Science vs. Nature

The enormous natural products market has seen an emergence of thousands of products.  Some of these products contain truly "natural" ingredients, and others, well--not so much.  Of course it is wrong for companies to market their products as natural if they're full of harmful chemicals just so they can capitalize on the green/natural/organic movement.  However, what about products that incorporate the best of science and nature?  Is it really necessary to be hard core natural if that compromises efficacy?  In certain instances all natural products truly are better in function and safety, but in others a little help from human-made ingredients makes a world of difference, and as long as those lab-created substances are safe (and earth-friendly), then I'm all for it.

Take natural shampoos for example.  It is impossible to make an all-natural shampoo that works well.  Natural liquid soap does not make for a good shampoo--it is impossible to get the pH acidic, which is required so that the follicle of your hair stays smooth, and not rough, dull, and tangled (although my friend washes his hair with a bar of Elemental Soapworks soap and insists it has cured his dandruff and itchy scalp--I attempted this once and got instant dreadlocks-but, I digress.)  Even the so-called "all-natural" shampoos contain lab created plant-based detergents.  These new detergents are wonderful--they're biodegradable, gentle, skin-soothing, and naturally derived--but definitely NOT all natural.

Not all man-made ingredients are bad, and in many cases they're better than just mother nature on her own. In some cases the fusion of nature and science equals a superior product-one that performs well and is good for us and the planet.