j, Cosmet. Sci.

, 54, 175-192 (March/April 2003)

Effect of mineral oil, sunflower oil, and coconutoil on

preventionof hair damage

AARTI S. RELE and R. B. MOHILE, Research and Development Department, Nature CareDivision,MaricoIndustries Ltd.,
MumbaL India.

Accepted for publication April 29, 2002,

Synopsis

Previously published results showed that bothin vitroandin vivococonut oil (CNO) treatments prevented combingdamageof various hair types.Using the samemethodology, an attempt wasmadeto studythe properties of mineraloil and sunflower oil on hair.
Mineral oil (MO) wasselected because it is extensively usedin hair oil formulations in India, because it is non-greasy in nature,andbecause it is cheaper thanvegetable oilslike coconut andsunflower oils.The study wasextended to sunflower oil (SFO)because it is the second mostutilized base oil in the hair oil industry on account of its non-freezing property andits odorlessness at ambient temperature. As the aim wasto cover different treatments, andtheeffect of these treatments onvarious hairtypes usingthe above oils,the number of experiments to be conducted wasa veryhigh numberand a technique termedasthe TaguchiDesignof Experimentation wasused. The findings clearlyindicate the strongimpactthat coconut oil application has to hair as compared to application of both sunflower and mineraloils.Amongthreeoils, coconut oil was the onlyoil foundto reduce the proteinloss remarkably for bothundamaged anddamaged hair whenused as a pre-washand post-wash groomingproduct.Both sunflower and mineral oils do not help at all in reducingthe protein lossfrom hair.

This difference in resultscould arisefrom the composition of eachof theseoils. Coconutoil, being a triglyceride of lauricacid(principal fatty acid),hasa high affinityfor hair proteins and,because of its low molecular weight and straightlinear chain,is able to penetrate insidethe hair shaft.Mineral oil, being a hydrocarbon, hasno affinityfor proteins and therefore is not ableto penetrate and yield betterresults. In the case of sunflower oil, althoughit is a triglyceride of linoleicacid,because of its bulky structure due to the presence of double bonds, it does notpenetrate the fiber,consequently resulting in nofavorable impact on protein loss.

INTRODUCTION

Morphologically, a fully formedhair fiber contains three and sometimes four different unitsor structures. At its surface, hair contains a thick protective covering consisting of layersof fiat overlapping scale-likestructures called the cuticle. The cuticle scales surround the cortex,which contains a major part of the fiber mass.The cortex,the second unit, consists of spindle-shaped cellsthat arealignedalongthe fiberaxis.Cortical cellscontain the fibrous proteins of hair. Thickerhairsoftencontain oneor moreloosely packed porous regions calledthe medulla,locatednearthe centerof the fiber. The fourth
175

176

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE

unit is the intercellular cementthat gluesor bindsthe cellstogether,forming the major pathwayfor diffusion into the fibers. The cuticleconsists of flat overlapping cells(scales). The cuticlecellsareattached at the proximalend(rootend),and they point towardthe distalend (tip end)of the hair fiber. However,cuticledamage evidenced by brokenscale edges that canusuallybe observed several centimeters awayfrom the scalpis caused by weathering and mechanical damage from the effects of normalgroomingactions,suchascombing,brushing,and shampooing. Because of extensive cross-linking, cuticlecellstend to be brittle and, therefore, are susceptible to damage by groomingprocedures, especially wet combing(1). In long hair fibers(25 cm or longer), progressive surface damage may be observed. The loss of cuticle cellsby gradualchippingimpairsthe structuralintegrity of hair, leadingultimately to split endsand fracture. This limits the lengthand the cosmetic qualitiesof hair suchas
Table I

Designof Experiment Using the TaguchiModel

No. Oils Hair type Hair treatment Oiling sequence Shampooing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8

