Can friction on hairless skin indefinitely stop new growth?

Hair Removal Methods Friction
#1

Hi,

I posted to Reddit (thought originally wanted to post here) this thread with some photos of my legs showing hairless patches achieved by total accident:

Seems I stumbled on ‘frictional alopecia’!

I now want to try to develop a deliberate protocol of post-hair removal friction, which - so long as you keep it up:-

  • indefinitely prevents new hairs from growing (like my gumboots do, if done enough);

  • works even while applying daily aloe vera to the skin for skin health purposes, and also to reverse any risky abrasion caused by this daily friction (infection-wise).

I assume pumice might be enough, or exfoliating gloves etc. Many people exfoliate regularly, but this protocol may have to be more friction than what people normally do - more minutes per day vs. a normal ‘quick exfoliation’.

Any thoughts on how to develop this? If enough friction is applied to the follicles, even if they’re constantly being re-nourished by the strong counteraction of aloe vera every day, perhaps the follicles will ‘get the memo’ to not produce new hairs because of the regular friction?

I’m just trying to emulate my gumboots accident (on all areas including facial), while not ruining my skin either.

This would be a holy grail (in that you can then avoid future instances of whole-hair removal after your initial one, which is always a painful thing no matter what method, AFAIK, at least among non-toxic methods like sugaring), even though it does take daily effort.

Best of all is that to keep an option open to become hairy again if you want, this would be a more easily reversible form of ‘permanent’ hair loss vs. having newly produced hairs removed again and again as the method to do it, which may cause full permanency.

#2

There are already pumice stones and glove exfoliators in the market for this purpose. You can buy one cheaply and test your theory.

I predict it will be very time consuming to remove thick, dense hair in large areas, and the amount of friction required on a daily/regular basis would cause your skin to be very sore. In some cases, the hair would be ripped from the follicle as with sugaring or waxing. In many cases, the hair would be broken off at the surface of the skin, which would be a similar result to shaving. I think a lot of people would also experience more ingrown hairs with this method as compared to waxing or shaving.

The hair would only be removed for as long as you continue the process on a regular basis. For it to be truly permanent, you need to cause enough damage to the cells within the follicle as with laser or electrolysis. This is something beyond the remit of any method that simply pulls or breaks the hair.

I hope this helps.

#3

In my Reddit link I describe that my method of hair removal is sugaring. I am talking about friction as a regular method of indefinite regrowth prevention, after your current hair is gone. I’m wondering how much friction is needed, because my legs sure haven’t been sore (or red), it happened by total accident!

My face is currently beardless. It’s in this context I’m asking about. While the skin is bare, how much friction needs to be applied to keep hair away like I accidentally did on my legs? If I get no answers I’ll just keep experimenting.

I’ve got exfoliant gloves.

#4

Sorry, but your Eureka moment is … well … it’s not! Consider the following:

First, if simple “friction” actually caused permanent or delayed hair removal, don’t you think that after thousands of years of people rubbing off their hair that this “new method” would have been noted? What your doing is shaving … basically no different.

Your statement:

“If enough friction is applied to the follicles, even if they’re constantly being re-nourished by the strong counteraction of aloe vera every day, perhaps the follicles will ‘get the memo’ to not produce new hairs because of the regular friction?”

Your statement (above) indicates a total lack of understanding of hair growth. You are not applying friction to the follicle. You are applying friction to the upper layer of the skin AND the dead hair shaft ONLY. You are NOT applying friction to the follicle.

You say “[follicles] are being “re-nourished” by aloe vera …” No way! Hairs are not growing INTO the skin; they’re grow OUT OF the skin and nothing applied topically can “nourish” the follicles. Follicles are “fed” from below NOT above! Likewise, follicles are not going to “get the memo” from being abraded by a pumice stone.

I could go into detail about what you’re seeing, but why? Your observations are false. Nobody has responded to your post because the experts, and casual readers, know your idea is weak and based upon no knowledge of skin/hair anatomy. You’re trying to “invent the wheel” … but, that’s been done for some time.

1 Like
#5

Interesting.

So you mean to say that the friction from my gumboots has actually been shaving - just tearing off - tiny new hairs as they’ve been newly emerging on those spots on my legs?

If yes, this is still - for me at least - the discovery of a major lifestyle improvement vs. what most people, who absolutely want to remain indefinitely hairless, seem to put up with.

