Went in yesterday for my 3rd electrolysis treatment on genital area.
Everything went like all other times except for the fact that all other times I mostly saw the removed hairs with the root sheath and bulb.
But this time on the thinner hairs (because many have become much thinner) often she got the bulb but no sheath.
So I asked her (she has 20 years of experience btw) if that’s bad…
And she said “no, it is because these are very thin hairs so it’s quite usual not to see the sheats as long as I have the black bulb…”
I was like “hmmm I definitely read on this site that the sheath should always be there…”
Is she doing something wrong? Or could she be right?
One thing to keep in mind is that you do not have the magnification that she has - if there is a visible black bulb - there probably is some root sheath on the hair.
Think about how small - in diameter - that hair is. The root sheath is a layer on that hair - very likely so thin that you would not be able to see it.
Thinner fine hairs have very small root structures to begin with. There are often small root sheaths followed by long lengths of hair in the hair shaft before the skin’s surface.
I would also like to add that the sheath dries up soon after it is removed, and so it would be less visible in a short period of time. One of my clients looking at the hair left on the table at the end of the treatment would think that NONE of them had root sheaths left on them, because by that time, all but the last few removed would have dried up already.
And another question…I wonder what the pro’s think of that…
She said, with her 20 yrs experience, that she can see that she made a good insertion.
Because if it is too far there would be blood and if it is too shallow she would burn the hair in two and it would brake off, so one wouldn’t see a bulb and sheath.
She said not only is it a good sign to see the sheath and bulb but it also proves good insertion…
Seeing all the nice juicy bits at the bottom of the hair that has been removed is a very good indication that the treatment was most likely a good one and successful.
Thinking about what you have said, I can offer that the hairs you were working on could have been so thin that you could not see the bulbs or sheaths. Some people want to have hairs removed that most people would never bother with, and those sometimes tend to have small rout structures whose moisture evaporates almost immediately upon removal. While I and your practitioner have the advantage of seeing the hair come out of the skin through magnification, you are seeing it with your own eyes (which can’t match an eagle’s accuity) from a distance, and with no magnification.