CNO SFO MO MO CNO SFO MO

MO

Straight Curly Wavy Permed Straight Curly Wavy

Permed

Undamaged Undamaged Undamaged Undamaged Bleached Bleached Bleached

Bleached

Before Before Before Before Before Before Before

Before

Once Once Twice Twice Once Once Twice

Twice

9 10 11
12

SFO CNO MO
MO

Straight Curly Wavy

Permed

Boiled Boiled Boiled

Boiled

Before Before Before

Before

Twice Twice Once

Once

13 14 15
16

SFO CNO MO
MO

Straight Curly Wavy

Permed

UV-treated UV-treated UV-treated

UV-treated

Before Before Before

Before

Twice Twice Once

Once

17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24

MO MO CNO SFO MO MO CNO

SFO

Straight Curly Wavy Permed Straight Curly Wavy

Permed

Undamaged Undamaged Undamaged Undamaged Bleached Bleached Bleached

Bleached

After After After Afier After After After

After

Once Once Twice Twice Once Once Twice

Twice

25 26 27
28

MO MO SFO
CNO

Straight Curly Wavy

Permed

Boiled Boiled Boiled

Boiled

After After Afier

After

Twice Twice Once

Once

29 30 31
32

MO MO SFO
CNO

Straight Curly Wavy

Permed

UV-treated UV-treated UV-treated

UV-treated

After After After

After

Twice Twice Once

Once

Treatments weresequential. If the treatmentis designated asCNO-Permed-Boiled-After-Once, it means permedhair wasfirst put in boilingwaterfor 120 min andair dried,and then 0.2 ml of CNO wasapplied to it. This treatmentwascarriedout for all 25 hair tresssamples. Twenty-fivereplicatetresses wereused
for each treatment.

EFFECT

OF COCONUT

OIL ON HAIR

DAMAGE

177

Table

II

Analysis of VarianceData for Half-Head Treatments for ProteinLoss Source of variance

Between treatments

Hair type
Normal

Degrees of freedom
1 38
1

Sum of squares
34.8 2234.6
42.8

Mean square
34.8 58.8
42.8

F-Value at 95% confidence level

o.6

Oil type MO
Bleached

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

1.1

Oil type MO
Normal

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

38

1545.7

40.7

Oil type SFO

Bleached

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

1 38
1 38

39.6 1345.6
48.6 1195.6

39.6 35.4
48.6

1.1
1.5

Oil type SFO

Normal

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

31.5
31.6 5.1 6.2

Oil type CNO

Bleached

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

1 38

31.6 195.6

1
38

36.5
286.5

36.5
7.5

4.9

Oil type CNO

Experimentalerror

F theoretical for 1.38 degrees of freedom at 95% confidence level = 4.08.

smoothness and shine.Groomingmethods involvingabrasive procedures are known to damagehair and its appearance.

Historically, coconut oil hasbeenusedasa hair dressing in the developing countries in the tropicalregions of the globewherethe coconut is cultivatedextensively. Prolonged useof coconut oil hasbeenknownto lead to healthylookinglong hair, suggesting that it may prevent damageto the cuticle in groomingprocedures involving abrasion. Obvious is the lubricating effectof oil on fiberfriction,whichreduces abrasive damage, especially in combing. However,in moderntimes,the trendin hair oil formulations is more towardsthe useof non-sticky oils suchas mineral oil or lessgreasy oils suchas sunflower oil. This is doneprimarilybecause of costdifferentials aswell asto overcome theundesirable properties of coconut oil such asgreasiness, its strong smell,andfreezing at ambienttemperatures.
This investigation is aimedat comparing the effects of thesetwo oils alongwith that of coconut oil in preventing hair damage whenusedasa preconditioner. Althoughseveral methods involvingscanning electron microscopy (SEM)measurement of combing forces andtensile mechanical properties havebeenusedearlierto characterize hair damage, we haveusedprotein lossand water uptakemethods for this purpose. Furthermore, these methods havebeenextended to studythe beneficial effects of theseoils in preventing chemical, thermal,andUV damage. Efficacy of these methods hasbeenestablished in an earlierpaperfrom this laboratory (3).

MATERIALS
MATERIALS

AND

METHODS

Samples of straight,curly,wavyandpermedhair of Indian originwereusedin thiswork. The length of the Indian hair strands was 25 cm.

178

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE

200-

176

173

17 165 i

160 -

120PROTEIN LOSS IN
80-

}92
40-

92 86

135&116

ug/g OF HAIR

COCONUT
OIL

SUNFLOWER OIL

COCONUT OIL

SUNFLOWER OIL

PRE-WASH TYPES OF OILS

POST-WASH

IBWITHOUT

EIWITH

Figure 1. Comparison of proteinlossfrom undamaged hair.

The reagents for protein estimation wereobtainedfrom SigmaChemicalCo. (St. Louis, MO). The otherreagents suchasbuffers and saltswereof analytical grade,whereas the oil samples wereusedas they are available commercially.
METHODS

Sample preparatio,. Hair tresses of 3+0.5 g were preparedfor this investigation. They were secured at the root end by a crochet sothat they remainedfirmly in place,and not a singlehair cameout of the tress duringexperimentation (eitherbecause of combing or during the procedure). They were cleaned by soakingin 0.01% (w/v) of polysorbate 80 (30 min at 28C), de-ionized water at room temperature (severalrinses),and 0.01% (w/v) of aceticacid (15 min at 28C), in that order.Finally, they were extensively rinsed
in water and air dried.

Bleachedhair was preparedby using a bleachingkit containing30 vol. hydrogen peroxide andammonia solution to adjustthe pH to -10. Fivemillilitersof thissolution wasusedper tress(cleaned by the procedure mentionedearlier),and the treatmenttime was120 min at roomtemperature. With this treatmentthe tresses became light brown
with a red tone.

