remove un-wanted hair

"fishky03" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I am starting to grow hair on my chest and stomach, can anyone tell me the best way to remove it
so it doesn't interfer with my swimming by slowing me down?

I am a life guard trainer and some of my students also want to know, I told them that I would try
to find out.

Thanks

Are you male or female, the tretment might be different?

Wayne
--
DrClean www.DrClean.co.uk The Best Fabric Cleaning Resource on the Web

fishky03 said:

I am starting to grow hair on my chest and stomach, can anyone tell me the best way to remove it
so it doesn't interfer with my swimming by slowing me down?

Oh, come on. Chest hair is not going to slow you down. I wouldn't worry about it.

As you have been told, hair isn't that much of an issue for drag. But if you just want to get rid of
unwanted hair, the best way is to wax, then use shave minimizing creams, which are soy based. These
are usually marketed toward women, but I don't know of any reason why males can't use them. Even if
you pay to have waxing done, it will last 4-6 weeks, so you don't have to pay often. I would advise
you to have this professionally done--a lot of men get this done, especially body builders and men
with back hair. It hurts, but only for a minute. Madelaine

fishky03 said:

I am starting to grow hair on my chest and stomach, can anyone tell me the best way to remove it
so it doesn't interfer with my swimming by slowing me down?

I am a life guard trainer and some of my students also want to know, I told them that I would try
to find out.

Thanks

Well some Olympic swimmers think it does,

but for you and me, no!!!

"Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

fishky03 said:

I am starting to grow hair on my chest and stomach, can anyone tell me the best way to remove it
so it doesn't interfer with my swimming by slowing me down?

Oh, come on. Chest hair is not going to slow you down. I wouldn't worry about it.

Quoted message said:

Well some Olympic swimmers think it does,

I think the rationale was that shaving made you more "sensitive to the water," not that it
eliminated drag from your hairs. The bottom line is that it was a way to psych up the nervous kids
before big meets. Now that we have body suits to psych them up, we don't need shaving. But body
suits have exposed shaving for the crock o' BS that it always was. If you look at a swimmer from
underwater and you see the wave-patterned warping of the skin and muscles, it's obvious that the
amounts of force between the body and the water are so many orders of magnitude more than the
friction that hair could produce that it's meaningless.

Maglischo does quote a couple of chucklehead kinesiology "researchers" who claim that shaving does
reduce friction, but this is something that is inherently impossible to research since the
differences are so small, and you can't do any sort of double blind testing.

"Madelaine" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

As you have been told, hair isn't that much of an issue for drag. But if you just want to get rid
of unwanted hair, the best way is to wax, then use shave minimizing creams, which are soy based.
These are usually marketed toward women, but I don't know of any reason why males can't use them.
Even if you pay to have waxing done, it will last 4-6 weeks, so you don't have to pay often. I
would advise you to have this professionally done--a lot of men get this done, especially body
builders and men with back hair. It hurts, but only for a minute. Madelaine

Question: Do shave minimising creams have a permanent effect? Or when I stop using them, will my
chest hair return to normal?

-Jim

"Hitchking" <[email hidden]> wrote*

Quoted message said:

Question: Do shave minimising creams have a permanent effect? Or when I stop using them, will my
chest hair return to normal?

The question is not whether the effect is permanent, but whether they work at all. You should be
aware that there is a certain amount of controversy on this subject. These products are under the
radar of the FDA for the moment, but I suggest you read very carefully and critically what the
manufacturers claim in print. Slowing the growth of hair is not specically claimed. Reducing the
number of times you have to shave is all they claim. This could mean anything, including that
because you're psyched out by the thought that you don't need to shave as much, you in fact don't
shave as much. Or that because you're slathered in soybean oil, your hair feels softer (even though
the length is no shorter), and you don't shave it off.

IMHO, your response is condescending. The original question asked quite simply "Do shave
minimising creams have a permanent effect?". If you want to answer a different question (your
version was "...whether they work at all..."😉, then offer that alternative as something that you
believe to be a more important question to you, but why tell the person that they are asking the
wrong question? I just don't get why Americans are so "holier than thou" that they can tell people
what they should think.

