Saturday, November 9, 2019

Statistical Significance and Homemade Shampoo

A Study on Gugo and Okra as Homemade Shampoo A Research Done by: Francine Faye A. Jumaquio Majaline Faye A. Tolentino Romer T. Nepumoceno Talavera National High School Talavera Nueva Ecija A Study on Gugo and Okra as a Homemade Shampoo Claudine M. Lajara I-Rosal Introduction This study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of a homemade shampoo out of the native Gugo, scientific name Entada phaseuoliodes and Okra, scientific name Abelomoschus Esculentus L. in making different type of hair stronger. Four phases were done: Phase 1, the control treatment; Phase 2, homemade shampoo compared to control treatment; Phase 3, homemade shampoo compared to varied concentration of gugo and okra; and Phase 4, where the acceptability of the homemade shampoo was determine in terms of smoothness, softness, and manageability. Statement of the Problem: Specifically, the researchers aimed to answer the following questions: 1. Can gugo and okra be used as raw material in making shampoo? 2. How effective are gugo and okra on the tensile strength of the hair? 3. Which treatment is more effective – treatments with greater concentration of okra han gugo or more gugo than okra? Procedure A. Preparation of Materials About 10,000 hair strands were gathered from four respondents having different types of hair, (normal, and dry, ethnic, curly). In each type of hair, 2020 strands were used: 240 strands for water, okra, 10 percent gugo, and 100 percent gugo; 240 strands for seven brands of shampoo; 12 0 strands for gugo and okra; and 600 strands for 10 treatments with varied concentration of okra and gugo. Five hundred grams of gugo bark were boiled in 70 ml of water for 30 minutes, and strained to extract the juice. The decoction was placed in a clean bottle. To prepare okra decoction, 200 grams of okra fruits were boiled in 200 ml tap water for10 minutes. The cooked okra was masked for extraction and decoction was strained for the preparation of solution. The homemade shampoo was prepared from 50 ml gugo decoction and 50 ml okra decoction. A 58ml coconut oil was added to the mixture and placed in an earthen pot. It was heated for 5 minutes and placed in a clean bottle. The homemade shampoo was then prepared into two setups: setup A and setup B. The treatment involves four type of hair (normal, dry, ethnic, curly). Setup A Treatment |Gugo (ml) |Okra (ml) | |1 |50 |50 | |2 |40 |60 | |3 |30 |70 | |4 |20 |80 | |5 |10 |90 | Setup B Treatment |Gugo (ml) |Okra (ml) | |1 |50 |50 | |2 |60 |40 | |3 |70 |30 | |4 |80 |20 | |5 |90 |10 | B. Soaking Process and Determination of the Hair Strength In phase 1, four treatments were prepared: †¢ Treatment 1: water, †¢ Treatment 2: Okra , †¢ Treatment 3: 10 percent gugo, †¢ Treatment 4: 100 percent gugo. These are the control treatments. Six bowls were prepared and labeled as 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 minute, respectively. Sixty strands of normal hair were used and divided into 10 strands. The hair strands were simultaneously soaked in the respective bowls with 100 ml tap water and were removed when the time allotted for each bowl had elapsed. Then they were rinsed separately. They were placed in clean sheets of paper labeled according to the length of time they were soaked, (such as T1- water: 5 minutes; T2 – water: 10 minutes; and so on). The bowl used from the first treatment was washed thoroughly and were used again for the other treatments. The process was repeated for treatments 2, 3, 4. To determine the strength of the hair strands, a spring scale was used and five trials were done. From the 10 strands of normal hair, 5 strands from Treatment were tested. The hair strands were tied up to the spring scale at one end. A 15 cm length of the hair strands were maintained between the spring scale and the weight. The weight was pull until the hair snaps. The amount of force in Newton (I Newton = 100 grams) registered on the spring scale prior to the breaking of the hair was recorded and the average result from the five trial was computed. The process was repeated for treatments 2, 3, 4. Also the same process was done for ethnic, dry, and curly hair. In the second phase, 480 strands from four hair types were used. Out 480 strands, 120 strands of the hair were prepared for trial 1 and trial 2, using the homemade shampoo (gugo and okra). The same procedure ion phase 1 was done for these treatments. In the third phase, 2,400 strands of hair were prepared from the four types of hair. Out of 2,400 strands, 1,200 strands were used in setup A and another 1,200 in set up B. Each set up has 5 treatments and 60 hair strands were divided into ten, and each 10 were soaked separately in six bowls labeled 5, 10, 15, 22, 25, and 3 minutes, respectively. The same procedure from the previous phases was done to determine the hair strength. In the 4th phase, 20 female respondents, who had normal and dry hair were asked to apply Treatment 1 in setup A: 10 percent gugo + 90 percent okra. Most of their hairs were equal in length. The respondents treated their hair one by one. They wet their hair first and 20ml of this treatment was applied to the entire crown and was massaged on the scalp. After 1 min. , the hair was rinsed thoroughly with tap water. A clean towel was used to dry and comb their hair slowly. After 1 hour, the effect on the hair was observed using 1 to 4 scales. The following scales were used: |A. Softness |B. Smoothness |C. Manageability | |1 – slightly soft |1 – slightly smooth |1 – slightly manageable | |2 – fairly soft |2 – fairly smooth |2 – fairly manageable | |3 – soft |3 – smooth |3 – manageable | |4 – very soft |4 – very smooth |4 – very manageable | After having applied and observed the effects of treatment 1; treatments with 90% gugo + 10 % okra were used by the same respondents with the same procedure as of Set up A. Results, Discussion and Conclusion Phase 1: Significant comparison on the hair strength among the control treatments: There was no significant difference on the hair strength, considering the different types of hair. However, the longer the longer the time each type of hair was soaked, the greater the hair strength. Among the four treatments in this phase, the hair strength when soaked in 10 %gugo, were the strongest while water was the weakest. Phase 2: Significant comparison between homemade shampoo and control treatment: Normal hair was significantly strongest compared to curly, dry and ethnic. Among the control treatment, hair strength was the strongest when soaked in treatment three: 10% gugo. Treatment 1: water was registered the weakest. It was also observed that as the soaking time increased, the hair strength also increased. Phase 3: Significant comparison among homemade shampoo, control treatment, Setup A and Setup B: Normal hair was significantly stronger, curly hair was the weakest, while dry and ethnic hair were almost comparable to each other. 10% gugo registered the strongest hair strength, followed by okra, then okra and gugo. Together, these three treatments were significantly different from all other treatment. The longer the soaking time, the stronger the hair strength. Phase 4: Acceptability of treatments. For normal hair, the two treatments showed no significant differences in terms of smoothness, softness and manageability. The 90% gugo+ 10%okra treatment was fairly manageable and the 10% gugo + 90% okra treatment was manageable. For dry hair, the two treatments showed no significant difference in terms of smoothness, softness. But there was a significant difference of manageability at 0. 5 probability level. Recommendations Based on the findings, the researcher recommends the following: 1. Use okra as raw material for making shampoo; 2. Further study of the properties of the homemade shampoo to establish the effect on hair; 3. Follow-up research must be conducted on the acceptability for other types of hair; 4. This research would provide information to those who are interested in the production of this product. Bibliography Jumaquio, Francine Faye A. , et. al. , â€Å"A Feasibility Study of Gugo and Okra as Homemade Shampoo†.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.