Woman's hair dye horror

Deborah Linton

April 15, 2009

| Submit Comments | Comments (32) | Previous | Next

Susan Taylor

Susan Taylor 1/4 Play Slideshow

A WOMAN had to be hooked up to a drip in hospital after suffering a vicious allergic reaction to a home hair dye kit.

Susan Taylor was rushed to A&E when her head, neck and face began to swell and burn within hours of using the Garnier Nutrisse hair colour.

She was put on a drip and given antihistamines - and later steroids by her doctor - but it took over a week for the symptoms to ease.

Mrs Taylor, 55, from Ramsbottom, has been left with extensive scabbing and she says as well as being horrendously painful, the ordeal has left her too traumatised to go out.

Now she is warning other women to carefully stick to the instructions on the box of hair products.

Mrs Taylor said she only did a 24 hour skin test instead of the recommended 48 hours.

The mother of two grown-up sons said: "It was a constant burning and itching sensation. It's been horrific and I've looked so awful I couldn't leave the house.

"It just got worse - the swelling wouldn't go down and my ears began to turn black. I've been dying my hair since I was 17, I've even used this product before, but I've never experienced anything as awful as this."

Mrs Taylor, a part-time carer, applied the light brown hair dye at 4pm.

As she went to bed at 10pm she felt her face burning up and looked in the mirror to find it was 'bright red'.

She then woke up at around 1am unable to swallow and with a burning sensation so bad her husband Anthony drove her to A&E at Fairfield Hospital where she was put on a drip and given antihistamines.

She was monitored and sent home but was still in pain two days later and went to see her GP who prescribed her steroids. When the symptoms had still not eased a week later she went to an NHS walk-in centre and was prescribed penicillin and referred to a dermatologist.

She said: "I want this to serve as a warning to other women. The instructions told me to test the product against my skin for 48 hours before applying it but I only did it for 24 hours because I've used it before without any problems.

"Garnier have been apologetic and offered to pay for a taxi to the dermatologist and any prescription but I think that's just insulting. It's been a horrendous experience. What if I'd needed to go to work or was dying my hair for my son's wedding?"

A spokesman for L'Oreal - the company that owns Garnier - said: "We are totally committed to ensuring that our products are safe and that our customers can use them with absolute confidence.

"We were very sorry to hear of Mrs Taylor's recent experience and are in regular contact with her to offer our support. We have recommended that she visits a dermatologist to establish the precise cause of the reaction.

"Allergies to hair colorants are extremely rare but can occur for a very small number of people. Mrs. Taylor's experience shows how important it is to carry out a skin allergy test 48 hours before using the colorant each and every time, following the instructions clearly displayed on our packaging."

You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.

460

275

false

| Submit Comments | Comments (32) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All

Jo14, Somewhere on planet Earth - I think (15/04/2009 at 09:08)

Why is she insulted by Garnier's offer?

She's admitted she didn't do as instructed with regard to the skin test - so, she can hardly blame them!

Miss M, Manchester (15/04/2009 at 09:32)

Read the box is my advice - if it says 48 hours, it doesnt mean 24 hours!

Mike S, Manchester (15/04/2009 at 09:36)

Absolutely - should dairies have to compensate people who are allergic to milk but drink it anyway? Or how about the sea for those who are allergic to shellfish but gobble down a prawn cocktail?

Some people have allergies. She didn't follow the instructions and paid the price. Get over it. I'm sick to death of this nanny state where whenever something unfortunate happens to someone, somebody else has to be to blame.

Angie33 , Manchester (15/04/2009 at 09:55)

I think shes very brave showing what has happened as a warning to others.Most women would have gone into hiding.

Stu it Right, Manchester (15/04/2009 at 10:02)

i think they seem to have been very generous and understanding. Read the instructions and follow them each time whether you have used the product before or not. Horrific thing for her to go through but realy if she is looking for someone to blame she can only blame herself!

whistlingdixy (15/04/2009 at 10:58)

Having some experience of this I would say its quite possible that a 24 hour test hadnt been completed either, you would expect a reaction as severe as that to show after mins/hours.

Pippa, Manchester (15/04/2009 at 11:01)

By her own admission, and I quote "She said: "I want this to serve as a warning to other women. The instructions told me to test the product against my skin for 48 hours before applying it but I only did it for 24 hours" so, in fact, Garnier need not offer her anything, after all their instructions were quite explicit and she understood them but chose not to follow them. I applaud her for wanting to warn others, but come on, it was all her own fault.

Hacienda 51, Manchester (15/04/2009 at 11:22)

The only way you find out you are allergic to something is when you use,eat something ect!
It is very unfortunate for this lady but as people have said she did not follow the instructions clearly.

Empty Head, Southport (15/04/2009 at 11:32)

whistlingdixy: You took the words right out of my mouth.

Savage Mandarin, Manchester (15/04/2009 at 11:53)

I imagine that L'Oreal are "insulted" by the fact that Mrs Taylor is dragging their products' good name through the mud when - by her own admission - she didn't follow the instructions (and btw, Whistlingdixy, I think that you're spot on with your comment - and you too, Mike S).
Allergies often occur when the body's tolerance to a chemical has been reached - like a jug filling one drip at a time; and the problem hits when one drop too many has fallen. That's why they recommend patch tests for these things: put chemicals on your head, and what do you expect?

