View Full Version : Isle of Dogs shampoo & Sodium Laureth Sulfate

19th February 2011, 03:31 PM
I was excited to try the Isle of Dogs line as I keep hearing such wonderful things about it. But then I was looking at the ingredient list and was SO dissapointed! I saw that the shampoo's contain Sodium Laureth Sulfate and from everything I have read about what to look for in a good dog shampoo (and from various vets) this is always the ingredient they say to avoid. It's said to be drying, irriatating, can cause damange to skin/hair folicle and more. Any opinions on this? I have been using (and loving) Buddy Wash and their conditioner Buddy Rinse by Cloud Star which is 100% natural and smells divine. It's always fun to try something new though, so I was curous about IOD. I listed the ingredents below.

Isle of Dog #10 shampoo
Deionized water, sodium laureth sulfate, cocamide DEA, acrylates copolymer, PEG-3 distearate, oenothera biennis (evening primrose) oil, fragrance. DMDM hydantoin, iodopropynyl butylcarbamate, citric acid, sodium chloride.

Buddy Wash by Cloud Star

Coconut shampoo base, aloe vera gel, essence of lavender, essence of mint, chamomile extract, sage extract, nettle extract, rosemary extract, wheat protein extract (natural deodorizing agent), tea tree oil, vitamin E, vitamin C.

Note: I have heard that sulfates can be hidden in some coconut based shampoos but I have contacted Cloud Star about the buddy wash and they have assured me that NO sulfates are put in their formulas.

19th February 2011, 03:37 PM
I'm extremely sensitive to sodium lauryl sulfate, but sodium laureth doesn't bother me. I've heard lots of bad things about the the lauryl, never laureth, maybe the same is true of dogs?

19th February 2011, 03:51 PM
Hmmm maybe! After just reading on their website, now I'm extra confused! lol :confused: they actually list Sodium Laureth Sulfate as an ingredient that should not be in good natural products (?!)


19th February 2011, 05:40 PM
These articles from wikipedia and snopes might be helpful:

Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/household/shampoo.asp)
Wikipedia SLS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_lauryl_sulfate)
Wikipedia SLES (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_laureth_sulfate)

Note that SLS is also used in toothpaste. They probably won't cause undue irritation if used as suggested - but if you want to go with a completely natural product best to avoid SLS/SLES. Of course some individuals are highly sensitive to certain chemicals as well.

19th February 2011, 06:08 PM
Note that lauric acid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauric_acid) (a fatty acid present in coconut oil) is the common denominator in all of these cleansers.

19th February 2011, 06:09 PM
and another link which I found quite frightening TBH


19th February 2011, 06:29 PM
There are about 4 brands that don't use sls in toothpaste. About 10 years ago most shampoo brands used sls, then the natural shampoo movement happened, and it's probably in fewer than half of shampoos now. I'm hoping the same will happen with toothpaste.

I am only sensitive to sodium lauryl sulfate, ammonium lauryl/laureth, and sodium laureth don't bother me at all. It's strange to have that degree of specificity.

It's funny that isle of dogs calls out sodium laureth as a bad ingredient, then uses it in their product anyway. I guess they don't think you should buy their product.

19th February 2011, 11:07 PM
I found the perfect shampoo only $100.00!!!!!!!!!!:sl*p::sl*p:


20th February 2011, 06:44 AM
I found the perfect shampoo only $100.00!!!!!!!!!!:sl*p::sl*p:


Thanks, I'll pass on this opportunity, though.

20th February 2011, 02:45 PM
Regarding the "scary" article; it mentions SLS can cause liver damage, etc.

Well tea tree oil can cause liver damage (particularly in cats), and it is a perfectly natural product. Used topically in the right amount, it can work wonders. Just don't consume it!

Just because it's "natural" doesn't mean it's safe or better. I just get a bit irritated with scare tactics. The underlying ideas may be correct, but the information presented is totally misleading.