QuestionQUESTION: I've been going to two different salons for the past year or so. I mostly go for pedicures, and they've done a good job... everything sterilized, etc. I decided to get a full set about a month ago at one salon and got a fill at the second last week. Well, the tech asked me if I wanted UV gel instead of acrylic. She said it would be thinner and cause less damage to my nail. Even though it was $30 for a full set rather than $25, and $25 for a fill instead of $18 (the other place is $25 for a UV gel fill and $12 for an acrylic fill...) I figured it was worth it and got what I thought was the gel. She applied it the same as an acrylic, but with a white powder vs the pink acrylic powder(she showed me both). Reading though information on the web regarding UV gel and learning that gel is not a powder and liquid combination like acrylic, and then learning about MMA and EMA, I'm pretty sure that what these salons are calling UV gel is really EMA and they are selling MMA for the standard $12 acrylic fill... what do you think? Other than this concern, and a little chip that I have on my thumb (I'm VERY rough on my nails...) I'm not otherwise concerned... should I find another salon?
ANSWER: Dear Trisa,
First, UV Gel is NOT thinner than acrylic. Both may be applied in the same degree of thickness. Second, neither is more damaging to the natural nail than the other. IN FACT, neither is damaging.
What is damaging is poor technicians using electric files on the natural nail itself. THAT is damaging to the natural nail.
Both services should be equal in price, ASSUMING that they are equal quality and LEGAL products.
Also, Uv Gel NEVER contains powder.
Please see these pages on my site. One explains the dangers of NSS (non standard salons) and their scams and MMA (the toxic variety of acrylic). And the other, the differences between the different systems.
http://ongles-chez-victoria.tripod.com/victoriasnails/id18.html
http://ongles-chez-victoria.tripod.com/victoriasnails/id16.html
It sounds as if yes, indeed you are being scammed.
UV Gel and quality acrylic both contain EMA which is FINE and safe.
It's the MMA that is what you need to be concerned about.
I hope this helps
Best regards
Victoria
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: So now that I'm totally scared... what kind of clues could I use to ascertain if the salons had used MMA or EMA when they put my nails on. The enhancement is pretty clear and there isn't a fill line... and the acrylic chipped towards the front. Would any of these be signed that it was the good stuff?
Also, once I find a better salon, is it okay to have fill or should I have these nails removed and get a whole new set? How much should I expect to pay (for acrylic, cause I don't really like the idea that the UV gel cannot be completely removed)?
Also, I work with young girls who's crazy mothers think its okay for a 10 or 12 year old to have ridiculously long bright red nails... and I know they are going to cheap salons. Would there be more of a risk for a child being exposed to MMA?
AnswerDear Trisa,
On the link that I provided you, the clues that you would have MMA on your nails are:
- if the acrylic does NOT soak off easily in acetone within 20 minutes and must be pried off, thus damaging the natural nail. Quality acrylic WILL soak off in pure acetone in 20-30min MAXIMUM and no longer.
- if there's a strong odour
- if the technicians use unlabelled containers without logos on them indicating 'Brand" of product used.
- if the technician refuses to provide the MSDS sheet for the products they use.
It's always best to infill over the existing product. Their's absolutely NO NEED whatsoever to have the older product removed. IN FACT, if it is MMA, it would have to be filed off and no one - least of all yoursel - wants to breathe that in. And if your nails are damaged underneath from being overfiled, THEN if you did remove it, the new product wouldn't stick well to the damaged nails. Best to leave sleeping dogs lying and refill over it.
Chipping is NOT indicative of the quality of product. It might be too thin, or you might have hit the nail a funny way and off it went. Who knows? Hard to say.
UV Gel CAN be removed if it's a soakable. There are some brands of UV Gel that WILL remove in ACetone.
However, if you intend on wearing enhancements long term, why worry about removing it? Most just file it thin and grow it out if they tire of it.
I have clients that have worn UV Gel for several years, without removal. There's absolute no need to remove it.
Contrary to "myth", nails don't breathe or they'd drown when you do dishes. The ONLY time nails need a break is if the technician is a bad one and causing damage to the natural nails with his/her filing methods. OTHERWISE, there's no need to remove them.
Long term exposure to MMA has proven to be detrimental to a persons health. There is absolutely NO REASON for a 12yr old to have enhancemetns applied and YES if MMA is used, this can cause some serious problems for the children down the road. MMA has been known to cause birth defects, liver problems, kidney problems, lung problems, etc etc...
Please refer those parents to the link I provided on my site re: MMA and what the government itself has to say about it.
I do hope this helps
best regards
Victoria