A boiling water treatmentwascarriedout for 120 min. The hair tresses wereplacedin

EFFECT OF COCONUT

OIL ON HAIR

DAMAGE

179

227
240 200

.....................................

160-

145

139 145 140

PROTEIN

LOSS

IN 120-

uglg OF HAIR

80

40

0 COCONUT OIL

SUN FLOWER
OIL

COCONUT
OIL

SUN FLOWER
OIL

PRE-WASH TYPES

OF OILS

POST-WASH

BWITHOUT

DWITH

Figure 2. Comparison of protein lossfrom bleached hair.

a beakercontaining boiling distilledwater. The hair tresses were immersed in it. This wasnot doneto simulateany real-worldprocess but in orderto createextremestressful conditions.This was primarily done to assess any impact on hair in water at high temperature, as Indian consumers largely usea hot water bath for hair.

In the case of UV treatment, the hair tresses wereexposed to simulated sunlightin a xenostat, wherein eachhair tress wasexposed at 50Cand 65% relativehumidity for a periodof 300 hr. The tresses wereturnedoverduringtheperiodof exposure to attempt a uniform exposure of all fibersto the radiant source.
In some caseshair tresses were treated with 0.2 ml of coconut oil/mineral oil/sunflower

oil before exposure, with the oil spread uniformlyacross the hair tress before exposure to UV light. In a few cases, the treatmentwith oil wascarriedout afterUV exposure. The tresses werestored at roomtemperature for 48 hr beforethey were subjected to proteinloss determination. This wasdesigned to simulate density of hair on scalp and
scalptreatments.

For the oil application, to eachhair tresswasapplied0.2 ml of oil (the quantity of oil normallyappliedby an Indian hair oil user).It wasallowedto remainon the hair for at least14 hr to simulate overnight application (the normalhabitof the Indianconsumer). Thesehair tresses were then subjected to both protein lossand WRI tests.

The entire studyinvolvedsamples of straight,curly, wavy,and permedhair of Indian origin. Because the numberof variables washigh, i.e., the type of oil, type of hair,

180

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE

360 -

306
320 280240 200 160 120 8040-

PROTEIN

LOSS

IN

ug/g OF HAIR

0
COCONUT

OIL

SUNFLOWER OIL

COCONUT OIL

SUNFLOWER OIL

PRE-WASH TYPES

OF OILS

POST-WASH

[] WITHOUT

[] WITH

Figure 3. Comparison of proteinlossfrom hair treatedwith boiling water.

sequence of oiling, the total numberof oil applications, and the numberof shampoo applications, the studyhad become quite complex in nature.In orderto simplifythe complexity of the experiment, i.e., to reduce cost,time, andenergy withoutcompromising on the quality of results, a statistical tool wasselected, termedthe Taguchi Designof Experimentation. Thisis a toolused in research anddevelopment of products in an engineering industrywherein,depending upon the levelsand factors, an appropriatedesign, eitherorthogonal array or factorial design, is selected. Thishelps to reduce the number of experiments withoutaffecting the result.Usingthis statistical model,it waspossible to complete the entirestudyin the stipulated time framewithout losing vital information, asit cut the numberof experiments to be conducted from 14400 to 800 (considering 25 hairtresses pervariable). As the experiment wasquitecomplex, we had to select the designof an orthogonal array,L32, to conduct the experiment. The designof experiment wasaspresented in Table I.
The tresses were wetted under running tap water (28C) and washedwith a 20% solutionof sodiumlaureth(3 molesof EO) sulfate(SLES).One milliliter of the solution

wasapplied per tress, and the tresses wereworkedbetween fingers to produce a lather. Followingthis, they wereextensively rinsedto remove all the SLESresidues. After this treatmentthe tresses were subjected to the followinginvestigations.
Combing damage. The protein loss method of Sandhuand Robbins was used in the

following manner. Eachof the wet tresses wascombed with a fine-tooth nyloncomb
(20-22 teeth/inch)50 times,rathervigorously alongthe entirelength of the tresson

EFFECT

OF COCONUT

OIL ON

HAIR

DAMAGE

181

440400 36O 32O 253 280 240

PROTEIN

LOSS

IN 200
160 120 80

ug/g OF HAIR

400

COCONUT
OIL

SUNFLOWER
OIL

COCONUT
OIL

SUNFLOWER
OIL

PRE-WASH TYPES

OF OILS

POST-WASH

[] WITHOUT

[] WITH

Figure 4. Comparison of proteinloss from hair exposed to UV treatment.

