LET'S FIND A NEW NAME FOR HEAT TRAINING!

[Chaosbutterfly]

From what I read, it seems the word "damage" is what people are trying to eliminate in assoication with heat trained. I think damage should first be defined. Damage hair is hair that is in poor condition, that has unusual amount of split ends, breakage, dryness, dullness, frizzy, brittle, no elasticity, easily matted, over-porosity, over conditioned, etc. Heat Trained hair, is hair that has been condition to thrive with high amounts or excessive amount of heat applied to the hair without an unusual amount of breakage, split ends, etc. The hair isn't dry or brittle, thus not damaged. Therefore, someone who has "heat trained" hair, their hair shouldn't be considered damage since its not. Now in all fairness, I've seen some people who refer to their hair as heat trained when it's damage. HTH

Lol, heat training is heat damage though...why ya'll trying to dress it up all pretty? Hair becomes damaged when any part of the hair strand becomes compromised to the point where it can't go back to the way it came out of your head. Regardless of how it looks, feels or swings, it's damaged.

Just because hair isn't dry or brittle doesn't automatically negate what it's been through. You can have hair with structures that are not intact, but thanks to conditioner, moisturizer, oils, and serums, you can get the hair to be soft and supple and to not look or feel like stereotypically damaged hair. But that doesn't change the fact that the hair has been structurally weakened.

And I'm not saying that someone can't have healthy and long heat-trained hair. In fact, I think that heat training a good option for people who don't want relaxed hair, but can't really handle their texture as it is. But I do not understand why people are trying to cover up the fact that this method is a form of damage. Just like how relaxing, texlaxing, and jheri-curling are all forms of damage. I mean, the only difference between someone calling their hair heat trained or heat damaged is if the change in texture was intentional. Or if it happened by accident, and then the person decided that they liked the result. You can't make the decision for someone whether or not their hair has been heat trained. Only they can make that distinction.

Ya'll gonna mess around, changing names and whatnot and end up getting sued for misrepresentation and false advertisement.

 

[Tiye]

From what I read, it seems the word "damage" is what people are trying to eliminate in assoication with heat trained. I think damage should first be defined. Damage hair is hair that is in poor condition, that has unusual amount of split ends, breakage, dryness, dullness, frizzy, brittle, no elasticity, easily matted, over-porosity, over conditioned, etc. Heat Trained hair, is hair that has been condition to thrive with high amounts or excessive amount of heat applied to the hair without an unusual amount of breakage, split ends, etc. The hair isn't dry or brittle, thus not damaged. Therefore, someone who has "heat trained" hair, their hair shouldn't be considered damage since its not. Now in all fairness, I've seen some people who refer to their hair as heat trained when it's damage. HTH

Thanks for this. My hair is heat trained. It's in good condition. It's thick, lustrous, has good tensility for my hair type/texture - i.e. 4b+ and I have zero split ends. Heat training expanded my micro coils n kinks into slightly bigger micro coils and kinks - the difference is subtle but as a result my hair is easier to manage and I have very few tangles

You can train your hair to do anything - heat is just a tool and it's not harmful if you know how to use it. I like straight forward language so I'm okay with the good old fashioned term.

 

[Tiye]

Lol, heat training is heat damage though...why ya'll trying to dress it up all pretty? Hair becomes damaged when any part of the hair strand becomes compromised to the point where it can't go back to the way it came out of your head. Regardless of how it looks, feels or swings, it's damaged.

Just because hair isn't dry or brittle doesn't automatically negate what it's been through. You can have hair with structures that are not intact, but thanks to conditioner, moisturizer, oils, and serums, you can get the hair to be soft and supple and to not look or feel like stereotypically damaged hair. But that doesn't change the fact that the hair has been structurally weakened.

And I'm not saying that someone can't have healthy and long heat-trained hair. In fact, I think that heat training a good option for people who don't want relaxed hair, but can't really handle their texture as it is. But I do not understand why people are trying to cover up the fact that this method is a form of damage. Just like how relaxing, texlaxing, and jheri-curling are all forms of damage. I mean, the only difference between someone calling their hair heat trained or heat damaged is if the change in texture was intentional. Or if it happened by accident, and then the person decided that they liked the result. You can't make the decision for someone whether or not their hair has been heat trained. Only they can make that distinction.