Instead of waiting for new hairs to become visible (after which it needs either more annoying/problematic shaving methods, or painful full removal methods), why not just have a daily - sufficient - friction routine? Based on my legs, it really seems to fully tear hairs right down to the skin! Maybe it won’t cause ingrowns either! Worth exploring!

That’s what I’m trying to think about developing as a protocol - doing friction everywhere, groin and armpits included, so that no matter what, new hairs never will fully regrow (as long as you keep doing it). If something pretty soft like gumboot inner lining material can do it, I wonder how gentle the protocol can be (so as to minimise skin damage).

Any insights on this would be greatly appreciated!

It should be a given that as a non-expert I’m only speaking in narrative analogies of broad cause and effect, while trying to guess the exact dermatological or trichological mechanisms connecting them. I think many websites I’ve visited are quite incorrect. Corrections are welcome.

Thanks for your time.

#6

Countless women do this already. Amazing what our “fairer sex” has been up to all these hundreds/thousands of years. Needless to say, this “new” method is as ancient as the pyramids. No kidding. Check out hair removal methods of the Romans and the Egyptians. You’ll find that they still have a few secrets to share. Now we know what was going on in those “Roman Baths.” Well, that’s at least ONE activity.

Back in the 1980s I was working with Romano Scavo (The Netherlands) and helping him design his new blend machine (CTI electronics). One day, Romano phoned me “all excited.” He said he had invented a totally new method of electrolysis! The new method was using very high HF, but with an automatic “on-off” feature … this would be revolutionary. I had to burst his bubble and tell him that his “new” invention had already been perfected and invented in 1923.

Sorry to say, “smoooth” you’re doing the same thing as Romano. Furthermore, if you are a male who has reached your 40s, what you are experiencing with your “frictionalized” legs is more of your own biology than your hair removal method.

Let me put it this way … by the time you are in your 60s-70s your legs will be totally hairless … AND, not from ANY hair removal method. The hair loss on the legs follows a very specific pattern … and it’s the one you think is your “Eureka” moment … it’s not.

I like your curious mind … but pick a better subject.

#7

“The inner lining material of the gumboots have some random chemical (or perhaps it’s the texture) that does something to the follicles to make them shut down.”
NO! There is no special chemical … the hairs were abraded. Some men see fewer hair just from wearing socks. This is magnified as they get into their 40s and the hairs are already diminishing in those exact spots.

“Anyway, any ideas / thoughts? What could be making my follicles’ hair production shut down in those exact spots?”
NO! The follicles are NOT “shutting down!” Absolutely no method of topical SHAVING, and that is only what you’re doing, has any effect on the follicle.

(I can’t believe I’m actually having this conversation. I need a hobby. Then again, if this guy creates a new product based on his boots, he’ll make a fortune selling it to legions of the uninformed and gullible.)

#8

Putting the “gummy” to rest.
I took this photo 10-minutes ago. This is my nephew Eric who is now 42. He has never shaved his legs or done anything to his hairs. And yet, the hairs are seemingly disappearing! As I said, hairs miniaturize in very specific patters. Notice that his area of “hair removal” is the exact spot where you are noticing the effects of your “gummy boots.” Convinced yet?

Erics leg 1
Erics leg 11260×842 152 KB

Erics leg 2
Erics leg 22100×1403 467 KB

#9

How Bono Sayed some is Biological

By me the Same with Legs/Hands hairs, as i was 20-30 , i shaved my Legs/Hands Hairs every 4 Weeks. Within they reached a Length where they bothered me. Now im 33 , all 2-3 Months , is enough. They Grow Slower. Even some Areas on my legs are thinning out even on some areas , where i had no hairs i get some .

#10

Some quick help.

Indeed, in German “ich” (small i) is not “Ich.” However, in English it is “I” (capital i) … not “i.” Also the term “people” is already plural. The term “peoples” is almost never used. So, just go with “people.” And never EVER say “peoples.” To an American it sounds dreadful! A good example: “I was going to the store.” Not: “i was going bei the store.”

Yes, Germans and American have big problems with the German “Bei.” But “by” does not mean “bei.” Americans often make fatal errors with the German “also” and “bekommen.” These are natural errors. Hans, my German friend, would say, “Can you ‘became’ me ten dollars?" See, it doesn’t work!

Your: "By me the Same with Legs/Hands … " Should be, “WITH me, I have the same [issue] with legs and hand hairs.” (Not great structure, but better.)

