scientific bull.

as i was browsing through the news, i came across a headline: stem cell correcting cream [edit: they have actually corrected the headline: now it states "stem cell protecting cream". i'm wondering... might this little thing have something to do with the editing of the article? i'm joking; surely the company itself corrected the misleading promise...] and a short article on how the new stem cell technology can preserve and correct your skin's stem cells. wtf, i thought. knowing the scientific skills of beauty journalists, i had to check out what the manufacturer claimed the product could do. as i suspected, the reporter was slightly clueless about the facts.

the news-breaking product is a new skin cream from lumene called excellent future. the site raves about the product as any cosmetics company would:

Innovative and powerful Lumene cream that utilizes modern stem cell technology. Skin contains cells that play a key role in preserving its youthful appearance, stem cells. By protecting these vital cells the cream helps to promote the skin's ability to repair itself.

a while ago i stumbled across a cream called amatokin that was marketed as using stem cell technology to stimulate the activity of endogenous (meaning: present in your own body) stem cells. one of my pet peeves is pseudo-scientific bullshit cosmetics firms love to promote, and these two, albeit different, seem so ludicrous i just have to do an exposé of a sort.

stem cells 101 it is then. first of all stem cells are unique because they can undergo two kinds of division: symmetric and asymmetric which means they can self-renew and have a potency to create progenitor cells which differentiate to either embryonic cells (i.e. every single cell of an organism equaling totipotency) or almost every possibe cell (pluripotent). sometimes cells which are multipotent, i.e. have a potency to differentiate as several cell types which are limited in number, are referred to as adult stem cells, but strictly speaking multipotent cells are progenitor cells. there are some researchers who believe unipotent stem cells can exist, but obviously it contradicts the accepted definition.

the vagueness in terminology facilitates providing misleading information. what cosmetics companies are talking about as stem cells are progenitor cells, a cell type which is usually unipotent i.e. has one target mature cell it will develop into, and skin cells are a prime example of such unipotent suckers.

the thing is, we know quite a bit about stem cells (and the controversy they create because of their main source, the human embryo), but scientific articles about progenitor cells are still at the stages of suggesting that there may, in fact, be multiple classes of progenitor cells maintaining skin. i stress that we are talking in terms of "may" and "possibly". (and here my clever reader will note that my claim about skin cells being "unipotent suckers" depends on whether the newest research is accurate or not...)

the thing is also, that stem cell therapies are a novelty which creates tremendous hope for the future of health care. their potential is huge. this means they're the hottest sh*t science has to offer and, naturally, cosmetics companies are all for sounding as scientific as possible. the problem is that stem cell technology is not developed enough for such commercial applications. therapies are still in developmental stages although there have been significant breakthroughs. therapies utilizing adult stem cells are even quite commonplace: for example, bone marrow transplants to treat leukemia is a form of multipotent progenitor cell use.

in other words, the stuff they're promising is not quite out of the lab yet. there is no scientific evidence provided for amatokin and they're required to submit their advertising to asa in the uk due to misleading information. and while lumene takes it a little easier by only promising protection for the precious cells, i'd like to see some kind of scientific proof. more accurately, i'd like to know how the application of "apple extract and arctic white peat" on your skin becomes stem cell technology if you're neither applying stem cells on your skin nor affecting the stem cells' activity? [edit: now the article claims that the apple extract has apple stem cell extract so they are using plant stem cell technology.]

as far as i can tell, it utilizes [human] stem cell technology only as a reference, that is saying that there are stem cells (which are actually progenitor cells) in the skin of your face, [edit: and you're adding the apple stem cell extract] because whatever "protecting" the cells actually means (promoting hibernation which means less activity? increasing activity which may, at worst, mean cancer? no, only "protection") it basically amounts to nothing new. supposedly, apple stem cell extract could guard against uv-rays, but we've got sun screen already, don't we girls? and i actually prefer one that protects all my skin cells (hahahahaha). the cream itself may be an ok moisturizer, as probably amatokin is, but the sales pitch is bull.

i hate it when they act contemptuous. we're not suckers, now are we?