Just getting some steam off my chest.

"Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Hitchking" <[email hidden]> wrote*

Quoted message said:

Question: Do shave minimising creams have a permanent effect? Or when I

stop

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

using them, will my chest hair return to normal?

The question is not whether the effect is permanent, but whether they work at all. You should be
aware that there is a certain amount of controversy

on

Quoted message said:

this subject. These products are under the radar of the FDA for the

moment,

Quoted message said:

but I suggest you read very carefully and critically what the

manufacturers

Quoted message said:

claim in print. Slowing the growth of hair is not specically claimed.

Reducing

Quoted message said:

the number of times you have to shave is all they claim. This could mean anything, including that
because you're psyched out by the thought that

you

Quoted message said:

don't need to shave as much, you in fact don't shave as much. Or that

because

Quoted message said:

you're slathered in soybean oil, your hair feels softer (even though the

length

Quoted message said:

is no shorter), and you don't shave it off.

x-no-archive:yes

Quoted message said:

IMHO, your response is condescending. The original question asked quite simply "Do shave
minimising creams have a permanent effect?". If you want

to

Quoted message said:

answer a different question (your version was "...whether they work at all..."😉, then offer that
alternative as something that you believe to be

a

Quoted message said:

more important question to you, but why tell the person that they are

asking

Quoted message said:

the wrong question? I just don't get why Americans are so "holier than

thou"

Quoted message said:

that they can tell people what they should think.

Just getting some steam off my chest.

And I don't get why some people try to indict an entire nation of people simply because one person
writes something with which they disagree. If I disagree with Martin, I don't write "I don't get why
Norwegians are so holier than thou!" but you feel free to slur an entire nation of people.

He wasn't telling the guy "what he should think". Re-read it without prejudice. His response was
that he didn't think shave minimising creams work at all, much less have a permanent effect. It's
his opinion, not that of ALL Americans. What IS your problem, dude?

Pat in TX

[First, an apology to this newsgroup since we are going off-topic here. The original posting was by
a male swimmer with a question about shaving/hair removal.]

At least there is one thinking person out there who was sufficiently involved to at least write a
countering viewpoint.

Pat, I suggest you go back and read my message. The posting to which I responded was in fact telling
the original person inquiring what he should think. He totally discounted the guy's question, and
did so in a condescending manner.

With regard to your negative comment concerning my triggering an indictment of an entire nation
based on one message, be advised that that one message wasn't the triggering event, but simply more
of the same that I see rampant in this country on a daily basis. FYI, I am an American citizen
living in the US. I see this kind of "holier than thou" attitude all the time. Just look at world
events. If you had travelled internationally and lived abroad as much as I have, I suspect you would
be aware of the same kinds of things that I routinely see. There was a leap of faith in that last
sentence because I do not know how much international exposure you have had.

Ask yourself why you were the only one who objected. By definition, not taking someone to task is
the same as consent. At least you deserve recognition for challenging my message.

"Pat" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

x-no-archive:yes

Quoted message said:

IMHO, your response is condescending. The original question asked quite simply "Do shave
minimising creams have a permanent effect?". If you

want

Quoted message said:

to

Quoted message said:

answer a different question (your version was "...whether they work at all..."😉, then offer that
alternative as something that you believe to

be

Quoted message said:

a

Quoted message said:

more important question to you, but why tell the person that they are

asking

Quoted message said:

the wrong question? I just don't get why Americans are so "holier than

thou"

Quoted message said:

that they can tell people what they should think.

Just getting some steam off my chest.

And I don't get why some people try to indict an entire nation of people simply because one person
writes something with which they disagree. If I disagree with Martin, I don't write "I don't get
why Norwegians are so holier than thou!" but you feel free to slur an entire nation of people.

He wasn't telling the guy "what he should think". Re-read it without prejudice. His response was
that he didn't think shave minimising creams work at all, much less have a permanent effect. It's
his opinion, not

that

Quoted message said:

of ALL Americans. What IS your problem, dude?

Pat in TX

x-no-archive:yes

Quoted message said:

Pat, I suggest you go back and read my message. The posting to which I responded was in fact
telling the original person inquiring what he should think. He totally discounted the guy's
question, and did so in a condescending manner.

