I just went for a treatment today with a new electrolysis who comes highly recommended. She uses a machine I forgot the first word but its "something"read…the title of the machine is one word.
It just has a knob that you turn for intensity…she uses ballet needles and gloves, so that was a perk, and also a magnify lens, she said this really helps to be precise.
If anyone has any comments on this machine, let me know!
the zeiss microscope i think its called? lol not too sure but thats what it says on her website.
Does old-school mean bad? or does it not matter? she uses thermolysis, but there isnt a beep or anything, just inset and slides out the hair lol
Zeiss is what I use.
Are they loupes (worn like glasses), or a standing stereo microscope with built in light?
its a standard microscope with a light…im just worried the machine isnt good?
Her machine may be old, but that doesn’t say she can’t do good work. The difference the machines and techniques make is all on your comfort level while the work is being done. Most modern equipment is more comfortable than an old spark gap Kree machine, and an Apilus Platinum being used with a Laurier insulated probe and the correct technique is going to be much more comfortable than anything else used with a sparkier technique.
I see!!! Well she was saying that the circular magnify lens does not show the precise accuracy that this microscope shows. Is that true? If it is, then why don’t all electrologists use the microscopic lens instead of the magnifying glass?
Yes, it is true.
As the average electrolysist rolls their eyes at your question, I will put it into perspective for you. If the difference between cars is so great, why isn’t everyone driving Bently, BMW, Mercedes, Volvo and the like? My guess is, its the money.
You don’t know how it felt to swallow hard and shell out enough to buy a car in order to buy something that fit in my car, and purely on speculation as we NEVER get to test these things before we buy them. I then spent 4 weeks adjusting to working with it, because it is not a natural thing to see 2 square inches as if it were blown up and one inch in front of your face.
Some people have purchased these units and ditched them because they did not take the time to allow their brains to get used to what they were seeing.
My best scope actually allows me to see in inside of the empty follicle the moment I remove the treated hair. It is awesome.
Wow!! I understand…
But is the accuracy still the same with the circle lamps then? or is that why some electrologists, for lack of better explanation, are not as skilled as others?
To those who have never worked with a stereo microscope, this will sound like a biased statement, but the truth is, no one using a circle lamp can make an insertion like someone with a stereo microscope that has high magnification and high contrast lighting. The better you can see, the better you can perform the task.
If the insertion is so critical a part of what we do, what could be better than actually seeing where the hair exits the skin, and at what angle close up? Additionally, one would be able to see the “dimple point” of one’s insertions, to make sure one doesn’t go to far, if one has not developed “the touch/feel” that keeps one from doing that. At any rate, better vision just allows one to work faster, even if all that other stuff were not true, but all that other stuff IS true.
James,
Can you post the model of microscope you use? What is the magnification and working distance?
I have tried some surgical loupes but the problem is that they have a “working distance” that is a little too far away. The closest WD I can find on 3.5x loupes is rated at 13 inches. I’d like to have a WD about half of that or at most 8 inches.
I use the Zeiss Opmi-1 and Zeiss Opmi-99
The magnifications are adjustable from 12 times life size up to 40 times life size. My focal distance is set at 13 to 17 inches and my rig is set up to look horizontally, at the treatment area. This is adjustable.
Keep in mind, with loupes, one is bent over the person you are working on. With a stereo microscope, one sets the optics, and they stay put. You can sit straight in a chair, look forward, and the focal distance that works well, has more to do with your arm length. I would not want to be closer to the patient.
I personally found loupes better than circle lamps, but stereo microscopes beat the loupes both in magnification, and comfortable ease of use.
Actually, when it comes to working on a stomach, what decides if you are sitting straight or not is your treatment table. If you can situate the client correctly, you would be sitting with your back straight while working on a stomach. If you can’t get your body positioned correctly in relation to the treatment table, due to some play between your task chair and the space under the treatment table, then one would be back to trying to bend forward over the table.
In most cases, however, the stereo microscope allows one to sit with the back straight and any bending is at the waist or neck.