Gel Manicures vs. Traditional Ones

Okay, so gel manicures are the major rage right now, with at home kits and mini LEDs to set them, they're popping up everywhere. Now, I know, as a woman who works, that a manicure that can last more than two weeks without chipping, one that keeps going until it's grown out before it needs to be re-done (not unlike acrylics, but without the havoc they wreak on your nails), is too amazing to be questioned... but what happens when you should question it for health reasons?

I have more than a "normal" nail polish collection... okay, it is now bordering on obsession, addiction and needing intervention, so I have a pretty serious investment in going with a traditional manicure (and doing it yourself! Or at least bringing your own polish). All of that aside, gel manicures sound like the best thing since... sliced bread? Or those little toasters that cook a sunnyside up egg while they make your toast... However, I have discovered a couple serious flaws in the gel manicure camp.

One: if you don't go back to the nail salon to have them removed (and then put back on), they can destroy your nails, similar to the way acrylics did back in high school. Here's the thing: you have to soak your hands in pure acetone (not normal nail polish remover) to soften the cured gel enough to actually remove it from your nails. The acetone does soften the gel, but it also softens the nails. Then you have to use a metal cuticle pusher to scrape off the gel and if you're not careful (or over-zealous, like I was), you'll actually end up scraping/peeling off part of the nail itself. The whole thing leaves your nails weak, just like acrylics did. And, if you have any kind of ADD, you'll get bored of the manicure/color you got. By day 5, I was itching to paint my nails, I love me a nice French manicure, but not that much. Long story short: gels are no better than acrylics--they ruin your nails, you're stuck with one manicure for weeks, and you look ridiculous when you "need a fill" and spend $40 to get the whole manicure re-done. At least, that's my opinion.

Two: you can get skin cancer from gel manicures. Yes, skin cancer. Since the lights used to cure the polish are UV lights, you're almost tanning your hands... like putting your hands only in a tanning bed. Since your hands are one of the most forgotten/overlooked parts of your body, they're at a huge risk for skin cancer. Think about it. Driving in the car: what's exposed? Your arms and hands. I have a girlfriend who literally drives with a coat or sweater at all times because she has such fragile, pale skin. Personally, I burn, then freckle, then tan. Any tanning whatsoever is terrible for you, but the concentrated UV rays are the worst. Further, how many of us can actually that we put sunscreen on our hands every single day? I sure as hell can't. And I always put sunscreen everywhere else. Women with darker skin tones are even more at risk, since spotting skin discoloration on a mole is made even more difficult because the differentiation between mole and actual skin tone are similar. Derms say women with darker skin need to be extra vigilant in checking between fingers and under the finger nails for small spots of discoloration, moles with irregular edges, yaddah yaddah yaddah. If states are banning or regulating the use of tanning beds, why are we still putting ourselves at risk by getting gel manicures???

The perks of gel manicures are clear: shiny, chip free manicures that last [sometimes] upwards of three weeks, they're your real nails, no added length or crazy tips, what's not to love, ladies? But there are alternatives that are really just as good, but don't leave your nails open to be ravaged by acetone and scraping off the polish (and possibly some of the first layer of nail), and don't put us at risk of skin cancer.... and they won't run your bank account into negative balance territory. My favorite, by far, is the Sally Hansen Nail Strips. They literally last just about as long as gels, and similarly to gels, you really only need to re-do them when they start to grow out and your nails look like they need a fill. They can be removed with normal nail polish remover, not pure acetone, and don't strip the top layer of your nail off. Plus they're cheaper.

And then there's just good ol' plain doing your own nails at home. With all the nail art trends around, and all the nail art blogs running up and down your internet pathways, not to mention the amazing nail tutorials that can be found on Youtube. This is where my obscenely large nail polish collection (and the guilt whenever I get a manicure without bringing my own polish, or doing gel) comes into play. How to justify going to a salon to have your nails painted by someone else and paying anywhere from $10-$70+ a pop (gels, regular manis, pedis, etc) is beyond me. Not to mention, I'll never get through my collection and have to throw them all away. (Probably have to do that someday any way, but hey!) Plus, there's the budget factor. Add up all the mani/pedis you've gotten in the last year, including gels. Pretty hefty chunk of change. In comparison, buying the right tools and your own nail polish, and doing it all yourself doesn't seem so bad. Plus, you can change it whenever you want, all it costs is 30+ minutes a day.

It all just makes you think. And it's an age-old debate: are the lengths we go to for beauty too far fetched? Are they just plain dangerous? Think about it the next time you're getting your nails done... [or doing them yourself].