***
[edit: wow! it took somebody at the company behind lumene about 30 minutes to find my posting after their web-solutions company tracked my little rant... well, perhaps they'll provide some extra info for us, then.]

green cleaning.

anu wrote about how washability is a key component of what she believes good quality consists in, and i could not agree more with her. the increasingly common labeling of clothing as "dry clean only" seems unrelated to the quality of materials used or common fabrics suddenly becoming non-washable, but rather appears to result from a reluctancy to take responsibility for the garment's quality in long term use. as a consumer, i have learned to read dry clean instructions on cotton tees as do-as-you-please-but-don't-come-crying-at-our-door-if-the-seams-twist, which, first of all, irritates me and, secondly, seems totally foolish now that manufacturing techniques and materials available should have improved, especially in higher-end products.

the daring interpretation transforms into daring action on my part: i tend to wash items which explicitly state that i shouldn't. wool, silk and cotton are materials which should, in my opinion, survive water. my trusted, four-year-old tiger of sweden peacoat has been to the washer (in low temperature and wool wash) so many times i've lost count because of constant wear and, luckily, it still looks flawless. but i have not been as fortunate with everything and despite materials and technique improvements should have taken place, we all know it is not entirely true: high price neither implies quality workmanship nor material.

dry cleaning is a hassle, environmentally suspect and, in finland, also fairly expensive, which acts as a hindrance to leisure-washing motivated by mere laziness. the finnish market seems also less competitive and the biggest selling point is low price rather than other qualities of the service, whereas in new york city there is a growing business of "green" and "organic" dry cleaners. as with everything marketed as eco-friendly, the description "green" is used comfortably when even a slight ecological improvement can be displayed meaning obviously that the process or product sold to the customer may be a far cry from environmentally sound. what seems incredible is the equivocation of the term "organic": dry cleaners use it in the sense of organic chemistry (carbon based) rather than organic produce (toxin free). in the ny times article alan spievogel, the technical director of the cleaners' association, is quoted saying:

Under that standard, [--]I could clean garments with nuclear waste and I could call myself organic.

i am quite sure this sounds appalling as a marketing strategy to most of you.

despite knowing what horrible toxins are used for cleaning our everyday surroundings and the things we wear, i cannot claim my consumer choices are honestly motivated by ecological considerations. i still believe the main reasons i try to steer clear of "dry clean only" is the hassle and the price rather than toxins. i still, like many people, associate the smell of artificial fragrances with clean laundry which is one of the reasons i do not use soap nuts. nevertheless, were they more readily available, i might consider them again since they worked ok.

which brings in mind my main belief when it comes to making sound choices: they need to be easy. we're all a bunch of sloths.

sprouse.

stephen sprouse (1953-2004) retrospective at deitch projects, the publication of rizzoli's the stephen sprouse book (out tomorrow) and louis vuitton's limited edition line marc jacobs calls an homage to sprouse's talent, means graffiti is all over the place again.

sprouse started his work in the 80's styling and dressing musicians, such as debbie harry and duran duran. his collections got great exposure, but due to extreme pricing because of expensive materials, they (mostly) sold poorly. he inspired numerous designers throughout the 80's and 90's with his graffiti prints -- often painted by hand -- and, moreover, remember early 90's fad of replacing buttons with velcro? blame sprouse.

his biggest commercial success was with louis vuitton in 2001 when he painted the (in)famous monogram canvas, and he is also responsible for the leopard scarf i crave for. the new collection is based on the earlier collaboration, but this time it's bright and neon. since i'm not fan of the monogram canvas, there was only one item i'd consider wanting for meself: the bracelets in gold and neon. timeless!

delicious on a slow sunday.

1. smoked almonds.
2. dean and deluca soho blend coffee.
3. non-sugared lingonberry juice.
4. bolla amarone red wine.
5. leftover from last night's dinner party: lemon risotto with tons of freshly grated parmigiano reggiano.

ocarina.

there are several great features for the iphone which give it that extra bit of oomph regular phones just don't have.

the decisive application for me is the smule ocarina. created at stanford university (which actually has the most beautiful campus on this planet; if you're ever in the bay area in cali, pay it a visit. i used to go skateboarding there when i lived in palo alto...) center for computer research in music and acoustics (ccrma) the program transforms your iphone into a flute: you just blow into the microphone and "cover" the virtual holes to alter the flow of air and, thus, the tone, and out comes music. genious!

hiltunen squared.

two of my friends had openings last week. incidentally, both are named hiltunen. tatu and jenni. (not related, as far as i know.)

