I just find that my hair ha smore tangles and is harder to comb without some cones. But too many makes it stiff and gross so I try to just keep it down. Lately I've not been using cones but that's just because I've found that Nexxus Ensure works better than anything with or without cones that I've ever tried.
As far as how long it takes for the damage to show, I'm not sure because I stopped NOT using cones before too much damage could ensue. I think I had quite a bit of breakage from it though.

Thanks, Ladies... I'll give coneless some time, and I'll keep an eye out for the results. So far there's been more friction, but so far it's livable.

Anais

This is only partly true. Silicone is a humectent as well. And there are different ways of forumulating it into conditioners that effect if it builds up, smooths, etc. My chemistry background suggests that the idea that it is "glue" is most certainly exaggerated.

Well it isn't as though I don't believe cones are hard on some people's hair; everyone is different in that respect.
But there are too many factors to simply call it a masking agent for damage. If a person has hard water, cones can be beneficial if in the right formulation, because hard water is terribly alkaline and the molecular bonds of keratin simply dissolve in alkaline water. That's why chemical processing can literally melt your hair right off -  it's VERY alkaline. And some forumlations of silicone polymers will covalently bond to the keratin, thereby preventing the dissolution of the keratin bonds in hard water. That's the principal behind all the "heat activated" conditioners. And THAT is NOT simply a glue masking damage; it is preventing the amino acid chain from falling apart over time. Although, sometimes dimethicone is just a coating - depends on how cheaply made the product is and how little money they wanted to spend on research to get the formulation right. Enough blabber. I'm still using my cones.

Rapunzel, oh of course I wouldn't stop caring for my hair!! LOL... I keep hearing about how terrible cones are for some people, but I clarify regularly and haven't seen damage in years. The last few days, I've been wondering why I'm even experimenting with coneless--Thinking, "Do I really think my hair can be better than this?" Apparently it can if I find the right product. Thanks a bunch

Noelkara, thanks for the chem refresher. I've been a  pharmacology phreak for years, mostly concerning toxic substances though. Which reminds me--you mentioned hard water-- I've heard that its alkalinity dampens shampoo foaming ability... I assume from neutralization on a small scale. Do you know how hard "hard water" must be before a noticeable lather difference? Up here in WA it isn't a problem, but it's something I've been thinking about since I do a lot of traveling. (Although they say foaming isn't any indication of cleanliness, it still tells me where I'm leading the majority of surfactants with no eyeballs )

Anais

Quote:

I think we're comparing apples and oranges here, as though the only difference between conditioners is whether they have or do not have cones.

Conditioners can do three things for the hair (maybe more, but this is how I see it now):

• The increase the moisture uptake and holding capability
• They leave a thin coating of oils.
• They leave a coating of silicones to make the hair silkier and shinier.

If you had really dry, damaged hair, and used a product that was strictly cones, and of the type that only builds up on the surface, and you never clarified, eventually you would get nasty buildup, and your damage would get worse.

But most conditioners have very complex formulations, and completely aside from cone content, do not work equally well.

I wash my hair with Suave Daily Clarifying conditioner. It is the lightest conditioner I have ever used, and it has no cones. Yet it has very little conditioning or detangling effect. If I were to use this for CO wash and didn't use another conditioner after it, I might think that CO wash didn't work. If I were to exclusively use this product to condition my hair (especially matched up with Suave Daily Clarifying shampoo), I might find increasing damage by the time I used up the first bottle.

Another example: the first time I tried CO wash, I used the VO5 conditioner I had been using all along, and it left my hair feeling greasy. Clearly it was intended to leave a thin coating of oil on hair, rather than cleanse, and if I had stuck with this, I would have given up CO washing rather quickly. So often I have read, I tried CO wash using VO5, or Suave, or White Rain (but specific product name not given) and it left my hair feeling greasy. As though all VO5 or Suave or White Rain products were identical.

Better conditioners attempt to address all the needs of your hair.

But most better conditioners contain some of all three types of conditioning ingredients. The different formulations' interaction with different hair, scalp, and usage conditions results in some people getting crappy results, while others love the product. I love what Pantene does for my hair, but, if you count the two different CO washes I do, it's the fourth rinse on my hair. It just takes a dab to slick on. If I were to apply it straight to harshly shampooed hair, I bet it would suck up a lot more. 

I think in an ideal world, you would be able to select three separate conditioners to address separately the needs of your hair. Or perhaps you could select a custom formulation, which would be mixed in the store as you waited.

Quote:

The alkalinity in hard water does not cause a pH problem with your shampoo. What happens is that the alkaline mineral salts react with ingredients in soaps and shampoos to form insoluble compounds that cling to your hair, and make it feel icky.

When I was in college long ago, I lived in a city that got its water from the local river, and though river water is soft, this water was very polluted. Whereas I had previously washed with Head and Shoulders, this no longer cleaned my hair, and I had to use Prell, which I could see was very harsh.

I think you have to play it as you go. If the shampoo you pack doesn't work in a different water supply, you may need something else, but it would be difficult to predict without testing what you should switch to, especially if you're not going to be there very long.

I think it would make $$ sense for somebody to use neutral shampoo/conditioner bases and make custom additions through a website. I know you can buy neutral conditioner base, I've seen it for sale by the gallon over the internet.

Remember Leia's post about making your own shampoo and using herbs? Posters spoke of buying some expensive hard-to-source salon products as bases.

I think it should be possible for a person to modify a conditioner that's already working for them by adding what you think works. If you applied it to 1/2 your head, you could test it against the unmodified product.

Not that everything would work, of course. If jojoba + Pantene Pro-V = gum, that wouldn't be a useful combination.

My opinion is that most of the "natural" ingredients in hair care products are only there for people who read the labels, anyway. Mostly a marketing gimmick. Even though rinsing your hair with tea, or seaweed, or applying jojoba may clearly be beneficial to your hair, the concentration in a bottle of conditioner is probably too small to make an impact. Especially if there are a lot of these extract-type ingredients, there's probably very little of each one present.