If you drop that piece of salt rock it breaks, as does the container holding it. Even if you don't drop it, it doesn't last forever, nor does sweat become "odorless" after "a week or two" of using it. (I've used Crystal off and on).
My suspicion is that you just aren't prone to sweat very much, or can't smell yourself. Did you notice that the salt rock itself smells bad once you've ever used it, whereas sticks don't?
I'm willing to concede the possibility that it works as you describe for you, but your experience isn't universal. It didn't work that way at all for me; I went back to mostly using the sticks because the salt rock didn't work very well.
Though when you say "just shower and apply some soap to your skin", that could work if you were using a deodorant soap. :-)
> Did you notice that the salt rock itself smells bad once you've ever used it, whereas sticks don't?
Never. You would always put it under a stream before (to moisten up a layer) and after you use it (to clean it). And only after you've showered and washed with soap first.
It sounds to me like people are not using it correctly and consistently, are mixing it with regular deodorant, or have very extensive bacterial colonies on skin and transdermally.
It sounds to me like people are not using it correctly and consistently, are mixing it with regular deodorant, or have very extensive bacterial colonies on skin and transdermally.
AKA no true Scotsman. You are doing a great job of speaking in patterns used by advocates of homeopathy and spiritualism.
Sorry, but incorrect usage resulting in diminished or no effect is not a true Scotsman fallacy component. Or do you claim that antibiotics are also homeopathy and spiritualism?
Similar, claims of does not work under all conditions are not the hallmark of a true Scotsman fallacy, otherwise tylenol should be considered homeopathy and spiritualism, since it doesn't work for certain types of pain, or certain levels of pain.
Incorrect accusations of fallacy indicate personal vendetta. What is your problem?
Or do you claim that antibiotics are also homeopathy and spiritualism?
Non sequitur/strawman/slippery slope.
What is your problem?
Ad hominem.
Did you read the rest of the thread? I'll concede that my specific quotation does not, in isolation, appear to be a "No True Scotsmen" fallacy, but considered with the rest of the crystalline deodorant alternative thread, and with spritualist arguments in the form of "It doesn't work if you have unrepented sin/if you don't pray hard enough/maybe you need to fast longer/maybe it's just not God's will", my comment makes more sense.
> in the form of "It doesn't work if you have unrepented sin/if you don't pray hard enough/maybe you need to fast longer/maybe it's just not God's will"
You might be confusing that I've said you have to do 1, 2, 3 while using this product, for random, mystical, steps.
The reason you wash up first is because the alum salts have no effect on the odor substances/chemicals already on your skin (and what permeated below the surface).
The reason you use the product consistently is because it takes time for the salts to kill-off the bacteria (to permeate in and below the skin) and to help eliminate the odor.
The reason you don't use regular deodorant while you use this is because it just makes it so much harder for it to make the proper and consistent contact with the skin.
The reason why it doesn't work so quickly if the person has massive bacteria colonies, or dosn't give it a proper go, etc, well, you should be able to figure that one out yourself.
At no point is spirituality, god, or homeopathy claimed here.
Potassium alum is an astringent/styptic and antiseptic. For this reason, it can be used as a natural deodorant by inhibiting the growth of the bacteria responsible for body odor.
They are already an ingredient in the deodorants that you use, and have known effects.
With one of these "crystals", mineral rocks, stones, whatever you want to call it, you're getting the above in it's more potent amount.
Or do you claim that antibiotics are also homeopathy and spiritualism?
Non sequitur/strawman/slippery slope.
Nope. Not a non-sequitur because it also fits the themes of:
a) items which must be used as directed otherwise results are lessened or negated, b) affect bacteria in relation to the human body and c) could be claimed as magic/voodoo by your exact argument.
Not a strawman, because most other medical chemicals must be used as directed, and are not dismissed as homeopathy as a result of this. Your argument must be taken as given, not as you wish it to be applied.
Not a slippery slope, because I am not arguing we must take tylenol and antibiotics to be homeopathy if this crystaline deodorant is also homeopathy, nor am I arguing cascading results of one declaration of the other. A comparison of like things does not constitute a slippery slope.
* What is your problem?
Ad hominem.*
Again, no - and ad hominem attack would be for me to state "you have a problem with the deodorant, therefore your statements are wrong or untrustworthy". I did nothing of the sort. I merely asked why you have a problem with the stuff after otherwise dismantling your argument.
Did you read the rest of the thread? I'll concede that my specific quotation does not, in isolation, appear to be a "No True Scotsmen" fallacy, but considered with the rest of the crystalline deodorant alternative thread, and with spritualist arguments in the form of "It doesn't work if you have unrepented sin/if you don't pray hard enough/maybe you need to fast longer/maybe it's just not God's will", my comment makes more sense
By my reading the rest of the thread is by many other commenters, some state the stuff works for them, some state it doesn't. Some claim you have to use it right, and without things that are claimed to be confounding. They aren't religious arguments, they may be incorrect arguments, I don't have the understanding of it. Some commenters seem to be a bit more hand-wavey than others. Some simply state they only get results when the salts are applied to clean skin, and in absence of other product, and may take a couple weeks to become effective. That seems reasonable to me for a number of reasons.
Some of the claims that seem overzealous such as "never needs to be applied again" are a bit much, but that same guy later says "never needs to be applied again, maybe once a week". Such a statement could be religious addling, or could be the result of a non-native English speaker having a problem with correct phrasing or translating an idiom.
Point being, your claims are unwarranted, and are fairly judgmental in a way that is more "anti homeopathy/religious" than anything that is fact based. Your claims of religiosity only really work if you twist some of the stuff said hard, and pretend multiple posters are one person.
My suspicion is that you just aren't prone to sweat very much, or can't smell yourself. Did you notice that the salt rock itself smells bad once you've ever used it, whereas sticks don't?
I'm willing to concede the possibility that it works as you describe for you, but your experience isn't universal. It didn't work that way at all for me; I went back to mostly using the sticks because the salt rock didn't work very well.
Though when you say "just shower and apply some soap to your skin", that could work if you were using a deodorant soap. :-)