bothsides. After every five strokes, the combwasdippedin 50 ml of watercontained in a beaker to dislodge the debris. The same 50 ml of waterwasused to collect all the loosely heldprotein eluted fromthecomb fora given tress. Theentiretress wasdipped in waterafterevery fivestrokes to collect the damaged anddislodged cuticle cells. The watersuspension wastested for proteincontent usingthe Lowrymethod. It wascompared against standard bovine serum albumin procured fromSigma Chemical Co.This bovine serum albumin wasdilutedsoasto getreadings withinwhichthemaximum and minimumreading for the sample wouldfall. The method involves the formation of a copper-protein complex in alkaline solution that,in turn,reacts withphosphomolybdicphosphotungstate reagent (Folin-Ciocaltaeu Phenol reagent) to yieldan intense bluecolored solution, whichis analyzed spectrophotometrically. It waschecked that the blue colordevelopment occurring in bothstandard andsample wasof the same color with different intensity, depending on the amountof proteinbeingelutedfrom the hair fibers, thereby indicating thatnone of theoilswasinterfering in the color development. The methodology is discussed to a greatextentin reference (2).
Water fete,rio, i,dex (WRI). The SLES-washed tresses were soakedin a 0.01% solution

ofpolysorbate 80 for 30 min.Following thisprocedure, theentiretress was placed over a hollow glass cylinder with a glass lid with perforations to holdthetress properly and to separate the hair fromcapillary waterin the glass centrifuge tubeof diameter 3 cm andheight8 cm.It wascentrifuged at 8000 rpmfor 15 min to remove capillary water

182

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE

PROTEIN

LOSS

IN

ug/g OF HAIR
200

COCONUT

OIL

MINERAL OIL

SUNFLOWER

OIL

TYPES OF OILS

[] NORMAL WITHOUT [] BLEACHED WITHOUT

[] NORMAL
[] BLEACHED

WITH
WITH

Figure 5. Comparison of proteinloss from normalandbleached hair in a salon trial.

andthenweighed. In thenextstep, thedryweightof thehairwasdetermined bydrying

the tress in a vacuum oven at 50C for 90 min, and then weighing it again. The

percentage waterretention index(WRI) is givenby:

WRI -- (Wwe t - Wary ) 100/Wary Half-head tests, Eachhalf-head test involved 20 clients eachwith normalandbleached hair.The hairwaspartedin the middleandhalfthe headwastreated with the respective oil (3 ml approx.) and massaged thoroughly, while the other half wasleft without
treatment.The oil wasleft on the hair for approximately 8 hr. Then the hair waswashed with warmwater(28C,200 ppm hardness) using20% SLES, andrinsed well to remove

anyresidue. To avoidinherent differences in damage fromleft to right side,the application of the treatment was randomized. Panelists with odd numbers were treated on the

left side, while thosewith even numberswere treated on the right side.

After shampooing andrinsing,the hair wascombed with a fine-tooth comb(separate

EFFECT OF COCONUT

OIL ON HAIR

DAMAGE

183

Table

III

Pair-Wise Comparison Data for Treatment Effectsfor Protein Loss(t-valuesat 95% confidence level) Treatment
Undamaged--with and without MO (MO aspost-wash) Undamaged--with and without CNO (CNO as post-wash) Undamaged--with and without SFO (SFO aspost-wash) Undamaged--with and without MO (MO aspre-wash) Undamaged--with and without CNO (CNO as pre-wash) Undamaged--with and without SFO (SFO as pre-wash) and without MO Treatmentwith boiling water--with (MO aspost-wash) Treatmentwith boiling water--with and without CNO (CNO as post-wash) and without SFO Treatmentwith boiling water--with (SFO as post-wash) and without MO Treatmentwith boiling water--with (MO as pre-wash) and without CNO Treatment with boiling water--with (CNO as pre-wash) and without SFO Treatmentwith boiling water--with (SFO as pre-wash) Treatmentwith bleaching agent--with and without MO (MO as post-wash) Treatmentwith bleaching agent--with and without CNO (CNO as post-wash) Treatmentwith bleaching agent--with and without SFO (SFO as post-wash) Treatmentwith bleaching agent--with and without MO (MO as pre-wash) Treatment with bleaching agent--with and without CNO (CNO as pre-wash) Treatmentwith bleaching agent--with and without SFO (SFO as pre-wash) Exposure to UV light--with and without MO (MO as post-wash) Exposure to UV light--with and without CNO (CNO as post-wash) Exposureto UV light--with and without SFO (SFO as post-wash) Exposure to UV light--with and without MO (MO as pre-wash) Exposure to UV light--with and without CNO (CNO as pre-wash) Exposure to UV light--with and without SFO (SFO as pre-wash)

Straight

Wavy

Curly

Permed

0.452

-1.779

0.106
--

---

--1.814

-0.431

----

0.461 0.103
--

-0.507

--

0.515
1.312

---

--1.108

---

1.762
--

--

0.484

-1.738

0.354
--

1.565
0.139 0.092
1.728
0.210

0.583
2.012

0.407

1.588

0.345

0.098
1.780

0.345

0.265
1.850

0.087

0.684

t theoretical for 48 degrees of freedom at 95% confidence level = 1.645.