Also, and this you can clear-up fast: in English, we do NOT capitalize nouns, like the Germans, unless they are days of the week, months or proper names.

1 Like
#11

Well, my patches are not due to old age. I’m quite young, and legs extremely hairy. (And clearly they’re very specific shapes from friction caused by the boots.)

So, I still don’t know how much preventive friction is needed for any given area (like face and neck), I’ll just have to err on the side of too much and apply Aloe vera to my skin right after I’ve scraped it quite a bit, every morning…for the next two months. If it works (I guess it only will take couple weeks to really see if no beard bits come back), then I’ll try dialling it down and seeing just how little is required, using exfoliating gloves.

I tried these gloves on a few different areas of fully haired skin and…well, it ain’t removing those hairs. ‘Circular motion’, I read? Thus I only assume that it works effectively on YOUNG hairs, not fully established ones - ones perhaps just barely rising above the epidermis.

Technically, I now see that hair ‘removal’ means going down to the root. A ‘hair’ is always both above AND below the epidermis. But experientially, for the lay person, if they can’t see any hair above the skin, they’re as good as ‘hairless’ - the hair, to them, is ‘already removed’.

So speaking from th lay point of view, what I’m now trying to do each day seems to be experienced more as prevention than removal (even though, well, it’s neither - it’s shaving). Why? because one cannot see what one is removing (i.e. shaving)! You’d need to look super close.

And it’s the BEST alternative to normal shaving ever! (And click here for my free ebook!! Gumboot line coming soon. :wink: ) NO mess made by visible hairs falling on the sink. You can do it on the couch while watching a movie. NO water or shaving gel needed. Just rub your skin. Exfoliation is a mere bonus.

THIS is what I’m trying to say - this practice - if it ends up working - replaces shaving entirely, and yet is painless too. No plucking required, ever again. In the modern world, I’ve not seen this technique talked about (in terms of being a ‘preventive’ method - not ‘removal’), even though I’ve read about ‘ancient’ Egyptian sugaring for years.

‘Friction’ sounds like the best noun, and maybe ‘scraping’ for the verb? or ‘exfoliating’? Any better verb is welcome. ‘Scuffing’? “Have you scuffed yet, darling? It’s so much better than shaving, isn’t it?”

Or ‘buffing’! (since “in the buff” means naked or nude, i.e. hairless. ‘Keep it buffed!’ Nice and shiny.)

Think I found it. Buffing. Keep that skin smooooth.

And now @Bono will call me a buffoon. :smiley:

#12

Buffoon is not in my vocabulary … and I would never call a person that, or anything like that. I’m merely pointing out certain facts that you had not considered.

Who knows, maybe your will make a fortune selling Gumboot Hair Removal. I sort of like the name … odd and catchy. A refreshing topic too … on this site there is too much clap-drap about scabs and bumps and politics. I say … “Get your Gumboot and get them HAIRS!”

#13

Friction on hairless skin is a common occurrence in our daily lives and can have a variety of effects on the skin. While friction can cause skin irritation and other temporary side effects, the question of whether it can stop new hair growth indefinitely is a complex one with no straightforward answer.

Hair growth is regulated by hormones, genetics, and other factors, and is not directly affected by friction. Friction on the skin can cause temporary hair removal, as hair is mechanically removed from the follicles. However, this removal is not permanent, and new hair will grow in its place over time.

Friction can also cause skin irritation, redness, and other temporary side effects, but these effects are unlikely to affect the growth of new hair. In some cases, excessive friction can cause skin damage and increase the risk of infection, but these effects are generally temporary and will not have a lasting impact on hair growth.

However, there are certain conditions, such as hirsutism, in which excessive hair growth is caused by hormonal imbalances, and friction alone will not be able to stop new hair growth. In these cases, medical intervention may be necessary to address the underlying hormonal imbalances and prevent excessive hair growth.

In some cases, hairless skin may become more prone to friction due to skin conditions, such as eczema or psoriasis, which can cause the skin to become dry and irritated. This irritation can cause the skin to become more prone to friction and can result in temporary hair removal. In these cases, it’s important to treat the underlying skin condition in order to prevent skin irritation and reduce the risk of friction.

In conclusion, friction on hairless skin is not capable of stopping new hair growth indefinitely. While friction can cause temporary hair removal and skin irritation, these effects are unlikely to have a lasting impact on hair growth. If you are concerned about excessive hair growth, it’s important to speak to your doctor to determine the underlying cause and determine the best course of action.