I’m gonna go out on a limb with my assumptions again, please correct me if I’m wrong at any time!
I’ve seen a post from Michael about comparing his results of manual blend with his colleague who uses flash I believe, at the end of the treatments they were identical (all cleared in the same total time). I know flash is pretty much instant, but how long is the ‘‘zap’’ of that blend? I’d like to know a bit more about the experiment.
Would it be safe to assume that blend has a higher chance of killing hair follicles, however with a slower ‘‘zap’’ time than flash, which makes both methods equally as effective in the same amount of completion time?
Pushing this further however, let’s take for example an untreated area, a full clear with flash would take less time than blend, but the regrowth will be more dense. At that stage, since most of the time is spent on treating the hairs and not looking for them since they are so close together, would there not be a slight probability advantage of using a faster method (flash)?
On an already well-treated area, most regrowth hairs are sparse, so the effectiveness of flash decreases exponentially (even if tiny) since at that stage, a lot more time is spent looking for new hairs to treat (as opposed to an untreated area).
I’VE CRACKED THE CODE!
Multiply that small variable with an electrologist’s skill and the difference could become a bit more significant. There’s also other variables like preference, convenience, price, pain, etc, but that’s another story.