same. I have used one of these crystals for years now. It works. I had wanted something that would not smell while deer hunting. Just wet the crystal and rub it under the arms, no odor. I can't see using anything that I can smell other than rubbing green cedar and chewing the berries to mask a scent. You can use the crystal on your feet as well. It inhibits bacterial growth.
 
The "crystal salt" is Alum as I understand it, which is a potassium aluminium sulphate, and the ingredient in most commercial antiperspirants is aluminium chlorohydrate. I am no chemist, but perhaps the idea is that Al is less mobile when bonded to a sulphate (where's our resident chemist Resinguy, I am sure he knows), either way, both contain aluminium.
 
First, you don't change your underwear for a month. Now, you don't use deoderant. What's next!?

stinkfoot.jpg
 
The "crystal salt" is Alum as I understand it, which is a potassium aluminium sulphate, and the ingredient in most commercial antiperspirants is aluminium chlorohydrate. I am no chemist, but perhaps the idea is that Al is less mobile when bonded to a sulphate (where's our resident chemist Resinguy, I am sure he knows), either way, both contain aluminium.

McRob,

There can be aluminum in Alum - but there does not need to be. The company claims it to be Aluminum free. They could use Chromium or something else.

"Double sulfates with the general formula A2SO4·B2(SO4)3·24H2O, are known where A is a monovalent cation such as sodium, potassium, rubidium, cesium, or thallium(I), or a compound cation such as ammonium (NH4+), methylammonium (CH3NH3+), hydroxylammonium (HONH3+) or hydrazinium (N2H5+), B is a trivalent metal ion, such as aluminium, chromium, titanium, manganese, vanadium, iron (III), cobalt(III), gallium, molybdenum, indium, ruthenium, rhodium, or iridium.[1] The specific combinations of univalent cation, trivalent cation, and anion depends on the sizes of the ions. For example, unlike the other alkali metals the smallest one, lithium, does not form alums, and there is only one known sodium alum. In some cases, solid solutions of alums occur."

The Thai Chrystals that I use are made of Sodium and Potassium that are allowed to crystallize and then are shaped into a more user friendly application.

To say that 'both contain aluminum' is not correct in the sense that alum is not the same as 'up to 25% aluminum'.

Here is an explanaition of modern underarm deoderant:

"Solid antiperspirants are made with several ingredients, including wax, a liquid emollient and an active-ingredient compound. It's the active ingredient that gives antiperspirants their sweat-blocking power. All antiperspirants have an aluminum-based compound as their main ingredient. If you look at the back of an antiperspirant container, the aluminum-based compound is always the first ingredient listed. Here are a few of the common active ingredients:

* Aluminum chloride
* Aluminum zirconium tricholorohydrex glycine
* Aluminum chlorohydrate
* Aluminum hydroxybromide

The aluminum ions are taken into the cells that line the eccrine-gland ducts at the opening of the epidermis, the top layer of the skin, says dermatologist Dr. Eric Hanson of the University of North Carolina's Department of Dermatology. When the aluminum ions are drawn into the cells, water passes in with them. As more water flows in, the cells begin to swell, squeezing the ducts closed so that sweat can't get out.

Each cell can only draw in a certain amount of water, so eventually, the concentrations of water -- outside and inside the cells -- reach equilibrium. When this happens, the water inside the cell begins to pass back out of the cell through osmosis, and the cell's swelling goes down. This is why people have to re-apply antiperspirant. For those who suffer from excessive sweating, hyperhydrosis, aluminum chloride in high concentrations can prolong the swelling and may ultimately shrink the sweat gland, decreasing the amount of sweat it can produce.

An average over-the-counter antiperspirant might have an active-ingredient concentration of anywhere from 10 to 25 percent. The FDA requires that over-the-counter antiperspirants contain no more than 15 to 25 percent of the active ingredient, depending on what it is. The FDA also requires that all antiperspirants must decrease the average person's sweat by at least 20 percent. For those who have excessive underarm sweating, there are prescription products that contain concentrations higher than those of over-the-counter antiperspirants." LINK

Here is what one manufacturer says about Alum and Aluminum:

"Our deodorant stones are made of potassium alum. It is a pure product made without the addition of chemicals, fragrances, oils or alcohol. The chemical formula for potassium alum is K2SO4Al2(SO4)324H20. Potassium alum is a colorless substance that forms octahedral or cubic crystals.
Bauxite is the ore from which alum is drawn. It is formed by the rapid weathering of granitic rocks in warm, humid climates and can be purified and converted directly into alum.

Potassium alum is soluble in seven times its weight of water at room temperature and is very soluble in hot water. When crystalline potassium alum is heated, some of the water of hydration becomes chemically separated, and the partly dehydrated salt dissolves in this water, so that the alum appears to melt at about 90 degrees C (approx. 392 degrees F), potassium alum swells up, loses all water, and becomes a basic salt called burn alum. Potassium alum has a density of 1.725.
Alum's are used for a variety of uses including as a powerful astringent.

