I suppose you are right, worst case scenario being another unanswered email in a large pile of unanswered emails!
Deenglow is trying to get the last word… Over my hairy dead body! Lol. I had a few days to think about all of what has been discussed in this thread, and, you guessed it, something is still itching my brain. Several factors of effectiveness have already been explored, however I’d like to delve into the most important one. I was wondering if practitioner’s skill, or the ‘’art’’ of electro, could be explained in a more… practical term. Oh no, not this again! Shut him up already! BOOOOOO! Bear with me for a sec before throwing your tomatoes, lol!
What makes the difference between a close to 100% kill rate (as shown several times on this forum by Josefa) versus a, well, pretty low one… I can’t talk for everyone, but 3-15% is what I’ve personally experienced in my relatively long term tests/treatments. So how can this be? Forgive the simplicity, but isn’t every electrologist doing the same thing, i.e. putting a needle in a hole and zapping. Off the top of my head, the only differing factors I can think of are the depth, strong-enough current (to get the hair to release without plucking, otherwise going back a second time), and maybe angle. Everything else seems rather trivial compared to this, no?
Let’s take my weekly treatments over 8 months on an area of my face (with the same operator) as an example. Multiple pulses (close together, in less than a second) were used throughout my treatments. I would assume this solves the issue of different depths! Sometimes, another pass was needed to remove the hair without plucking it. I’d assume that removes suspicions about not using adequate current/settings since it was relatively rare, right? I guess that also removes doubts that she was only trying to clear the area fast, and not try to kill every single hair, as some people pointed out in this thread already.
So how come is there still such a big difference in terms of effectiveness with what seems to be the norm on this forum (few clearances and TTT-wise; let’s not even talk about Josefa’s miraculous posts). Could the multiple pulses (3!) still not be effectively targeting the right area(s)? Could the angle be the secret ingredient (applying pressure to the follicle walls seems to be the only thing I can think of)? Not too sure what else there could be…
I’m not going to toss any tomatoes; I’ll just make a couple comments/observations.
First off, I have a strong client policy: clients must NOT post “heroic” photos of my work. I won’t continue with them if they do, because they usually get into some “contest” with which they know nothing about. If B&A photos are posted, I’ll do it myself (with consent) and offer up the exact TTT and evidence. If clients hype my work, and/or present hyperbole, it gets people up-in-arms or pissed-off (electrologists). Bad Ju-Ju! (I differ from Josefa on that point.)
My favorite clients just shut-up, get the work done and leave happy … nothing to brag about please! I don’t need the “ahgeda” (NY Italian for grief.)
Having said that, indeed the differences clients get is astronomical. I spoke some time ago about a local electrologist who took 127 hours on a chin (beard) with almost no results. (A whole beard should be less than 100 hours.) The electrologist went to the Hinkel School (my school) and uses the same machine I use. What the hell is wrong? I think you can figure that out.
As to all the various variables? Actually, if a REAL scientific study were ever conducted, we would discover that the variables are pretty small: there would emerge one technique to beat them all. Problem is, it will never happen. Thus, the client is left with the terrible task of trying to figure this out themselves. And this site will continue on with legitimate head-scratching, and half-baked recriminations. It’s not worth it because nothing will come of it!
Tomatoes please!
sigh, he’s begging for it and I cant! Housing ripped up my garden this year to run new gas lines…
My damn point exactly, I CAN’T FIGURE IT OUT! I tried to present variables that are all related to the zapping itself aka electrologist ‘‘skill’’, nothing to do about machines or methods!
Do you consider the variables I talked about small? Are there more important ones? Honestly, I don’t think they’re that small, otherwise people wouldn’t have such different results! I really wouldn’t push this further if TTT was in about the same range for everyone, but it’s not so here I am.
Some of the variables that contribute to their skill or kill rate include insertion accuracy, choice of probe and modality. The training they recieved and what retraining they have undergone. And most of all what Josepha said, their desire to destroy every single hair. If you dont treat certain hairs because you dont like telogen or catogen or grey hairs or whatever, well if you never try, you will definitely never succeed in killing them. Treatment of the hair beforehand ( ie not shaving it) makes a big difference to growth cycles.
It’s not that your “clues” and questions are unimportant, but they are one small part of the bigger picture. All of these things and more contribute to what you call art or skill.
