Humans have been cleaning their hair for thousands of years.
The first use of ‘shampoo’ dates back to South Asia, from 3300 BCE to 1300 BCE[1]. These early shampoos were introduced to Britain by Sake Dean Mahomed in 1814 in Brighton[2].
By the early 1900s, shampoo was beginning to be advertised by various companies. However, despite dating back so far, shampoo and soap were very similar products until the invention of Drene in the 1930s.
Shampoo, as we know it today, has been around for less than 100 years.
In the 1970s and 1980s, beauty companies began to take a new direction with their marketing. Ads were aired featuring famous American actresses Farrah Fawcett and Christie Brinkley, asserting that it was unhealthy not to shampoo several times a week.
It seems unlikely that celebrities alone could change the social consciousness of hair hygiene forever with such simple premises. These advertisements may have failed if not for some fortunate properties of shampoo.
Regular use of shampoo removes the oils produced by the human scalp, sebum[4]. Once removed, the scalp’s sebaceous glands will produce oil at a higher rate to recover what was lost in the shampooing process. As a result, the hair feels greasier than usual. Many mistake this greasy feeling as an indication that hair needs to be shampooed again.
In other words, people began believing they needed shampoo because their hair became greasy without it.
Does this mean we shouldn’t use shampoo?
There are several advocates for the No Poo Movement. On Reddit, the No Poo forum boasts almost 400,000 members and lists various techniques, like using hard water or wax, for cleaning one’s hair without shampoo. There are also internet resources claiming that you shouldn’t shampoo your hair.
However, alternative techniques for shampooing hair seem to require more effort. Furthermore, they only appear to have the backing of individuals rather than any scientific research.
These individuals frequently use the phrase works for you when talking about alternatives to shampoo. For instance, if a technique appears to work for you, this might be enough evidence to refute the need for further research. But this argument is a double-edged sword; if shampoo also works for you, why bother looking at alternatives?
Shampoo is quick, cheap (unless you are buying expensive brands) and saves you the hassle of sifting through alternatives, some of which are costly.
So… do we like shampoo?
Meh.
There is insufficient evidence backing the need to shampoo our hair, and yet there still seems to be an unusual social pressure about the usage of shampoo.
People who don’t use shampoo and advertise this fact publicly tend to be shamed as unhygienic. This relatively harmless exhibit of groupthink is derived from successful advertising campaigns backed by some addictive properties of shampoo.
Fortunately, this doesn’t seem to be a problem that most people face daily.
So at the very least, the next time you wash your hair, you’ll know why.
[1] Smith, V. (2009). Clean: A history of personal hygiene and purity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[2] Teltscher, K. (2000). The shampooing surgeon and the Persian prince: Two Indians in early nineteenth-century Britain. Interventions, 2(3), 409–423. doi:10.1080/13698010020019226
[3] Sherrow, V. (2023). Encyclopedia of hair: A cultural history. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood.
[4] Rathi, S., & D′Souza, P. (2015). Shampoo and conditioners: What a dermatologist should know? Indian Journal of Dermatology, 60(3), 248. doi:10.4103/0019–5154.156355