tatu hiltunen's video explorations into the phenomenology of masculinity titled jamais vu are shown at hippolyte gallery. it's a very small space and, therefore, i recommend visiting at an unpredictable hour rather than a saturday afternoon.



jenni hiltunen's make your own paintings at korjaamo is a combination of video and painting. jenni paints her friends and herself as creations of art, art personified, as people who become projects of art and artists simultaneously.

the hilarious and rather racy video is itself worth the visit.

dutch talent.

i visited amsterdam last spring to see madonna. i'm not a huge fan, but she is an icon and the sticky and sweet tour may be her last one. judging from the lack of activity on stage -- who wants to see madonna stand half of her concert playing a guitar rather than dance, i ask -- she's definitely getting old regardless of her age-defying appearance.

while in amsterdam, i took a day trip to the nearby town of utrecht where a friend had graduated with a master's in fashion design. his graduating class had a thesis show there and, naturally, i wanted to see his work, and there was one particular designer who made an impact on me: renske versluijs. her thesis is an exploration into muslim women as objects of the male gaze (which theoretically strikes me as rather uninventive and simplistic, but the main point are the clothes, anyway...) and a collection of beautifully crafted garments (not necessarily practicing muslim approved, i'd say). i was especially struck with the dress in the middle (you can see close-ups of the technique on her site) which was constructed of ribbons which created an interesting surface: the dress looked finished and unfinished simultaneously. one to watch, she is.

recollections from brazil.

unsure how i ended up at the website of a mulher do padre, a sao paulo based streetwear retailer, but i instantly remembered the impact their products had on me years ago. i visited brasilia, brasil in 2002 for a conference and while the city was architectonically impressive (and strangely surreal), the shopping was nonexistent. most of the few items i brought home were a mulher do padre. i remember trying to look them up some years ago, in vain, and am happy to see they're still in business. i wish my portuguese was, ahem, better to be able to figure out what exactly they're up to.

amp is all about quirky pleating and colors: think css at their least cassette playa, i.e. slightly over the top, but lacking the neon craziness. therefore, i believe my baby blue minidress and off-white dress with bonsai trees were the most subtle items in the collection.

since my visit brazilian music acts, such as bonde do role in addition to cansei de ser sexy, have made it big, but here's a little jewel of a pop band i encountered on my visit: pato fu with "sobre o tempo."

intelligent life?

my current favorite lifestyle magazine is the economist intelligent life. the title of the magazine is slightly pompous, but nonetheless pretty much at even with my previous choice, the monocle. the follower of wallpaper* in the promotion of brûléian world of modernist interiors, sleek exteriors, bespoke fashions and exclusive lounges with cool music, the monocle offered interesting viewpoints into countries one hardly heard nothing of, in addition to a coup or a natural disaster. unfortunately, the world of tyler was still slightly too luxurious for me to relate.

the economist to the rescue. intelligent life offers quality writing, insightful reviews and a variety of topics to fit a lifestyle magazine worthy of buying repeatedly. it's highbrow enough to be taken seriously as a magazine and, simultaneously, entertainment rather than challenging.

in every number there is something baffling, though, such as the main article, the age of mass intelligence by john parker in the latest winter 2008 issue. while reading it, i was constantly bothered by the equation of intelligence with (any kind of) consumption of high culture, i.e. the author assumes that reading plato and listening to mozart will increase the intelligence of whoever does the deed while this clearly is not the case. reading a book that one does not understand (anyone? hands up! i'm here waving admission...) does not make one any smarter. it may inspire thoughts, but the capacity and skills one has for dealing with them is another case altogether, and some of these you're born with, some you can learn and cultivate.

moreover, the distinction between high and low culture was not questioned which seems incredibly ignorant in this day and age: what a simplistic and anachronistic claim to think enjoying classical music and the canon of western novelists are "high" culture and popular culture is not and cannot be intelligent! the author used statistics which inform us that an increasing amount of people attend classical music concerts and museums than ever before as proof for mass intelligence growth.

