In recent months, Korean eyelash lamination, a technique that has gone viral among lashmakers and brow artists and is also known as Korean lash lift, has been increasingly discussed. But the question many professionals are asking is:

• Can I use my usual perming products to perform it?
• Is it mandatory to use cysteamine?
• Can I follow the Korean technique with InLei® products?

In this article, we clarify the differences between cysteamine and ammonium thioglycolate in Korean eyelash lamination, based on real data, tests, and field experience. If you have doubts about the Korean technique itself and want to better understand what it entails, we have written a detailed article on Korean lamination!

Cysteamine or ammonium thioglycolate? What to choose for Korean lamination

One of the most widespread beliefs is that for Korean lamination, it is necessary to use cysteamine-based products. But who decided that? To tell the truth, it's not clear. Trends often spread like a wave and reach us without clear boundaries or principles. How many times do we replicate something just because we saw it done in a 30-second tutorial on Instagram or TikTok?

As excellent representatives of the Italian lash industry, we wanted to go further to obtain a clear and defined work protocol. We deeply explored this topic for months, based on real data and comparing it with the direct testimonies of professionals who have actually trained in Korea. It emerged that in the country of origin of the Korean technique, both cysteamine-based and ammonium thioglycolate-based products are used.

So… NO, there is no single official approach. There are many variations and many precautions to take depending on the situation and the lashes to be treated. One thing is certain: a professional approach with studies underlying each step will achieve amazing results regardless of the perming and fixing solutions used (provided they are quality products).

Difference between cysteamine and ammonium thioglycolate: comparative table

To understand which active ingredient to choose for Korean eyelash lamination, it is essential to know the main differences between cysteamine and ammonium thioglycolate. We summarize the key points in a comparative table:

Is ammonium thioglycolate too aggressive for eyelashes?

With the spread of Korean lamination and cysteamine-based products, a very common belief has emerged: cysteamine is very gentle and therefore better for eyelashes than ammonium thioglycolate, which, being more aggressive, should be avoided.

⚠️ Warning: this is a classic case of a false myth!

Here too, chemistry gives us the answers, and the difference between these two ingredients must be analyzed precisely, not by hearsay. Let's proceed step by step:

• Is cysteamine more delicate than ammonium thioglycolate at the same concentration? Yes. At the same percentage, the cysteamine molecule acts more slowly and is generally more delicate than ammonium thioglycolate.
• Are there European regulations on these active ingredients? Yes, but only for one of the two. European Cosmetic Regulation No. 1223/2009 sets precise limits for ammonium thioglycolate, which can be used in perming products up to a precisely established maximum concentration. Cysteamine, however, is not yet regulated.
• Can there be cysteamine-based products with a concentration such that they become aggressive on the hair? Obviously, yes. Precisely because there is not yet specific regulation, it is possible to find formulations on the market with excessively high concentrations, which can compromise the hair structure.

Conclusions: cysteamine and ammonium thioglycolate compared

• Do cysteamine-based products damage the hair because there is no regulation? NO! You just need to choose stable, tested, and balanced formulas, and use them correctly: adequate quantity and controlled processing time are the factors that truly make a difference.
• Is ammonium thioglycolate dangerous? NO! If used within a regulated and well-formulated product, with an established work protocol, it is a safe and effective active ingredient. An example is InLei® Lash Form 1, which contains a perfectly calibrated percentage to work effectively without being harmful to the hair.

Korean lamination with InLei® products: is it possible?

In light of what we have just said about the difference between cysteamine and ammonium thioglycolate, the answer is simple: yes, it is possible!

We have tested the Korean lamination technique for over a year using the Lash Filler 25.9 line, and we can confirm that it is perfectly compatible and guarantees stable results.

We have carried out hundreds of tests collaborating with our team of trainers in almost 30 countries worldwide. Ammonium thioglycolate-based products, and in particular Lash Form 1, have given perfect results on all hair types. Its use is therefore also optimal in the so-called Korean techniques, guaranteeing a stable and long-lasting curl on lashes of every thickness and porosity.

Like all working methods, this can also vary depending on the cases encountered. During our countless tests, we verified that there are eye and lash conformations more suited to a job performed with cysteamine and other situations where it is ideal to perform the treatment with ammonium thioglycolate.

Please note: as with the classic technique, here too, the product does not account for 100% of the result: the choice of correct processing times, the suitable roller, the application and spreading technique of the lashes, and other precautions are all fundamental building blocks for creating precise and orderly work. We have prepared a complete step-by-step protocol to perform Korean lamination with InLei® products: discover it in our dedicated article.

Korean lamination and film: is it advisable to use it?

Whatever active ingredient is used for Korean eyelash lamination, the use of film is not recommended, as it can make the result less predictable. Here's why:

• With ammonium thioglycolate: InLei® products based on ammonium thioglycolate are perfectly stable and guarantee results within very precise standard timings, calculable based on hair structure (porosity, elasticity, and thickness). Speeding up the process would mean completely losing control of the disulfide bond breakage rate, risking burning the eyelashes in just a few minutes.
• With cysteamine: as we have seen, cysteamine is a very delicate molecule, and its main advantage is that it acts slowly and in a controlled manner. Using film to speed up its action would be a contradiction, risking losing control of the chemical process.
• In both cases, in addition to creating a greenhouse effect, the film tends to push the product towards the root, risking coming very close to the skin, thus increasing the risk of irritation and allergic reactions.