combfor eachside).After eachof the ten combingstrokes, both the hair and the comb weredippedin 200 ml of distilledwater to recover brokencuticledebris.A total of 100 strokes (50 on eachside)wereapplied.The suspension with cuticledebriswasusedfor protein estimation.Analytical controlswere run in the form of determinationof the

184

JOURNAL OF COSMETICSCIENCE
Table IV

Analysisof VarianceData for Treatment Effectsfor ProteinLoss

Hair type

Source of variance
Between treatments

Degrees of Sumof Mean F-Valueat 95% freedom squares square confidence level
2
2

Undamaged Oil typeMO (straight,curly)

Undamaged Oil type MO (wavy,permed)

22.2
4.2

11.1
2.1

5.3

Experimental error
Between treatments

2
2

12.4
7.2

6.2
3.6

1.7
46.4

Experimentalerror

Between treatments Undamaged Oil type CNO (straight,wavy) Experimentalerror

2
2

92.8
2.0

46.4
1.0

Undamaged Oil type SFO (curly, permed)

Boiled

Between treatments

2
2

80.0
10.0

40.0
5.0

8.0

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

Oil type MO (straight,curly)

Boiled

Experimental error
Between treatments

2 2
2 2

32.4 4.6
16.9 6.5

16.2 2.3
8.5 3.3

7.1
2.6

Oil typeMO (wavy,permed)

Boiled

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

2
2

20.4
3.6

10.2
1.8

5.6 24.8 1.0

1.2

Oil type SFO (straight,wavy)

Boiled

Experimental error
Between treatments

Oil type CNO (curly, permed)

Bleached

Experimental error
Between treatments

2 2 2 2
2 2

34.8 1.4 4.2 4.2

12.5 11.5

17.4 0.7 2.1 2.1

6.8 5.8

Oil typeMO (straight, curly)

Bleached

Experimental error
Between treatments

Oil type MO (wavy,permed)

Bleached

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

Oil type SFO (wavy,straight)

Bleached

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

2 2

38.0 7.8

19.0 3.9

5.0

2
2

43.0
2.2

21.5
1.1

19.5
2.0

Oil type CNO (curly,permed) Experimental error

UV-Treated

Between

treatments

2
2 2
2

Oil type MO (wavy,permed)

UV-Treated

Experimental error
Between treatments

15.4 7.6
22.2
2.3

7.7 3.8
11.1
1.7

6.5

Oil typeMO (curly,straight)

UV-Treated

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

2
2

10.4
2.1

5.2
1.1

4.7

Oil type SFO (wavy,straight)

UV-Treated

Experimental error
Between treatments

2
2

44.6
1.2

22.3
0.6

37.2

Oil type CNO (curly,permed) Experimental error

F theoretical for (2.2) degrees of freedom at 95% confidence level = 19.0.

residue ofoilonthescalp oftheclient after rinsing, and only after ensuring zero residue,
the rinsingswere collectedin the mannermentionedabove.

Theoutcome of these experiments was analyzed statistically (taking intoaccount the mean andthestandard deviation ofthenumber of replicates forthesignificance of the treatment effects withinthe confidence limits). See Table II for analysis of variance
(ANOVA) data.

EFFECT

OF COCONUT

OIL ON

HAIR

DAMAGE

185

Table

Analysisof VarianceData for Treatment Effectsfor Water RetentionIndex Source variance

Between treatments

Hair type
Undamaged Oil type MO (straight, curly) Undamaged Oil type MO (wavy, permed)

Degreesof freedom
2
2

Sum of Mean F-Value at 95% squares square confidence level

29.2
4.7

14.6
2.4

6.2

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

2
2

19.1
7.8

9.6
3.9

2.4
31.2

Experimentalerror

Between treatments Undamaged Oil type CNO (straight,wavy) Experimentalerror

2
2

93.6
2.9

46.8
1.5

Undamaged Oil type SFO (curly, perreed)

Boiled

Between

treatments

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

2 2
2
2

83.0 13.1
35.5
5.3

41.5 6.6
17.8
2.7

6.3

7.4

Oil type MO (straight,curly)

Boiled

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

2
2

19.1
7.8

9.6
3.9

2.4
4.8

Oil type MO (wavy, permed)

Boiled

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

Oil type SFO (straight,wavy)

Boiled

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

2 2

20.4 4.2

10.2 2.1

2
2

33.7
1.7

16.9
0.8

21.1 0.9
12.4

Oil type CNO (curly permed)

Bleached

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

Oil type MO (straight,curly)