If an aluminum compound, such as aluminum chlorohydrate or aluminum zirconium, which is very soluble, is used as an antiperspirant, that compound is readily absorbed. Once in the body, the aluminum portion of the molecule ionizes, forming free or radical aluminum (Al+++). This passes freely across cell membranes, and forms a physical plug, that when dissolved is selectively absorbed by the liver, kidney, brain, cartilage and bone marrow. ... Potassium alum molecules have a negative ionic charge, making it unable to pass through the cell wall. THEY ARE NOT ABSORBED. This is why our deodorants are safe to use and will not cause high levels of ALUMINUM in your system. ALUM and ALUMINUM are two different substances, with distinct chemical signatures. They possess different chemical properties which create different chemical attributes. "

TF
 
Last edited:
I do trust the large drug companies, they spend many millions of dollars on research. My wife worked for several, and they have always been very stand-up.

Hey sodak,
Complete trust in drug companies may be misplaced. Consider Thalidomide, or more recently Lymerix - something I'm concerned about since I had all 3 Lymerix injections. For some people, they experienced the very things they were trying to avoid. It all had to do with genetic predisposition, apparently. A search will turn up details of a class action lawsuit against Smith, Klein, Beecham IIRC.

There was also a drug recalled recently (I don't remember the name) but IIRC, the drug was prescribed for depression, and in some people, contributed to their suicide!

Just my 2 cents.

Doc
 
I use drugs as well but the Baye - Dole act (in America) has made drug companies a lot more scary in my opinion.

Fen Phen, and the like are very scary.

Check out what consumer reports has to say: LINK

The FDA seems hog tied in most cases.

TF
 
There was also a drug recalled recently (I don't remember the name) but IIRC, the drug was prescribed for depression, and in some people, contributed to their suicide!

Just my 2 cents.

Doc

This is a precaution listed with all anti-depressants, and most believe it is primarily due to the nature of giving a depression. You're too depressed to take any sort of action in life, let alone ending it. Then you get a drug that during upward titration gives you a boost in energy, just to the brink of enough to kill yourself. The study being discussed was also mainly in younger populations.

There are many, many laws and structures in place to test medications and treatments before they 'hit the streets'. It's obviously not perfect, but every time you give a new law or rule, you increase the money required to make a drug and the time until it can be used by the public. Or put another way, they're not in a hurry to get some drug out there that will end up with a lawsuit costing them millions of dollars.

I'm not making a claim about the safety of antiperspirants either way, just that I always get a kick out of people who come to the pharmacy and deride the safety of the prescription drug they're about to take that's been used for decades and been through multimillion dollar government regulated trials, but will also buy a half dozen homeopathic 'drugs' that have hardly been tested or consistently manufactured.
 
Where do we sign up to be the guinea pig for this stuff...send your experiments to me and I will try them out :thumbup:
 
For a long time I was concerned with the unhealthy effects of chemicals so about 15 years ago I started using regular Baking Soda daily instead of under arm deodorants.

At first it did not work that good but I stuck with it and after approximately a month of constant use, suddenly there was no more odor with very little perspiration, to this day.

Even shirts that are ready for the laundry have very little or no odor.
 
I just use plain ol' rubbing alcohol, and it works fine. And I'm a BIG sweater.

Sometimes the regular kind, and sometimes the "scented", with wintergreen, or whatever - depending on what the wife picks up at the store. Cup your hand and get a couple of tablespoons in there, then rub it up and down the target zone (plus about 6"-8" either way).

It's cheap, too.

Pine
 
This is a precaution listed with all anti-depressants, and most believe it is primarily due to the nature of giving a depression. You're too depressed to take any sort of action in life, let alone ending it. Then you get a drug that during upward titration gives you a boost in energy, just to the brink of enough to kill yourself. The study being discussed was also mainly in younger populations.

There are many, many laws and structures in place to test medications and treatments before they 'hit the streets'. It's obviously not perfect, but every time you give a new law or rule, you increase the money required to make a drug and the time until it can be used by the public. Or put another way, they're not in a hurry to get some drug out there that will end up with a lawsuit costing them millions of dollars.

I'm not making a claim about the safety of antiperspirants either way, just that I always get a kick out of people who come to the pharmacy and deride the safety of the prescription drug they're about to take that's been used for decades and been through multimillion dollar government regulated trials, but will also buy a half dozen homeopathic 'drugs' that have hardly been tested or consistently manufactured.


I agree with much of this Spooky - and we are off topic (in a way). But, after teaching Biomedical ethics and checking out research protocol's and the changes post Baye Dole - drugs like Vioxx are allowed to hit the street - merely because Merck had spent so much money on research - they could not afford it to NOT hit the streets. I think that the FDA is much less powerful than they used to be in stopping dangerous drugs. I fear money is the mover now.

With that said - drugs make my life a LOT better... oh - wait - are we talking about over the counter? ;)
 
There was also a drug recalled recently (I don't remember the name) but IIRC, the drug was prescribed for depression, and in some people, contributed to their suicide!

Doc

Doc...this happens alot. As someone who has been treated for depression,I have to say that the meds don't make the depressed person feel any better. All I found them to be good for was to make others more comfortable around a depressed person.
 