Ya'll gonna mess around, changing names and whatnot and end up getting sued for misrepresentation and false advertisement.

This is the misunderstanding. Some people seem to think this is some back door attempt to get swing. There is no swing in my hair and it does revert. Furthermore relaxing isn't damage- hair can become damaged as a result of the relaxing process but relaxing hair in and of itself is not damage.

 

[poookie]

I can think of a few nicknames but they're not very good. I'm one of those people who just looks at heat training as heat damage. Maybe one day I'll learn better...

I agree! When the curl pattern disappears due to heat, it's damaged. I mean no harm towards those that do it intentionally, but hey, it is what it is!

 

[poookie]

Lol, heat training is heat damage though...why ya'll trying to dress it up all pretty? Hair becomes damaged when any part of the hair strand becomes compromised to the point where it can't go back to the way it came out of your head. Regardless of how it looks, feels or swings, it's damaged.

Just because hair isn't dry or brittle doesn't automatically negate what it's been through. You can have hair with structures that are not intact, but thanks to conditioner, moisturizer, oils, and serums, you can get the hair to be soft and supple and to not look or feel like stereotypically damaged hair. But that doesn't change the fact that the hair has been structurally weakened.

And I'm not saying that someone can't have healthy and long heat-trained hair. In fact, I think that heat training a good option for people who don't want relaxed hair, but can't really handle their texture as it is. But I do not understand why people are trying to cover up the fact that this method is a form of damage. Just like how relaxing, texlaxing, and jheri-curling are all forms of damage. I mean, the only difference between someone calling their hair heat trained or heat damaged is if the change in texture was intentional. Or if it happened by accident, and then the person decided that they liked the result. You can't make the decision for someone whether or not their hair has been heat trained. Only they can make that distinction.

Ya'll gonna mess around, changing names and whatnot and end up getting sued for misrepresentation and false advertisement.

Excellent post!!! Giving the process a positive name is going to be misleading for folks & potential newbies here. "heat training" is heat damage, and while some folks have been able to get their hair permanently straight by way of heat, it's still a dangerous process, & there's no guarantee that the results will work for every head of hair.

 

[loulou82]

^^ When the curl pattern disappears because of a chemical is it also damaged?

My question would be if any process that alters the curl pattern results in inherently damaged hair (whether by heat, color, chemical).

 

[poookie]

^^ When the curl pattern disappears because of a chemical is it also damaged?

My question would be if any process that alters the curl pattern results in inherently damaged hair (whether by heat, color, chemical).

I'd say yes, but damaged is a loaded word. Maybe a better term is "structurally altered". Whether with relaxer or with a hot styling tool, the structure of the hair is altered, and if someone wants to do that to their hair, they should be made aware of the potential risks involved, and that there's no turning back if they don't like the end result (short of chopping the structurally-altered hair off & starting over).

My concern is the idea of "heat training" being promoted as a sort of healthy alternative to chemical straightening. It's got the same damage potential as a relaxer, and any heat training is permanent, and people need to keep that in mind. There's no 100% "safe" method to permanently straighten the hair. It's either via chemicals or heat. (unless I missed something!)

 

[godsflowerrr]

I like Heat-laxed or thermal straightening.

 

[loulou82]

I think that's an important nuance... damage vs. structurally altered.

I also don't consider it a healthier alternative. I do consider it a process that deserves open discussion so that those who may consider it know all the pros and cons. HT threads get so side tracked.

 

[g.lo]

I like Heat-laxed or thermal straightening.

cosign for the names
for people who argues that heat trained hair is "damaged hair", i guess BKT, relaxer, ... and all that can be considered as damage as well.
so we should stop relaxing, bkt, texturizing and so on
(by the way i am natural, i just think that if something works for somebody let it be!!!! and just be happy for them)

 

[LongLeggedLife]

I dont have a clear understanding of what 'heat training' is, as I use high temps on my hair fairly often, and have never had any changes to my curl pattern.

However, if the hair is long, thick, looks beautiful/healthy and stays that way, I wouldn't mind it being 'damaged'!
Imo, these are not characteristics of 'damaged' hair.

 

[qchelle]

I think changing the name will just confuse people. But I won't be doing it, so I don't really care if people are confused I like the term 'Heat-laxed' though.