Bleached

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

2 2
2 2
2

4.2 4.5
15.3 12.3
40.0

2.1 2.3
7.6 6.2
20.0

Oil type MO (wavy perreed)

Bleached

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

4.2

Oil type SFO (wavy, straight)

Bleached

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

2
2 2

9.5
40.0 1.8

4.8
20.0 0.9 22.2

Oil type CNO (curly, permed) Experimentalerror

UV-Treated
Between treatments

2
2

17.4
8.2

8.7
4.1

2.1

Oil type MO (wavy, permed)

UV-Treated

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

2
2
2 2 2 2

23.4
2.8
12.4 2.8 41.6 1.6

11.7
1.4
6.2 1.4 20.8 0.8

8.3
4.4

Oil type MO (curly, straight)

UV-Treated

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

Oil type SFO (wavy, straight)

UV-Treated

Experimentalerror
Between treatments

26.0

Oil type CNO (curly, permed)

Experimentalerror

F theoretical for (2.2) degrees of freedom at 95% confidence level = 19.0.

RESULTS
PROTEIN

AND
LOSS

DISCUSSION

The process of cuticlechipping that results from abrasion of hair against objects suchas groomingdevices or evenotherhair is a major factorin hair damage. The proteins that constitutethe cuticle cells are lost during wet combing.It is well known that wet

186

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE

't14.1
12

5.13.8

14.9 14 5

15.3

% WATER
RETENTION

INDEX

:::: ._,?..'.. ,

.
I I

,}{'

'-.. :.
COCONUT OIL

.
i

SUNFLOWER
OIL

COCONUT
OIL

SUNFLOWER
Oil

PRE-WASH TYPES

OF OILS

POST-WASH

ltllWITHOUT

[3WITH

Figure 6. Comparison of waterretention indexfor undamaged hair.

combingis accompanied by the breakingof the surface cuticlecell because of its brittleness. Histologically, the major component of the cuticle cell consists of the exocuticle andthe endocuticle. The exocuticle, beinghighlycross-linked is not swollen by water.The endocuticle and the cell membrane complex, on the otherhand,areless
cross-linked andaremorevulnerable to swellingdamage. This leadsto the lifting of the

surface cuticle via bending. Such cuticle cellscanbe broken in the process of combing or teasing. The proteinlossobserved in these measurements results mostlyfrom the cuticular region. Because of theshort timeinvolved in thecombing andbriefimmersion of the combed tress in water,it is unlikelythat proteins from the bulk of the fiber are
involved in this measurement.

The datafor protein loss measurement for undamaged anddifferently damaged hair are shown in Figures 1-4. The barson theleft referto tests whereoil wasused asa pre-wash
conditioner, whereas thoseon the right arefor the testsinvolvingpost-wash treatments

where oil wasapplied afterdryingthe hair.The datain Figures 1-4 clearly show that theperformance of coconut oil in reducing protein loss wasbetterthanthat of mineral
andsunflower oils.Coconut oil performed betterasa pre-wash ratherthan a post-wash conditioner. This shows the importance of lubrication vs reduction in the swelling of the cuticlecellsthat leadsto their breakingin wet combing.The difference between

EFFECT

OF COCONUT

OIL ON

HAIR

DAMAGE

187

60-(

52 3

[ 52 4

52 3

45
RETENTION 30

' 0.4 'i'

.{
{

'50.9 "",
.?

INDEX

'

COCONUT OIL

SUNFLOWER OIL

COCONUT OIL

SUNFLOWER OIL

PRE-WASH TYPES

OF OILS POST-WASH

BWITHOUT

E3WITH J

Figure 7. Comparison of water retentionindex for bleached hair.

coconut oil andmineraloil is probably dueto the difference in their ability to penetrate the hair (4). The smallereffectof sunflower oil may be due to the presence of unsaturationin the molecule. No informationregarding the penetrabilityof sunflower oil in
the hair is available.The sameeffectwasseenin the half-headtest in a salontrial, asseen in Figure 5.

The effectof various oilsin preventing cuticledamage in laboratory testswasestablished statistically by a parametric test,t-test. The outcome of the analysis is shownin Table III. The t-valuesclearlyindicatethat damaged aswell asundamaged hair benefitsfrom application of coconut oil asa pre-wash conditioner, whereas in the case of sunflower oil and mineral oil, there was no effect.The effects of coconut oil were alsopositivein a salon test.In both normalandbleached hair, treatmenteffects in reducing proteinloss weresignificant, whereas the samefindingswereabsentin the case of mineral oil and sunflower oil. The valuesof t for coconutoil are statistically significant,whereas for mineral oil and sunflower oil, they are not.

SeeTablesIV andV for ANOVA data for treatmenteffects for proteinlossand water
retention index.