I think that the FDA is much less powerful than they used to be in stopping dangerous drugs. I fear money is the mover now.

With that said - drugs make my life a LOT better... oh - wait - are we talking about over the counter? ;)
Sorry, but I have to disagree. The FDA can easily hold up drugs from hitting the market for many *arbitrary* reasons for a very long time - years. After a company has spent many millions in development and trials, this can be very frustrating. My wife has seen this happen many times, and it still goes on to this day.
 
Sodak,

Read about the Vioxx debacle - the estimated 27,000 heart attacks and how the FDA approved it. What do you think about the FDA's role there.

I think I get jaded teaching the case studies that are ONLY the negative. ;)


TF
 
Sodak,

Read about the Vioxx debacle - the estimated 27,000 heart attacks and how the FDA approved it. What do you think about the FDA's role there.

I think I get jaded teaching the case studies that are ONLY the negative. ;)


TF

I'm sure we could go back and forth pretty easily. Companies have to spend many millions of dollars - make that tens to hundreds of millions to try and bring a drug to market. Their success rate is pretty low, probably around 20% get past clinical trials. That's money down the drain. They get a 17 year patent to try and recoup their costs before competitors can manufacture the drug and compete. I've seen several examples where the FDA will hold up trials, applications, etc., based upon the whim of the director for years - 10 years in one case, IIRC. Now the company only has 7 years to recoup those costs, for no good reason. The 17 year clock starts ticking at the application, not the approval.

Having witnessed some of the protocols these drugs go through, I have far more confidence in them and the companies rather than unproven "natural" or "herbal" remedies.

I think the FDA has far too much power. As always, YMMV.
 
Like I said - I think I may be jaded. Here is what I find odd about Western Medicine. If it is considered 'traditional' - meaning it cannot be patented - there is no money ever spent to see if it is effective. Primitive peoples have been using traditional methods for thousands of years with great effect - but if there is no double blind clinical trial in America - we tend to dismiss it out of hand.

Take Peppermint for instance. It is by far the most effective thing to settle my stomach when it is upset - all I can give is anecdotal evidence because no one can nor will market Peppermint as a medication.

I also think that Doctors are highly influences by drug makers (when you look at the amount of money that is spent courting them) thus most of them do not consider the primitive methods.

What I also find odd is that this forum embraces many forms of primitive things - but when I brought this up - it got a lot of flack for being dangerous, wrong, incorrect and many other things. Don't get me wrong - I am not angry - I just find it odd.

TF
 
Like I said - I think I may be jaded. Here is what I find odd about Western Medicine. If it is considered 'traditional' - meaning it cannot be patented - there is no money ever spent to see if it is effective. Primitive peoples have been using traditional methods for thousands of years with great effect - but if there is no double blind clinical trial in America - we tend to dismiss it out of hand.
I agree with you totally here. If there is no money in it, then it would be fruitless (and a waste of money) for a company to study it. I also agree that a lot of traditional remedies work great. It would be nice if the govt. would do some clinical trials on them, and we could really see.

A lot of modern medicine come from the traditional areas also, which I think is important to remember.


Take Peppermint for instance. It is by far the most effective thing to settle my stomach when it is upset - all I can give is anecdotal evidence because no one can nor will market Peppermint as a medication.
Ever try a can of ginger ale? Ginger *really* works well. For me, a bottle of beer really settles my stomach - but just one.


I also think that Doctors are highly influences by drug makers (when you look at the amount of money that is spent courting them) thus most of them do not consider the primitive methods.
I can't argue here, you are correct!


What I also find odd is that this forum embraces many forms of primitive things - but when I brought this up - it got a lot of flack for being dangerous, wrong, incorrect and many other things. Don't get me wrong - I am not angry - I just find it odd.

TF
I hope I didn't come across angry, if I did, then I apologize. I think there's room for both viewpoints. I also think that if some traditional remedies work well, then there's a good reason for it, it would be nice if there were studies. Since it wouldn't make sense for a company, it would be nice if a public entity of sorts would take that one on.

For instance, ginger ale works good on the stomach. Could you grind up a ginger root and put that in a cup of tea? I'm sure you could, but I don't know how much to put in. It would be nice to have that information also.

FWIW, I use alum after shaving with my straight razor, great stuff!
 
I also think that Doctors are highly influences by drug makers (when you look at the amount of money that is spent courting them) thus most of them do not consider the primitive methods.

What I also find odd is that this forum embraces many forms of primitive things - but when I brought this up - it got a lot of flack for being dangerous, wrong, incorrect and many other things. Don't get me wrong - I am not angry - I just find it odd.

TF

I certainly agree with the former statement. It's not always nor even frequently the case (necessarily), but often strong pushes from the 'latest and greatest' do more harm than good.

As for the latter, I apologize if I gave any flack about your choices! In my education and experiences with patients, herbals and such are far too often looked at as safe (because they're natural, so what harm could they do..) so people end up getting in trouble with them. It's not to say they're all bad, but it's can potentially be like people self medicating things without appropriate supervision. Or put another way, you're situation is a bit different than what normally triggers my knee-jerk response.
 
Back
Top