Seana
By insertion accuracy, do you mean the depth at which the zap is made? Doesn’t the multiple pulse technique employed by my electrologist (and I’m sure many others) greatly improve that accuracy?
She also treated every single hair during our sessions regardless of phases, and zaps it again when it rarely pulls when tweezed.
She seems to be doing everything right, yet I can’t figure out why TTT will take at the very least 2x what is repeatedly discussed here (not even talking about Josefa’s miracle posts, just generally speaking). I can’t help but wonder… how, why? Really, what else is there?!
The choice of probe seems trivial, at least to me, I’d be extremely pissed (actually enraged) if that was the factor that greatly increases my TTT…
Time to clarify certain facts:
-
Indeed, the time used to clear the 10 toes was not 60 minutes, but 72 minutes exactly. The confusion is probably due to the fact that I charged for an hour, rounding in favor of the client as I always do.
-
The timer starts with the first pedal pressure, that is, those 72 minutes of the session correspond exclusively to the time used in the electrolysis process, not in the infiltration of anesthesia or other previous steps.
“Clients who present hyperbole in order to highlight my work …”.
It sounds like a euphemism to me. The correct term would be:
“Josefa’s client is LYING and she is his ACCOMPLICE”. It’s okay.
The difference between you and me Michael, is that I would never question a direct testimony by any of your clients knowing that you are present in the conversation, and knowing full well that professionally you would clarify if such lies had taken place.
Oh dear, I got my tit in the wringer …
Not what I meant … mama mia!
Mission accomplished! Fight between yourselves, muhahahaha!
All jokes aside, I think Michael’s point was more about clients hyping the work and not about devaluating yours. I’d also like to clarify that I’m very aware of the ‘‘hype’’, if anything I always diminish it’s effect IN MY MIND to compensate. Sadly even accounting that, it still doesn’t make sense to me how there is such a huge gap between operators. I think I’ve presented valid points trying to figure out why (in my last 2 messages) accounting for everyone’s answers that have already been given in this thread. It would be a shame to end this now, though, being so close to what feels like a ‘‘final answer’’!
The ball is in your camp (all of you), I’m just the challenging… messenger! Waiting for people to answer (if they want to) so I can refute and compromise to get closer to a satisfying answer.
Zap, you are one funny guy. Okay, coming clean: The answer you are looking for …
It’s all about local anesthetic: it’s the gorilla in the room that nobody talks about for a number of good reasons (including extreme hostility, fear & condemnation). I don’t mention it for the crucial reason that this is no place to go into such details. But painless treatment is only a small percentage of the benefit.
Adding local does amazing things to (any) treatment; and amps it up to nearly a different modality; think night-and-day. It adds actual moisture to the skin making the thermolysis more effective (and in the right spot). It causes less cooling-effect by slowing blood-flow (epi) = more effective currents. It allows for treatment without worrying about patient comfort. It GREATLY diminishes post-treatment problems, to near zero, by delaying the inflammatory process.
Indeed, there are many other treatment benefits. However, as I say, this is no place to get into the details; and I won’t do it. But, from my perspective, I just gave you the answer you are looking for. And now I will shut my big, wrinkled, stupid, preposterous (blind eyes) face to avoid any more misunderstandings and condemnation.
Back to clients posting stunning results? It’s like this (for me anyway). If we talk about results that clients are not getting, or CANNOT get, where do we go from there? Unless I can actually show an electrologist (in person) what I’m doing, what’s the point of creating confusion or anger? For example, why talk about local anesthetic when few do it … again, what’s the benefit to clients? Frustration! And anger from the professionals.
Usually I try to aim at-the-middle and give clients an average in what they should expect in the real world of electrology. Maybe I’m wrong. Still, that’s how I TRY to handle questions like yours. (Love the devil, by the way.) AND, I AIN’T SAYING NUTHIN’ NO MORE!
Okay, one last time. Example:
Look at it this way. Eric has a 2011 Volkswagen and our neighbor has the exact same car (almost). Eric can beat the guy in a race any time. So, we talk about tires, tire pressure, shift patterns and transmissions, road conditions, grades of gasoline, synthetic/natural oil, additives, RPMs, etc.
Then the revelation: Eric’s car has a TURBO! Oh the poor guy that doesn’t know about the turbo … he just thinks he’s a terrible driver and has no idea why he loses every race. Yeah, it’s like that! And, that’s just my damned opinion and I’m sticking to it!