188

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE

24.2

% WATER

RETENTION INDEX

10-

COCONUT OIL

SUNFLOWER OIL

COCONUT OIL

SUNFLOWER OIL

PRE-WASH TYPES

OF OILS

POST-WASH

WITHOUT

EIWITH

Figure 8. Comparison of water retentionindexfor hair treatedwith boiling water.

WATER RETENTION INDEX

The waterretention indexfor undamaged hair is shown in Figure6. Fromthe datait can beseen thatcoconut oil reduces theWRI of undamaged hairby 44%, whereas in the case of mineraloil and sunflower oil, thereis hardlyany reductionin WRI, asseenin Figure 6. The ability of coconut oil to penetrate hair (4) supports this observation. The data for the bleached, heat-damaged, and UV-damagedhair are shownin Figures 7-9, respectively. For these damaged samples, the WRI is muchhigherthan that for the undamaged hair. This is mostlydue to the chemical degradation of proteins, generating hydrophilicgroups.Both the cleavage and oxidationof disulfidebonds,followedby their oxidationto cysteicacid, as well as hydrolysis of the peptide linkage, occur, althoughthe contribution of the latter is probably minor. All samples showa reduction in the WRI asa resultof the applicationof coconutoil, whereas the samefindingswere not observed to a significant level in the case of mineraloil and sunflower oil. Assuming that mostof the wateris absorbed by the fiber, the WRI reflects the swellingpropensity

EFFECT OF COCONUT

OIL ON HAIR

DAMAGE

189

i59.8
60

61.2
5

61.2

,..8.7

57.5

x::":
% WATER

RETENTION
INDEX

40

20-

COCONUT
OIL

SUNFLOWER OIL

COCONUT
OIL

SUNFLOWER
OIL

PRE-WASH TYPES

OF OILS

POST-WASH

EIWITHOUT

EIWITH

Figure 9. Comparison of water retentionindex for UV-treated hair.

of hair. Sincerepeated swellingand contraction damages the cuticle,reduction in the WRI can be considered as beneficial in reducinghair damage.

The datain Figures 6-9 showthat the sequence of application (whether pre- or postwash) is important. Post-wash applicationis lesseffectivein reducingthe WRI as
compared to pre-wash application. The difference seems to be in the locationof the oil residues andtheir ability to counteract surfactant damage. In post-wash application the

oil film is on the surface, with nopenetration into the fiber.In pre-wash application, it ispossible that the molecules of the oil penetrate into the cuticle andprobably eveninto
the cortex.This may alsobe the case with undamaged hair, althoughthe effectis small. The reduction in the WRI mustbe dueto the introduction of the hydrophobic triglyc~
eride into the keratin structure.

See TableVI for pair-wise comparison of treatmenteffects for waterretention indexdata.

MECHANISM OF PROTECTION BY COCONUT OIL AND NOT BY MINERAL OIL AND SUNFLOWER OIL

The histology of a cuticle cellandthe mechanism of damage in wet combing isproposed by Swift (5,6) Because of cross-linking, the exocuticle is brittle anddoes not swell.The

190

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE

Table VI

Pair-Wise Comparison Data for Treatment Effectsfor Water RetentionIndex (t-valuesat 95%
confidencelevel)

Treatment
Undamaged--with and without MO (MO as post-wash) Undamaged--with and without CNO (CNO as post-wash) Undamaged--with and without SFO (SFO as post-wash) Undamaged--with and without MO (MO as pre-wash) Undamaged--with and without CNO (CNO as pre-wash) Undamaged--with and without SFO (SFO as pre-wash) Treatmentwith boiling water--with and without MO (MO as post-wash) Treatmentwith boiling water--with and without CNO (CNO as post-wash) Treatmentwith boiling water--with and without SFO (SFO as post-wash)

Straight
0.41

Wavy
-1.87

Curly
O.O9
--

Permed

--

--

--

O.36

O.34
1.98
__

--

O.O9

O.34
1.21

0.43

1.89
1.02

Treatmentwith boilingwater--with and without MO

(MO as pre-wash) Treatmentwith boiling water--with and without CNO (CNO as pre-wash) Treatmentwith boilingwater--with and without SFO (SFO as pre-wash) Treatmentwith bleaching agent--with and without MO (MO as post-wash) Treatmentwith bleaching agent--with and without
CNO (CNO as post-wash)
0.24
1.85

0.13

1.43
0.12

0.06
1.87
0.12

Treatmentwith bleaching agent--with and without SFO (SFO aspost-wash) Treatmentwith bleaching agent--with and without MO (MO aspre-wash) Treatmentwth bleaching agent--with and without
CNO (CNO as pre-wash)

0.46
2.12

O.47

Treatmentwith bleaching agent--with and without SFO

(SFO as pre-wash) Exposureto UV light--with post-wash) Exposure to UV light--with post-wash) Exposure to UV light--with post-wash) Exposure to UV light--with pre-wash) Exposureto UV light--with pre-wash) Exposureto UV light--with pre-wash)
1.45

and without MO (MO as

0.21

0.098
1.85

and without CNO (CNO as and without SFO (SFO as

0.32

and without MO (MO as

0.19

0.09
1.97

and without CNO (CNO as and without SFO (SFO as

O.43

t theoretical for 48 degrees of f}eedom at 95% confidence level = 1.645.

endocuticle and the cell membrane complexhavelesscross-linking and therefore swell significantly.This effectproduces the tendencyfor the surface cuticle cells to curve upwardand breakwhen pressure is appliedwith a comb.