But, I didn't read anything condescending in his response. It may be that you were subconsciously
looking for condescension....and, I didn't see anything of the "telling him what to think" attitude
you cited. He was just telling him what he knew about the products so that the poster could make an
evaluation. If you look for the worst, you are sure to find it. I just didn't find it.

Quoted message said:

With regard to your negative comment concerning my triggering an

indictment

Quoted message said:

of an entire nation based on one message, be advised that that one message wasn't the triggering
event, but simply more of the same that I see

rampant

Quoted message said:

in this country on a daily basis. FYI, I am an American citizen living in the US. I see this kind
of "holier than thou" attitude all the time. Just look at world events. If you had travelled
internationally and lived

abroad

Quoted message said:

as much as I have, I suspect you would be aware of the same kinds of

things

Quoted message said:

that I routinely see. There was a leap of faith in that last sentence because I do not know how
much international exposure you have had.

I have lived in Germany for seven years and have traveled to 21 different countries. We camped out
the entire time we traveled, so I have had a lot of exposure to different cultures. I have seen a
"holier than thou" attitude among the Germans, the French, the Austrians, the Swiss (did I mention
the French?)....in short: people are not uniformly one way in any country, nor is there any
"rampant" attitude.

Quoted message said:

Ask yourself why you were the only one who objected. By definition, not taking someone to task is
the same as consent. At least you deserve recognition for challenging my message.

It could just be that the other people are tired of you and don't want to take the time to respond.
Me? I am tired of people saying generalities about ALL Americans. Nobody has a corner on the market
of any "attitude." I think when somebody makes a generality, he ought to be called on it. For all
you know, you may have gotten into a dozen killfiles instantly.

Pat in TX

curt said:

Wow, did this get off-topic. We are now talking about generalizations about people in the US,
Germany, France and a few others? I am from the US and I think we are the most obnoxious people as
a whole, but you can't pigeon-hole

Lots of countries give us a run for our money here. Nationalism is pretty much a global phenomenon
and the Ugly American tourist seems to be as well.
--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com

There are studies out there somewhere that say that smooth surface (shaven) actually slows you down
just a smidgeon. Slightly rough surface (hair, shark skin, fish scales) actually break up the
viscosity of the water and make it easier to swim through it. They're laboratory tests, not tests on
swimmers. But we're talking about maybe one tenth of one percent of your speed, or even less. You
might find out the articles if you look up 'fluid dynamics'

See, I knew that studying engineering was going to come in handy sometime! 😉

I think shaving is mainly psychological, and possibly to increase the feel for the water and
partially a myth.

"Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Well some Olympic swimmers think it does,

I think the rationale was that shaving made you more "sensitive to the water," not that it
eliminated drag from your hairs. The bottom line is that it was a way to psych up the nervous kids
before big meets. Now that we have body suits to psych them up, we don't need shaving. But body
suits have exposed shaving for the crock o' BS that it always was. If you look at a swimmer from
underwater and you see the wave-patterned warping of the skin and muscles, it's obvious that the
amounts of force between the body and the water are so many orders of magnitude more than the
friction that hair could produce that it's meaningless.

Maglischo does quote a couple of chucklehead kinesiology "researchers" who claim that shaving does
reduce friction, but this is something that is inherently impossible to research since the
differences are so small, and you can't do any sort of double blind testing.

I dont care which country or which rude reply......I'm still wetting myself laughing over Wayne's
response way back which was "are you a male or female" Thanks Wayne I had a really good laugh here
in Australia!!!

"Jason O'Rourke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

curt said:

Wow, did this get off-topic. We are now talking about generalizations

about

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

people in the US, Germany, France and a few others? I am from the US and

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

think we are the most obnoxious people as a whole, but you can't

pigeon-hole

Quoted message said:

Lots of countries give us a run for our money here. Nationalism is pretty much a global phenomenon
and the Ugly American tourist seems to be as

well.

Quoted message said:

--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com

"DaKitty" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:9dx_a.33055$ff.31962@fed1read01...