Gem 01, Manchester (15/04/2009 at 13:31)

Whats the big WARNING on the box.....May cause allergic reactions skin test...all you can do is blame yourself for not doing that...she is very lucky it could have been worse

Jan Elliott (15/04/2009 at 13:49)

If you actually read the article properly, she is just trying to warn others not to do as she has done, and not out to blame anyone. Talk about knee-jerk reactions! How many of us would not/have not have done exactly as she has done, thinking the worst that can happen with a product coming from a company with such a high reputation - is perhaps a bit of a rash, or itching? If she has used the product before she has maybe thought, as I have done, that she wouldn't have such a severe reaction, if any at all. After all, how many people have used a product without strictly following instructions - be honest!! She won't, and I certainly won't, in future, so she has done me a favour, for one.

JoeStalin,Gorton (15/04/2009 at 14:27)

This must have been a very frightening experience and it's good of Susan to warn others of the risk who also might not have the nous to read the instructions first and do the required allergy test. Only Susan will know whether she really did the allergy test at all. I always find it amusing when people do the most stupid things and then "warn" others about it. It's not like we're all dim enough to shove a bucket full of chemicals on our head without seeing if a little bit of it brings us out in a rash. She's obviously angling for a bit of compo but she'll struggle having admitted in the press that she didn't follow the manufacturers advice.

Matthew Wright (15/04/2009 at 14:27)

Garnier have been apologetic and offered to pay for a taxi to the dermatologist and any prescription but I think that's just insulting. It's been a horrendous experience. What if I'd needed to go to work or was dying my hair for my son's wedding?"-What else are they supposed to do. I hope she makes sure she doesnt die it incorrectly for the court appearence if she decideds to prosecute it will cost enough in legal fees without any further embarrasment

Bolton expat, Hamilton Canada (15/04/2009 at 15:00)

After viewing the photographs of this lady's horrific skin reaction, I can only say thank you for coming forward and sharing this with the public.
I am surprised that this lady has used hair dyes for many years and would not expect this kind of reaction. Thank you for your courage in sharing this but I too do not believe the company is at fault.

Esso Blue. Shirt and Tie modern day Pirates, Manchester. (15/04/2009 at 16:25)

Manchester Evening News the story says she put the test on for 24 hours instead of 48 hours.

On the video she says she put the test on for 12 hours.

The rash started at 10.30 after she originally put it on at 4.00. That is only six and a half hours when she started to react, so I am surprised she didn't get a reaction from the test within within six and a half hours of the test..

MARS BAR, SWINTON (15/04/2009 at 16:31)

Get a massive claim in there a massive chemical industry get what you can,a taxi and prescriptions is an insult,get that claim in.

MARS BAR, SWINTON (15/04/2009 at 16:33)

Whats the big WARNING on the box.....May cause allergic reactions skin test...all you can do is blame yourself for not doing that...she is very lucky it could have been worse
Gem 01, Manchester
15/04/2009 at 13:31
what are you whittering on about she did a skin test and you do it on your hand??????silly posting...

MARS BAR, SWINTON (15/04/2009 at 16:39)

If it says 48 hours them there own chemists arnt sure ,all other dyes containing peroxide say a skin test is 24 hours,in fact they can tell in a few mins as my wife runs several hairdressers and knows all about this.
This must have been a box of what she says can only be of well over the perioxide dosage,garnier should be sued.

willing to listen, Middleton (15/04/2009 at 18:09)

I also agree with your comments Whistlingdixy..

local_lass, Burnage (15/04/2009 at 20:03)

Every year there is a story just like this one. I can't beleive these people aren't aware of the risks and didn't read last years version.

Fair enough running these stories over and over again should help warn others - but If you don't follow the instructions in the box and take heed of the warnings you take the risk on your own shoulders.

Why should the brand be mentioned? Why on earth should she be insulted by their very decent offer. Me thinks the whole going to the papers thing was just to try and get some compensation cash!

For the record you are more likely to react to these dyes in subsequent applications than the first time round.

Philip Lines (15/04/2009 at 22:13)

By her own admission she DID NOT read the instructions. So therefore there is no case to answer and the manufacturers owe her nothing but are showing a gesture of good faith which they are not obluiged to do. The product has obviously been tested in the lab and possibly countless lab animals have suffered or died in the process. Its a shame but there is a multi million pound / dollar beauty industry here that employs millions of people world wide and gives women the illusion that these products make them look better. There isn't really a story here except for one of stupidity...Sorry luv ! We will all now pay for her treatment via our taxes to the NHS.

JoeStalin,Gorton (15/04/2009 at 22:18)

Maybe she picked up the wrong box. She might have picked up a face die instead of a hair dye. It's easy done!

waywardweastie (16/04/2009 at 03:52)

Good God woman,did you dip your whole head in a bucket of this stuff or what?
You just want to warn others eh?
No need love,most of us want to remain in the gene pool in spite of vanity.

tracy wiliams (16/04/2009 at 15:07)

Hair dye reactions seem to be on the increase.This lady did the skin test for 24 hours I would like to point out that people have followed the 48 hour test no reaction then applied dye and have had severe reactions.And its interesting to know that PPD (4-Paraphenylene Diamine,C6H8N2)the chemical used in most hair dyes in this country is actually banned in France,Germany and Sweden due to danger to health so why is it still on our shelves?

()

Report

News