IMO, anything that is done to the hair that will cause its protein bonds to be permanently altered is damage. Permanently altered meaning broken down (which is what happens), thus meaning damage. The hair has been damaged on the molecular level. Things that fall under this category include relaxers (breaking down disulfide bonds), heat-training (breaking down hydrogen bonds to the point of no return), and bleaching (eliminating melanin). Breaking down the natural bonds in your hair causes it to be weaker, thus damaged. Of course it can be healthy (looking) on the surface level, though (i.e. no split ends, etc)

And I disagree with the notion that there's no difference between relaxers and heat-training (or thermal heat texlax presstherm silkening or whatever ). With relaxers you run the risk of damaging your scalp. Which is even worse than just your hair. If I wanted straight hair, I'd heat train.

Anyway, I can't wait to be relaxer-free and throw some bleach on this baby!

 

[EllePixie]

I think changing the name will just confuse people. But I won't be doing it, so I don't really care if people are confused I like the term 'Heat-laxed' though.

IMO, anything that is done to the hair that will cause its protein bonds to be permanently altered is damage. Permanently altered meaning broken down (which is what happens), thus meaning damage. The hair has been damaged on the molecular level. Things that fall under this category include relaxers (breaking down disulfide bonds), heat-training (breaking down hydrogen bonds to the point of no return), and bleaching (eliminating melanin). Breaking down the natural bonds in your hair causes it to be weaker, thus damaged. Of course it can be healthy (looking) on the surface level, though (i.e. no split ends, etc)

And I disagree with the notion that there's no difference between relaxers and heat-training (or thermal heat texlax presstherm silkening or whatever ). With relaxers you run the risk of damaging your scalp. Which is even worse than just your hair. If I wanted straight hair, I'd heat train.

Anyway, I can't wait to be relaxer-free and throw some bleach on this baby!

THAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANK YOU for the bolded! I don't understand how people can attempt to argue with simple chemistry.

I vote for calling it heat weathering. Oh, and there's nothing wrong with heat training.

 

[Whimsy]

Op I have nothing against heat training and I now get what you are saying... I just think it is pointless to change the name.. The only thing that will change peoples impressions about the processes is lot of success pictures.... Lots of different people trying it and loving it and showing it off... Give it time when there are waist length heat trained ladies you won't care what people call it....

That's my opinion to a T.
Heat training isn't for me, but if it helps someone get to their goal long length I give it 2 thumbs up for them. I just haven't seen that yet.

"Heat Training" doesn't sound like a bad name for the technique IMO

 

[havilland]

I like thermal texturizing or thermal relaxing.

I like the idea of "relaxing" my hair texture with a natural source like fire....as in earth, wind and.

I am texlaxed. And I would like to avoid chemicals for health reasons. That is why using heat sounds appealing to me.

Personally I wish all the negativity surrounding ladies and their personal hair choices would cease. I am tired of all the judging we do to each other.

To me it's just hair and how you or I choose to style it shouldn't matter.

IMHO.

 

[DDTexlaxed]

i'm not "hating" or trying to bash brittany but:

1.)why is she writing a book on something people have been doing for years? it aint that deep...continually use high heat over time, and eventually your curls will loosen and your hair will get straighter faster and with less effort...i thought that was common knowledge people have been using hot combs and technically "heat training" for over 100 years, so i really hope she doesnt try to come off as if she invented this brand new revolutionary method...i guess i just dont understand what new things she's bringing to the table that calls for a whole book to be written about it

2.) i dont see her changing the name of heat training catching on to many people 1st of all, and people who knew what it was before will still call it heat training...the phrase isnt going to go away...if anything the new phrase will probably just confuse people

***************************************************************

Why shouldn't she do it? She can make money like everyone else. I like her approach because she has explained the process of heat training in a way I never thought of. You won't be confused if you read the book.:wink2: I prefer using the term heat textured. If you do Brit's version of heat training, you will still have texture in your hair.

 

[tHENATuRALhAiRpRoJEcT]

THAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANK YOU for the bolded! I don't understand how people can attempt to argue with simple chemistry.

