Is there an actual reason for this?
Seems to me that it can’t be cost as the prohibitive issue. They market shampoo towards children by promoting “no more tears.” In my experience (and I’ll admit that it’s been a while since I bought children’s shampoo. Actually, now that I think of it, I’ve NEVER bought it, as I don’t have kids), the shampoo for kids isn’t any more expensive than any other brand.
Well, I’ll concede that the painful shampoo seems to have a built-in consumer base in the sado-masichistic crowd.
Maybe most adults have enough brains to not get shampoo into their eyes, thus they see no need to pay more money for a less effective ‘no more tears’ shampoo.
I don’t believe baby shampoo has the harsh detergents that others do, which is probably why it doesn’t sting the eyes.
Babies don’t put put gels, mousse, sprays, etc. on their head, thus the stronger detergents aren’t needed.
Have you ever tried washing your hair with baby shampoo when it was really dirty?
It doesn’t clean very well as opposed to adult shampoo.
Baby shampoo also doesn’t rinse out as easily as other shampoos, in my experience (two kids who have both inherited my freakishly thick hair).