to put it simply: if i visit the prado and walk around enjoying the art, am i smarter as a result? no. i have additional experiences. if i get a great curator telling me about the paintings of hieronymus bosch and i have more information as a result, am i smarter? no, unless we use a very limited sense of the word. does the fact that i've been trained in classical violin and can discuss bach's sonatas and partitas for solo violin at length imply that i am smart? no. i have a skill and some knowledge that may impress someone, but it does not suggest intelligence on my part. and since when was it more than a simplistic question begging assumption that being interested in dvořák was a sign of higher intelligence than being interested in, for example, krautrock? oh, please.

a few days ago i realized i was not alone with my disapproval of the thesis of the article. plenty of people had been engaging in a heated debate with some pretty intriguing ideas going as far as wanting to restrict access to high culture only to members of the intelligentsia and their heirs. the preposterous idea of limiting access to cultural events and establishments to protect the elite from the banality of lower classes feels quite out of place to someone in scandinavia. or anyone believing in equal rights to participate in culture... interestingly, somebody suggested the article was written only to provoke, which is a thought that did occur to me, too. at the same time, several commentators suggest the claim of the article does not seem as implausible to everyone.

there's more in a blog entry by emily borrow on the same site, and a continued debate on the economist site. go enjoy.

g. i. jane.

continuing on the trail of great xmas gifts, i finally received i know why no id-tags. aino was sweetheart enough to let me mix-and-match until i got just the right combo. they're a utilitarian take on the classic military ornament and just perfect when you feel like arming yourself against whatever is threatening your peace of mind. in my case, the cold. add a heavy sweater dress (samu-jussi koski for marimekko) and a pair of trusted dr marten's boots -- mine are in metallic blue -- and you're just about feminine enough to go fight the freeze.

clueless beauty pageant.

when it comes to make-up, i am utterly clueless. when flipping through glossies, i skip the pages where make-up tips are given and, therefore, look basically the same every day. my face is not my canvas, to say the least.

here's my arsenal of make-up. really. all of it.


(oops, my pressed powder is not present, but in my purse...)

there are a few good reasons behind my reluctance to experiment with cosmetics:

first, and foremost, i have (really) oily skin which is prone to breakouts. because of that, i cannot really wear foundation without it starting to "float" on my skin in a few hours. the same reason prevents the use of dark eye-shadows. finding a mascara that does not venture up on my browbone is a nightmare: i used kanebo38 for a while but my eyes got teary, moved onto diorshow, but at the moment am happy with mac zoom lash. every powdery product i must buy at least a shade lighter than i want it because the color will darken in a matter of hours because of oil. i have not found a base that would prevent the oiliness, so i deal with doing without multiple basic beauty products.

second, i have sensitive skin and have been known to develop random allergies to products i've used for years. therefore, cosmetics with added fragrances are a big no-no and brands i am unfamiliar with i approach with skepticism.

third, i have a, whatshouldyacallit, unusual face (hah, euphemism of the day!) which does not easily transform to different looks. it does not take much make-up to turn me into ronn moss...

so why am i writing about this? i realized that i am thirty-two (yeah, i kinda realized it before, but this time the revelation arrived with a mirror...) and i've never owned a skin-highlighter pen or any other product supposedly everyone over 25 should have. although i have felt infantile pride over being such a low maintenance kind of a chick, i could use some upkeep from time to time. and, naturally, i'd love to look as dewy and pretty as possible and i do have to admit that at this age having next to nothing on your face does not translate into just-out-of-the-shower freshness but rather a lack of sleep.

for some reason all the tips women with vivacious sebaceous glands seem to get from magazines are for skin care and acne prevention. i've got my buffing down put and my pimples in check, but it does not translate to my face lacking shine and my makeup staying on where it's supposed to. when i visit cosmetics counters the salespeople never seem to take me seriously: i am offered a base product after another until i tell them i've pretty much tried them all. the most common completely useless suggestion i constantly get is the recommendation to use waterproof products; correct me if i'm wrong, but is it h2o oozing from my pores? what is the substance used for waterproof make-up removal? correct answer to both questions: oil, and you do the math...

i'm sure i am not the only butter-face with these problems although it seems my blogging colleagues only suffer from perfect skin or, in some cases, overly dry complexions. in other words, i would love to receive your tried-and-tested make-up and base tips for oily skin. (ja saa kommentoida ja vinkata suomeksi, jos tuntuu, ettei englanti taivu...)

lanvin + acne.

i'm sure all of you know about the acne-lanvin -collaboration. it's been available for pre-order for a while now (correct me if i'm wrong, since the beginning of december?) and it is officially fab. while i've felt frustration over acne's constant price accumulation which hardly seems added value driven, i still think their denim line captures cool urban chic at its best. at a time when collaborations are so fashionable we're forced to think they're passé and when most of them hardly live up to the great expectations (such as recent h&m flops with madonna and, to my detriment, comme des garçons), i am thrilled to see something great come together.

here are my faves of the line: the denim dress with lantern sleeves and a visible zipper at back, the shirt with satin buttons and shoulder flaps, and the trousers in soft denim with pleats. what are yours?

