I have recently become aware of the huge controversy
surrounding Sodium Lauryl and Sodium Laureth Sulfate.
Like the 'cones controversy, I never even knew these
existed until I started looking at hair care sites.  However, the SLS controversy seems to be more"serious"
because it is claimed that SLS can cause cancer and
all kinds of medical problems. Horrors!  At the least, it's
supposed to be much more damaging to your hair
than shampoos without them.  There are other articles
discounting all these claims, claiming they are hoaxes
put out by the "all natural" companies.  At any rate,
has anyone noticed a difference by getting rid of SLS?
ALL my favorite shampoos, in fact ALL my shampoos
in my shower have it in them.  Either Sodium Lauryl or
Sodium Laureth.  I really DON'T feel like going out to
buy more shampoo. Getting to the Australian Organics,
if I was going to buy more shampoo, it would be in my
price range.  (I can't afford the more expensive salon
shampoos.) Is it better to go with it?  Is the SLS controversy really anything?

If it makes any difference, my switch to SLES helped my scalp calm down and itch less. The one thing we can count on:: SLES is definitely less harsh than SLS. My scalp also produces less oil without SLS. With lauryl, I had to wash every single day to get rid of the greasies.

I don't worry too much about the controversy. To me, the cancer thing sounds a little ... much. My product philosophy? Everything causes cancer eventually anyway. I'd stick with the one that is less harsh.

Anais

Yes, SLES= Sodium laureth sulfate. I didn't understand either, but I guess it's that extra "e".