Quoted message said:

There are studies out there somewhere that say that smooth surface

(shaven)

Quoted message said:

actually slows you down just a smidgeon. Slightly rough surface (hair, shark skin, fish scales)
actually break up

the

Quoted message said:

viscosity of the water and make it easier to swim through it. They're laboratory tests, not tests
on swimmers. But we're talking about maybe one tenth of one percent of your speed, or even less.
You might find out the articles if you look up 'fluid dynamics'

It was in 'Nature' magazine, around nine or ten years ago. The technology should see first light
in things like military submarines and possibly commercial airline jets (if they ever bounce back
from 9/11).

The study concentrated on fluid conduits. Apparently, with a smooth surface, the water/conduit
interface produces shear vortices that tend to roll up (like rolling up a rug or carpet), until they
become so big as to break off into the main current and cause undesirable turbulence. The vortice
effect is reduced somewhat with the addition of uniform protrusions on the surface of the conduit.
However, greatest effect was achieved with RANDOM protrusions on the surface of the conduit.
Vortices were not completely eliminated, but broke off when very small, thus resulting in a more
laminar flow.

That's about all I can remember from ten years ago. :þ

Quoted message said:

See, I knew that studying engineering was going to come in handy sometime! 😉

I think shaving is mainly psychological, and possibly to increase the feel for the water and
partially a myth.

It's likely that positive psychology can overcome and exceed any negative performance aspects
associated with shaving. =)

Quoted message said:

"Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Well some Olympic swimmers think it does,

I think the rationale was that shaving made you more "sensitive to the water," not that it
eliminated drag from your hairs. The bottom line is that it was a way to psych up the nervous
kids before big meets. Now that we have body suits to psych them up, we don't need shaving. But
body suits have exposed shaving for the crock o' BS that it always was. If you look at a swimmer
from underwater and you see the wave-patterned warping of the skin and muscles, it's obvious
that the amounts of force between the body and the water are so many orders of magnitude more
than the friction that hair could produce that it's meaningless.

Maglischo does quote a couple of chucklehead kinesiology "researchers" who claim that shaving
does reduce friction, but this is something that is inherently impossible to research since the
differences are so small, and you can't do any sort of double blind testing.

"mrdancer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"DaKitty" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:9dx_a.33055$ff.31962@fed1read01...

Quoted message said:

There are studies out there somewhere that say that smooth surface

(shaven)

Quoted message said:

actually slows you down just a smidgeon. Slightly rough surface (hair, shark skin, fish scales)
actually break up

the

Quoted message said:

viscosity of the water and make it easier to swim through it. They're laboratory tests, not
tests on swimmers. But we're talking about maybe one tenth of one percent of your speed, or even
less. You might find out the articles if you look up 'fluid dynamics'

It was in 'Nature' magazine, around nine or ten years ago. The

technology

Quoted message said:

should see first light in things like military submarines and possibly commercial airline jets (if
they ever bounce back from 9/11).

Could have been. I actually remember it from my engineering Fluid Dynamics textbooks... (I'm
an engineer)

Quoted message said:

The study concentrated on fluid conduits. Apparently, with a smooth surface, the water/conduit
interface produces shear vortices that tend to roll up (like rolling up a rug or carpet), until
they become so big as to break off into the main current and cause undesirable turbulence. The
vortice effect is reduced somewhat with the addition of uniform

protrusions

Quoted message said:

on the surface of the conduit. However, greatest effect was achieved with RANDOM protrusions on
the surface of the conduit. Vortices were not completely eliminated, but broke off when very
small, thus resulting in a more laminar flow.

Yea, something like that. There is also viscosity that water has, that air has in negligeable
amounts, that needs to be broken up before theese vortices start up (remember a glass that is just
sightly overfilled with water, slightly bubbled up, but not spilling yet, because the water surface
is subtenmded, and almost as if it's holding it in. Untill the water surface is broken. This same
thing is happening every time we enter water, and a very smooth vessel actually takes a tad more
energy to break the water surface, as opposed to an appropriately textured one.