Recentstudies of Ruetsch and Weigmann(7) confirmthat the endocuticle andthe cell

EFFECT OF COCONUT

OIL ON HAIR

DAMAGE

191

membrane complex(CMC) are the foci of weakness and that the cuticle cell often lifts and fractures when the fiber is extended. Chemicalmethodsimpair the adhesion by weakening the cell membrane complex between the cuticlecells.The degree of swelling of the cuticlelayers is increased by disulfidecleavage and oxidation. This enhances the combing damage andproteinloss, especially in wet combing,asobserved in this study. Coconutoil is mostly a triglycerideof lauric acid and is hydrophobic. Application of coconut oil asa pre-wash conditioner coats the hair andinhibitsthe penetration of water into the hair. A smallpart of it is alsoabsorbed into the hair during the washwhen the fiber is swollen.Introductionof this hydrophobic componentreduces the swelling propensity of the cuticle,which limits the upwardcurvingof the surface cuticle.This reduces the chippingawayof the cuticlecells,which reduces proteinloss, asobserved in
this work.

Because of the low molecularweight of coconutoil, it penetrates the cortex,whereas mineraloil, beinga hydrocarbon, does not penetrate the hair at all. This hasbeenshown in the earlierstudy (4). It is possible that sunflower oil doesnot penetratethe fiber because it hasa bulkier structureas a resultof doublebondsin the fatty acid chain. Coconutoil triglyceridehas a linear structure,which is why it solidifiesat room temperature, whereas sunflower triglyceridehasan irregularball-like structurebecause the fatty acid chains fold on themselves due to oneor two doublebonds. This is why sunflower oil is a liquid at room temperature. It is likely that it doesnot penetratethe fiber aswell asthe coconut oil. This may be the reason why the WRI is low for coconut oil as compared to mineral and sunflower oils.
CONCLUSIONS

This studyhasfirmly established the superiority of the protective effectof coconut oil
on hair damagein grooming processes when it is used as a pre-washconditioneras compared to mineral oil and other vegetable oils suchas sunflower oil. It not only has a protective effecton undamaged hair but alsoon chemically treatedhair, UV-treated hair, and hair treatedwith boiling water (i.e., hair in water at 100C for 2 hr). The ability of coconut oil to penetrate into hair cuticleandcortexseems to be responsible for this effect.Coatedon the fiber surface, it can preventor reducethe amountof water penetrating into the fiber and reduce the swelling.This, in turn, reduces the lifting of the surface cuticleand prevents it from being chippedaway during wet combing.A

reduction in the WRI is additional evidence of its efficacy in decreasing waterabsorption. The datapresented in thiswork clearlyshowthe superiority of coconut oil asa hair damage protectant,in the groomingof untreatedor damagedhair.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank the management of MaricoIndustries Ltd. for providingan opportunity to work on this project, and Dr Yash Kamath, Director of Research, T.R.I., Princeton, New Jersey, for his valuableguidance in writing this paper.
REFERENCES

(1) M.L. Garcia and J. Diaz, Combabilitymeasurements on human hair, J. Soc.Cosmet. Chem.,27,
379-398 (1976).

192

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE

(2) S.S. Sandhuand C. Robbins,A simpleand sensitive technique,based on protein lossmeasurement,

to assess surface damage to humanhair,J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem., 44, 163-175 (1993).
(3) A. Rele, Effectof coconut oil on prevention of hair damage.Part I,J. Cosmet. Sci.,50, 327-339 (1999). (4) S. B. Ruetsch, Y. K. Kamath, A. S. Rele, and R. B. Mohile. Secondary ion massspectrometric investigationof penetration of coconut andmineraloilsinto humanhair fibers: Relevance to hair damage,

J. Cosmet. Sd., 52, 169-184 (2001). (5) J. A. Swift and A. C. Brown,The criticaldetermination of fine changes in the surface architecture of humanhair due to cosmetic treatments, J. Soc. Cosmet. Chon.,23, 695-702 (1972). (6) J. A. Swift, Int. J. Cosmet. Sci,,13, 143 (1991). (7) S. B. Ruetsch and H. D. Weigmann, J, Soc. Cosmet. Chem., 47, 13-26 (1996).