I vote for calling it heat weathering. Oh, and there's nothing wrong with heat training.

so cute!!! i visualize myself blowing away in the wind like a dayuum tumble weed.... tumbling down the street with my heat weathered tresses

this forum rocks!

 

[EllePixie]

so cute!!! i visualize myself blowing away in the wind.... tumbling down the street with my heat weathered tresses

this forum rocks

I hatechu....

 

[tHENATuRALhAiRpRoJEcT]

I hatechu....

hate-weathered

 

[DeepBluSea]

I think heat trained describes it perfectly. IF that is your goal, you are literally training your hair to straighten easier. Thus, it won't take as long to blow dry or flat iron. And people will know what she is talking about. If she writes a book and comes up with a new term (yall have come up with some cute names), the avg jane is not going to know what she is talking about. But hey, those Miss Jessie girls had folks thinking a silkening was something more than a glorified texturizer.

 

[Minty]

professionals consider it "Thermal Straightening"

 

[Tiye]

I think changing the name will just confuse people. But I won't be doing it, so I don't really care if people are confused I like the term 'Heat-laxed' though.

IMO, anything that is done to the hair that will cause its protein bonds to be permanently altered is damage. Permanently altered meaning broken down (which is what happens), thus meaning damage. The hair has been damaged on the molecular level. Things that fall under this category include relaxers (breaking down disulfide bonds), heat-training (breaking down hydrogen bonds to the point of no return), and bleaching (eliminating melanin). Breaking down the natural bonds in your hair causes it to be weaker, thus damaged. Of course it can be healthy (looking) on the surface level, though (i.e. no split ends, etc)

And I disagree with the notion that there's no difference between relaxers and heat-training (or thermal heat texlax presstherm silkening or whatever ). With relaxers you run the risk of damaging your scalp. Which is even worse than just your hair. If I wanted straight hair, I'd heat train.

Anyway, I can't wait to be relaxer-free and throw some bleach on this baby!

We are talking about non-living protein you know. It's okay to stretch it out - really. My hair is not damaged at the moment internally or externally. I've had damaged hair in the past so I know what that looks like and I'll have it again. I don't heat train for straight hair. If I wanted straight hair I'd get a relaxer, in fact I'd need a relaxer.

Hair boards offer a wealth of information but unfortunately they also help to spread misinformation. So, I'll simply put this heat-training issue on the same list of hair board myths as the "no cones!", "no sulfates! movements, and henna as a relaxer, etc., and leave it be.

THAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANK YOU for the bolded! I don't understand how people can attempt to argue with simple chemistry.

I vote for calling it heat weathering. Oh, and there's nothing wrong with heat training.

I'm chemistry literate. I just disagree with common hair board dogma against it.

 

[Minty]

@Tiye :blowkiss:

 

[EllePixie]

.

I'm chemistry literate. I just disagree with common hair board dogma against it.

I wasn't saying you weren't - my comment wasn't referring to anyone on the thread.

I don't think there is anything wrong with it, but it is what it is - People shouldn't crucify another for anything they do to their own hair.

 

[ms-gg]

If I coin this new term that Brit uses in her book then I want a cut of that check ya dig?


I'm just playin (not really )

 

[colibri972]

I'm just happy that I got a chance to read a thread that could potentially be shut down before it does!

But on your first point, people make big bucks re-inventing information that already exists so why not? Whether she invented a method, a whole process or not, it's all in the packaging...marketing. As she mentioned, some people want to know so....give them what they want. This reminds me of when Pinkskates had her website and required payment to join. Folks were scratching their heads like uhmmmm 'ain't this the same information we can get on LHCF or BHM etc. for free?' She, was marketing herself (or hair.) Anyway, my 2 pennies....

Why close the hot topic? an interesting subject with a pinch of cat fight powder... yummy

Everybody wants to sell something and in some case it's not a crime.lol
And use marketing it's not crime too, when you think about it LHCF paid subscription is a form of marketing. Despite this you are not disapointed to pay 6.50 in order to be able to share your hair problem.
And you are not forced to buy her book, just watch britany video and you will know how to heat train.

Lol, heat training is heat damage though...why ya'll trying to dress it up all pretty? Hair becomes damaged when any part of the hair strand becomes compromised to the point where it can't go back to the way it came out of your head. Regardless of how it looks, feels or swings, it's damaged.

