Hair Care Product Claims 504 levels of conditioning ingredients. Conversely, typical “bodifying” and “volumizing” variants generally yield somewhat lower combing forces due to a conscious decision to limit surface deposition. Furthermore, lower priced, bargain brand products often attain their price point by using even lower ingredient levels, while also possibly omitting more-expensive ingredients (e.g. silicones). As such, it is common to see such formulas being less effective at lubricating the hair surface. Of course, these statements represent generalities, and exceptions can certainly be found, but surveying the wet combing performance associated with a selection of commercial products should yield findings similar to those shown. So-called “2-in-1” shampoos (i.e. shampoo plus conditioner) were introduced to the market in the mid 1980s and provide lubrication via the deposition of high molecular weight silicone oil on the hair. Therefore, the Garcia & Diaz method predates such products, but the methodology is still applicable. These newer products provide a lower level of lubrication, with the amount being dependant on the amount of silicone oil deposited on the hair. The contributing factors to this deposition are complex, and involve variables such as composition of the surfactant base, silicone oil droplet size, and possibly the presence of deposition enhancing polymers. Subsequently, quantification of silicone deposition levels via techniques such as Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-OES) or X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) is commonplace. Once again, manufacturers will produce variants within a brand that impart differing levels of conditioning, with this being achieved by varying silicone deposition levels. Figure 6 shows wet combing results for two commercially available 2-in-1 products. Product 1 was found to deposit 140 ppm Si/g hair, while Product 2 deposited 600 ppm Si/g hair. As probably anticipated, significantly more surface lubrication is attained when using Product 2. To reiterate, a high level of conditioning is desirable for some hair types, while being disasterous for others. Therefore, there are dangers in ascribing any “superiority” rank to formulas based on instrumental testing alone. Nevertheless, it is seen how such