'tis the season to stay in and watch some films.

i used to be quite the film buff a decade or so ago: i'd watch anything and everything i could get my hands on. i still enjoy movies, but since it's become less common of a pastime, i'm also more picky. during the holidays i caught up with many films i had wanted to see and, moreover, enjoyed a few unexpected cinematic treasures. equipped with a few boxes of chocolate pralines (any kind will do, i'm not picky...), red wine and a wool blanket, my main excuse for not blogging at all during the holidays is that i had my eyes glued to the tv.

one of the better ones was changeling starring angelina jolie. not your basic picker-upper, i do not recommend watching it when feeling down. the film itself is refreshingly lacking in tear-inducing gimmicks and concentrates on the drama of real human loss and insecurity.

i also finally saw the dark knight with the amazing joker played by heath ledger. it felt strange watching someone who had just passed away doing something that brilliantly. otherwise the movie was crap-o-lah, although i do wonder what device is used for christian bale's darth vader sound...

then there was milk starring sean penn. based on a true story, it concentrates on the essential last years of the life of a closeted gay man who ends up as the first openly homosexual public official in the u.s., more accurately in san francisco. a representation of a life of secrets which many people wish would stay hidden, it was tragic to see how the argumentation against gay people has not changed much during these three decades. also, worth of note is the lack of women visible: there are only two female roles, the activist lesbian and the christian fanatic.

as a total opposite, i also watched the women the remake of a 1939 film with the same title, where notably no men appear on screen. unfortunately the update's storyline has none of the witty charm of the original film's social commentary, but comes across as pathetically stereotypical, boring, superficial with monologues conjured only to bring about tears of fake pathos because someone lost a life of luxury. what a waste of time.

nevertheless, i can recommend seeing the curious case of benjamin button. a film that aspires towards greatness, with some exquisite performances (cate blanchett and taraji p. henson) it almost gets there. it does lack credibility in its grandiosity; there are better films about fleeting time and mortality than this one. but worthy it is.

faves right now.

santa was kind to me. i received several amazing gifts, two of which were a kokon to zai (a.k.a. ktz) top from wunder and a delicate pink cross pendant from antti asplund.

i've been wearing both combined with my bubble-gum pink cheap monday jeans; here with suede zara booties, another day with rugged old dr martens. (the absurd pose is explained by the fact that the jeans are tiny and i'm stretching them out a bit, and somebody just had to snatch a shot. and i'm paying homage to silver (and not saying he'd ever publish such a crappy photo) who does the tongue-in-cheek pose quite perfectly.)



but onto the details which really make the outfit. the top (or minidress if i'm feeling really brave) is stretchy and has an inlay of some kind of rope which gives it a 3d appearance. the rope detail is methodically and beautifully arranged around the whole garment which makes it heavy, but with such a finished appearance you just want to keep on twirling to show it off. and there's the sci-fi feel to it, which appeals to my vulcan affinities...

the necklace is a delicate powdery pink that contradicts the cold, bare and unadorned shape. i've liked asplund's cross pendants since they came out, but felt the other colors are slightly too defiant for my style: with my geometric hair and simple style, strong statement accessories can make me look cold.

beanie.

the arrival of cold weather never ceases to surprise me. i don't like below freezing temperatures nor do i really feel fondly about snow, and every year i whine constantly about winter and how terrible it is outside. therefore, i prefer the indoors, warm drinks (like yogi ginger tea), good books or movies of which i've consumed aplenty these past days (more about the films i saw later, i promise).

if and when i do need to venture outdoors, i'm proud to announce the arrival of my new beanie: my sweetheart made it for me by hand, it's black wool and there's a pompom! tested already, i am happy to say it does keep my knuckleish head warm.