Yesssss, one step closer! Why would you say no more, we’re on the right track! BY ALL MEANS, SPILL EVERYTHING OUT! VOMIT THAT KNOWLEDGE MICHAEL, INFECT ME WITH IT! Lol, gross. I’m not kidding though, why don’t you want misunderstandings and condemnations?! Seems like they’re actually necessary for everyone to have the correct answers (well, maybe just me).
By local anesthetic, you mean something injected with a needle, and not topical creams like EMLA or BLT, right? I’d assume those creams will still have some of those beneficial effects you’re talking about, but maybe to a lesser extent? Very interested in this.
I’m not really concerned about my comfort or temporary skin reactions, so I’ll just skip these.
Moisture and blood flow, easily understandable, got it. NEXT!
So if I read between the lines correctly, cranking up the current will indeed yield a better result? I thought when the hair was removed without a pull, adding more current wouldn’t do much in terms of effectiveness, I guess I misinterpreted what I’ve read on this forum (or maybe I am now).
I wonder if Josefa used local anesthetic on our yet again polarizing cream test… It could explain the difference in reactions!!!
That’s the thing, if it’s something I can personally do myself, or make someone else do, why not try to emulate and hopefully educate in the process, so everyone (ok, mostly me, lol) gains from it! It’s the whole damn point of my existence on this forum.
Injected … and indeed Jossie (who I love dearly; and she knows it) is THE master. Few physicians have her ability … VERY few. Okay, none of them!
No more until I get the energy to produce a book or a series of videos … with all the bells, whistles and exactly how to go about all of it (insurance), “That’s all folks!”
With all my series of surgeries (four of them), frankly I’m out-of energy but hope I live long enough to accomplish a few more goals I have my (good) eye focused on. I’m old … I might not. Just reality.
What’s the anesthetic used? I know that damn topical lidocaine gives me a headache almost every time (depending on the amount absorbed I assume). I wonder what you and Josefa use, and what amount.
Seana, I think you already tried to undertake this task (injected anesthetic) in Canada, but found some roadblocks along the way, right? Let’s try to figure it out (if you haven’t already)!
Ich kann nicht hören
BÖSE! Du kannst es auf Deutsch sagen, ich verstehe!
Thank you Josie, this was necessary. Regardless of whether what has been said to have been in the end put down to ‘misunderstandings’.
The clarified facts, a small detail mind you considering, that even an OCD should be prepared to accept as a negligible difference and conclude as more or less the same truth and not fabrication or gross overstatement to the initial claim.
The objective point (focus) of this thread was and still is, efficacy and permanency and not over glorification of results to inflate another’s ego underservedly. My own dignity and principles would not allow me to do this.
Therefore, if any honour is due to the always humble electrologist in this case it is deservedly so with respect to the commitment and dedication shown to obtain such results as in this thread and countless other examples catalogued here on hairtell where lying/condoning lying has never ever been neccessary.
Well to be fair, the results are supposed to be glorified, whether on purpose or not, since one clearance is all it took, instead of the usual 3, 5, or 15! TTT also seemed to be ridiculously low too. Hype, questions and maybe even accusations are kinda expected with ‘‘miraculous’’ posts like these, to hopefully get everyone on the same page, wouldn’t you agree?
I feel like I’ve learned much more than I usually do with all these supposed accusations and misunderstandings, but maybe that’s just me… Two weeks ago I would’ve said the opposite thing, but now… Bring on the PROGRESS disguised as drama!
P.S. Did you really think you could get the last word… on your own thread? How dare you! Lol kidding.
There are two different conversations going on at the same time here. One conversation highlights great work (as it is). However reasonable questions about specifics, or generalizations about the industry as a whole, are taken as personal insults and accusations. The other conversation is just fact-finding.
Since this thread is about toes and feet, and Jossie’s great work, it seems right that Jossie herself should be the one to clarify the specifics of her treatment. Surely not me or anyone else who might only be speculating.
Once terrific work is shown, juxtaposed to other’s inferior work, it seems appropriate that the relevant details and methods used (e.g., anesthetic) should be explained … just simple fact-finding.
If Eric’s Volkswagen keeps beating the neighbor, Eric should tell him how and why!