(I'm sorry if I'm not using all of the right technical terms, my schooling and textbooks were not
in english)

Quoted message said:

That's about all I can remember from ten years ago. :þ

Quoted message said:

See, I knew that studying engineering was going to come in handy

sometime!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

😉

I think shaving is mainly psychological, and possibly to increase the

feel

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

for the water and partially a myth.

It's likely that positive psychology can overcome and exceed any negative performance aspects
associated with shaving. =)

Absolutely!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

> Well some Olympic swimmers think it does,

I think the rationale was that shaving made you more "sensitive to the water," not that it
eliminated drag from your hairs. The bottom line is that it was a way to psych up the nervous
kids before big meets. Now that we have body suits to psych them up, we don't need shaving.
But body suits have exposed shaving for the crock o' BS that it always was. If you look at a
swimmer from underwater and you see the wave-patterned warping of the skin and muscles, it's
obvious that the amounts of force between the body and the water are so many orders of
magnitude more than the friction that hair could produce that it's meaningless.

Maglischo does quote a couple of chucklehead kinesiology "researchers" who claim that shaving
does reduce friction, but this is something that is inherently impossible to research since
the differences are so small, and you can't do any sort of double blind testing.

Wow, did this get off-topic. We are now talking about generalizations about people in the US,
Germany, France and a few others? I am from the US and I think we are the most obnoxious people as a
whole, but you can't pigeon-hole everyone in a country. I have had great experiences in France when
I was there. I didn't expect them to speak duh, American duh like so many American tourists I saw
while there do. I found them very nice, but I was in France and was trying to learn their style of
life, not impose mine. I don't speak French, but I had a book and was trying. They seemed to love
that and total strangers helped me all the time with communication. It was great, and I would love
to go back soon.

It is strange how people see how the world is in there own eyes. Everyone has their own view. I
think this off-topic subject started with someone that is frustrated over how we as Americans are
acting in general. I know I am embarrassed on how we are at war all the time and are very
aggressive. I think many of our athletes that go to the Olympics especially sprinters and
basketball players are an embarrassment the way they act. I will say this is not the place to
discuss this however.

I say, relax and talk about it to people that you know. I am disturbed by many things in this
country and exercise my right of speech often.

Enjoy, Curt

"Pat" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

x-no-archive:yes

Quoted message said:

Pat, I suggest you go back and read my message. The posting to which I responded was in fact
telling the original person inquiring what he

should

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

think. He totally discounted the guy's question, and did so in a condescending manner.

But, I didn't read anything condescending in his response. It may be that you were subconsciously
looking for condescension....and, I didn't see anything of the "telling him what to think"
attitude you cited. He was

just

Quoted message said:

telling him what he knew about the products so that the poster could make

an

Quoted message said:

evaluation. If you look for the worst, you are sure to find it. I just didn't find it.

Quoted message said:

With regard to your negative comment concerning my triggering an

indictment

Quoted message said:

of an entire nation based on one message, be advised that that one

message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

wasn't the triggering event, but simply more of the same that I see

rampant

Quoted message said:

in this country on a daily basis. FYI, I am an American citizen living

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the US. I see this kind of "holier than thou" attitude all the time.

Just

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

look at world events. If you had travelled internationally and lived

abroad

Quoted message said:

as much as I have, I suspect you would be aware of the same kinds of

things

Quoted message said:

that I routinely see. There was a leap of faith in that last sentence because I do not know how
much international exposure you have had.

I have lived in Germany for seven years and have traveled to 21 different countries. We camped out
the entire time we traveled, so I have had a lot

of

Quoted message said:

exposure to different cultures. I have seen a "holier than thou" attitude among the Germans, the
French, the Austrians, the Swiss (did I mention the French?)....in short: people are not uniformly
one way in any country, nor is there any "rampant" attitude.

Quoted message said:

Ask yourself why you were the only one who objected. By definition, not taking someone to task
is the same as consent. At least you deserve recognition for challenging my message.

It could just be that the other people are tired of you and don't want to take the time to
respond. Me? I am tired of people saying generalities about ALL Americans. Nobody has a corner on
the market of any "attitude." I think when somebody makes a generality, he ought to be called on
it. For all you know, you may have gotten into a dozen killfiles instantly.

Pat in TX