Just because hair isn't dry or brittle doesn't automatically negate what it's been through. You can have hair with structures that are not intact, but thanks to conditioner, moisturizer, oils, and serums, you can get the hair to be soft and supple and to not look or feel like stereotypically damaged hair. But that doesn't change the fact that the hair has been structurally weakened.

And I'm not saying that someone can't have healthy and long heat-trained hair. In fact, I think that heat training a good option for people who don't want relaxed hair, but can't really handle their texture as it is. But I do not understand why people are trying to cover up the fact that this method is a form of damage. Just like how relaxing, texlaxing, and jheri-curling are all forms of damage. I mean, the only difference between someone calling their hair heat trained or heat damaged is if the change in texture was intentional. Or if it happened by accident, and then the person decided that they liked the result. You can't make the decision for someone whether or not their hair has been heat trained. Only they can make that distinction.

Ya'll gonna mess around, changing names and whatnot and end up getting sued for misrepresentation and false advertisement.

heat training is heat damage though (and we are all ok about this even heat trainers)... so why ya'll trying to dress it up all UGLY?


You can have hair with structures that are INTACT, but thanks to conditioner, moisturizer, oils, and serums, you can get the hair to be soft and supple and to not look or feel like stereotypically damaged hair. But that doesn't change the fact that the hair is structurally weakened.

...that's remind me of natural hair care.

Excellent post!!! Giving the process a positive name is going to be misleading for folks & potential newbies here. "heat training" is heat damage, and while some folks have been able to get their hair permanently straight by way of heat, it's still a dangerous process, & there's no guarantee that the results will work for every head of hair.

Well they are newbie... they are not sheeps. I think that they are aware that Heat training is not new glamorous relaxer.

Ya'll gonna mess around, changing names and whatnot and end up getting sued for misrepresentation and false advertisement.

"false advertisement" and "positive misleading name"...
nice sugar coating for "lies"

So our hair technique is not respectable, we are liars, and we dive the stary -eyed, lamb like, virginal newbie in corruption (debauchery is not far, wait for it)

No really heat is the devil!

 

[qchelle]

We are talking about non-living protein you know. Yes, hair is dead matter. Dead matter that has a very distinct structure that can be disrupted, weakened, damaged, etc. It's okay to stretch it out - really. My hair is not damaged at the moment internally or externally. I've had damaged hair in the past so I know what that looks like and I'll have it again. I don't heat train for straight hair. If I wanted straight hair I'd get a relaxer, in fact I'd need a relaxer.

Hair boards offer a wealth of information but unfortunately they also help to spread misinformation. So, I'll simply put this heat-training issue on the same list of hair board myths as the "no cones!", "no sulfates! movements, and henna as a relaxer, etc., and leave it be.

I'm chemistry literate. I just disagree with common hair board dogma against it. I don't understand how what I said is "dogma against it"

Of course this is all just my opinion look and we can agree to disagree
For the record, I'm not against heat-training.

 

[GloriousPraise]

heat training
thermal straightening
thermalax (nah, on second thought nix that one, for some reason that sounds like a laxative to me)
Thermal texturizing
heat texturizing

 

[30something]

Thermal processing? Heat processing? is that just too weird?

 

[Rain20]

Would you say an ice cube is damaged water or that heated shea butter or oil is damaged. You can use a physical property like heat to temporarily re-arrange a chemical structure. Ex. Shea butter is usually solid a room temperature. If you heat it it turns to a soft butter use more heat and it turns into an oil. If you cool it the shea butter returns to its solid form.

However, if you use an extreme of a physical property ex. fire then the structure may be totally damaged or destroyed(none of the former characteristics are present=burnt). Ex. the shea butter is heated to point of being scorched so it is now none of the physical properties of the shea butter remain. So the key to thermal restructuring is to control the amount of heat so as not the permanently burn the hair.There may be some flaws in my example but I hope you get the gist of what I wrote.

If you watch Brittany's channel she does suggest lower temperatures and fewer passes for fine hair. She only does her new growth with more than 2 passes and then may use one pass on the heat trained hair.

I guess I dont understand. Did Brittany want the OP to do this? She usually is very good about speaking for herself.

Do what's best for your hair. There is not one method that will work for everyone.