Shampoo is supposed to remove dirt and grease from your hair. Conditioner is supposed to replace the necessary oils your hair needs to have. … Which need to be replaced because the shampoo just washed them all away. In order to make a 2-in-1 shampoo and conditioner, they have to make a significant compromise, producing a shampoo that doesn’t wash all the grime out and a conditioner that doesn’t stay and replenish as well as a standalone one would. So you get both in one bottle … but a shitty version of both. Using separate products will work much better. Even the cheapest shampoo and cheapest conditioner out there, used individually, will easily outperform even the fanciest combination.
Oh, and while we’re here… That thing on the bottle that says ‘lather, rinse, repeat’? It’s not just for fun, and not just because they want you to use more shampoo. It actually does work noticeably better if you do it twice in a row.
I am following your logic, but as someone who’s been using a 2 in 1 for like a decade, I can tell you everyones hair needs are different. I’ve used them separately as well and it really does not make a difference for me.
Even the cheapest shampoo and cheapest conditioner out there, used individually, will easily outperform even the fanciest combination.
But I really take offence to this line, absolutely not true. The cheapest shampoo will dry up/irritate your scalp, the cheapest conditioner will make your hair feel like an oil spill.
I have really long hair and another benefit of doing them separately is, it’s easiest to brush it right after applying conditioner, and harder when it has shampoo in it. So there’s that on top of really needing the conditioner to work well.
2-in-1 shampoos suck tho, so unix wins again
Shampoo: Remove oils and thereby remove dirt attached to oils. Conditioner: Restore oils to your hair.
2-in-1: Restore oils while also removing oils?
Exactly.
Shampoo is supposed to remove dirt and grease from your hair. Conditioner is supposed to replace the necessary oils your hair needs to have. … Which need to be replaced because the shampoo just washed them all away. In order to make a 2-in-1 shampoo and conditioner, they have to make a significant compromise, producing a shampoo that doesn’t wash all the grime out and a conditioner that doesn’t stay and replenish as well as a standalone one would. So you get both in one bottle … but a shitty version of both. Using separate products will work much better. Even the cheapest shampoo and cheapest conditioner out there, used individually, will easily outperform even the fanciest combination.
Oh, and while we’re here… That thing on the bottle that says ‘lather, rinse, repeat’? It’s not just for fun, and not just because they want you to use more shampoo. It actually does work noticeably better if you do it twice in a row.
I am following your logic, but as someone who’s been using a 2 in 1 for like a decade, I can tell you everyones hair needs are different. I’ve used them separately as well and it really does not make a difference for me.
But I really take offence to this line, absolutely not true. The cheapest shampoo will dry up/irritate your scalp, the cheapest conditioner will make your hair feel like an oil spill.
Folks shampoo is for you skalp/hair roots and conditioner is for the tips only.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUbbx00iVqs&t=192
Just the tip?
I have really long hair and another benefit of doing them separately is, it’s easiest to brush it right after applying conditioner, and harder when it has shampoo in it. So there’s that on top of really needing the conditioner to work well.