hahahahaha Josepha…
But seriously, you are gonna finish the leg right? Your poor son may want to go to the beach one day!
Your results are amazing as always.
I have not had a single treatment that even remotely approaches that level of success.
LDLD… I cannot comment about energy levels - that is up to your electrologist to figure out what works. No one is saying this because they are trying to hide information, it’s simply because there is SO much variation. The client, the machine, the probes, the modality, the electrolgist’s own particular technique, these are all factors. What we can say is that when a follicle is effectively treated, the hair will slide out without absolutely no resistance. I hope you have seen Josefa’s videos on youtube, if not, have a look… you will see how easily the hairs come out with just the fingers. If you are prone to PIH then it can be minimised but generally unavoidable. The point is, it WILL disappear and you are right that it is only worth it if the hair is disappearing too.
From your post I gather that you are now seeing Deanna but you were previously seeing another electrologist? So forget about the past now and the year of no results… you can say that was bad electrolysis and put it behind you (unless you want to try and get some of your money back).
I would strongly urge you to have a test area completed by your new electrologist before proceeding so you can be sure you will get results. Take as an example what Josefa posted on the previous page - have an area of this size (or smaller) completely cleared of all hairs and wait 3 months to see what happens and how much reduction you experience. The selected area should not have been touched by waxing etc or shaving. If, after 3 months it’s looking good, you will have the confidence to proceed knowing you will get results.
Hi stoppit, this relates to a post I just made. Had my first appointment and my electrologist seems cautious (she works for one of the big electrolysis companies which could be why I guess). I’ve barely had any reaction (and my skin’s sensitive) 1 day later: I felt a tug on a couple of hairs- she did adjust settings a couple of times and I guess as it was a first appt she may’ve been just figuring my hair type or whatever out). Saw some hairs which looked like they had a root and some def slid out: does that mean they were definitely ‘killed’? I really don’t want to waste my time and can put up with redness way more than the hair. She said the aim is to gradually weaken the blood supply to the follicle (and that she could zap it outright but I’d hit the ceiling). Ps it really didn’t hurt but I’ve done some DIY with the Clean n Easy so maybe I’m just used to it.
Confused now. Desperate to get this under control. So if the hair slides out it’s definitely killed?
Yeah my electrologist said that it was a process of gradually weakening the follicle, but everyone on this forum says that a properly killed follicle will slide out easily and not grow back. So I’m kind of confused, too. Although after watching Josefa’s videos on Youtube, I’m more and more convinced that the folks on the forum here are right!
I’ve finished a first clearing on my male “brazilian” area. I felt quite a few hairs being gently tugged out during the clearing. Not nearly as sharply as an untreated hair, but still. But I wasn’t using any anesthetic, so maybe she was going easy on the current.
But when I go back for the second clearing treatment here in a week or so, I’m going to ask my electrologist to treat the follicles “properly” the first time around. I’d rather have more pain per follicle than more treatments.
Haha, this is what trouble me the most about this thread too… 
This discussion has convinced me to only accept the best. I will have to do some real investigation, schedule planning, and financial planning in the time to come.
CometJo,
We are of course correct. I’ll tell you that when I first started practising ( on myself) I too shared the view that just because the hair didnt release 100% didnt mean it was destroyed.How much was enough? WellI can tell you I saw a fair bit of regrowth int hose early days. How much more than if the follicle had been treated fully or how much was from other factors ( like laser being done prior) I may never know. However, and I’ve said this more times than I can count here, the release of the hair is the BEST measure of how well the hair has been treated and therefore dead. When using blend I would give little less faith in this, in other words the chemical ddecomposition continues to take place after the hair is removed. That doesnt happen with themolysis. But one thing I will say is that regardless of modality, the probability it is dead for good is MUCH higher if the hair gets a good release. IF it releses only partially, of say 90% , what does that do to the kill rate? That cannot be measured, but experience tells me its not as high as a hair that has been fully treated.
I would say, be very careful in how you word such a thing with your electrologist as there is nothing that can be accomplished by offending her, you want to develop the relationship in a positive manner. Saying something along the lines of “I think the hairs are not releasing as well as they could, and some additional treatment could improve results” is probably less offensive than “please treat the hairs properly”
Seana
1 Like
Yes, exactly. This is the BEST and ONLY way that the client and electrologist can know that the follicle has been correctly and sufficiently treated.
How does one know if a laser session has gone reasonably well? By monitoring the subsequent shedding during the period after the treatment. The more hairs shed, the more effective the treatment has been. By the looks of it, a hair wont´t remain connected to a well ‘cooked’ follicle and for this reason, it falls out.
Now, with electrolysis it is exactly the same, but instead of waiting for the hair to shed and fall out, the hair is immediately removed by the practicioner. Owing to the enormous capacity that the follicle has to regenerate, even the smallest traction means that an essential part of the follice remains intact and therefore, potentially capable of producing a new hair.
Basically, the electrolysis process consists in inserting the needle into the follicle, applying current and removing the hair.
There exists a technique however, in which the final step (removing the hair) is not carried out. This technique goes by the name of ‘ULTRA-lysis’. The founder, Harvey Grove, argues that with his technique, the treatment time can be cut in half or less. The main problem with this technique, in my opinion, is that there is no way of knowing that the follicle has been sufficiently treated. And this has an impact on the effectiveness of the treatment. Aditionally, the client is left with no immediate inidication of how the treatment is going.
Regarding this topic, Adrien and I are doing a trial to check what the difference is between the traditional electrolysis technique (which Mr Grove calls ‘Slow Motion’) and ULTRA-lysis, with respect to time and effectiveness. Although so far we have only done one case and we will need to do around 20 at least, to arrive at a valid conclusion, the results for now are in favour of the traditional electrolysis technique. Everything is being recorded and it will be shown in an upcoming video.
And…I learned something new, within a few minutes of even waking up! Please keep your results on this known Josepha and come back and update us. This site, and you, never cease to amaze me.
Seana
Yes, Harvey talked about this more than 15-years ago … maybe even 20 (?). One key problems (seems to me) is that leaving the dead hair in the follicle might result in additional inflammation and potential infection. (I know: the client was instructed to wash off the dead hairs.)
I do remember that Harvey wanted to speak at the AEA convention about his discovery … and he was NOT allowed to speak. I was very upset, because I wanted him to speak!!! I don’t believe in Censorship at ANY lever …
If you truly master the 2-hand technique, you can move rapidly and never stop or switch hands to pull out the hair. I’m working on two videos now to show this: one on gigantic white hairs (very difficult to see), and an underarm case … “Nicole.”
Michael,
Let me ask you directly, do you think it is possible in your country to have a professional organization that shares information without censoring and without politics getting in the way? Maybe it’s a pipe dream but it would seem to me, that an organization that could successfully accomplish this, could probably swamp in membership what the AEA has. Why has this not happened? Why has someone not reinvented the wheel at the national level and done it correctly? Why as a profession does electrology not demand this?
Seana
Good questions and I’ve been scratching my head for years on this one … and, sort of, why I’m not a member. A couple reasons:
First, there is an underlying “fear factor” with anything really new. I remember how AEA members were THROWN OUT, if they used laser. They changed their tune when the Japanese group started using laser … and they were big contributors to the association … you know “the GELDT” (I was called, “you laser-lover” on more than one occasion, just because I wanted to hear their "Schpiel.) Wonderful members were thrown OUT … guys like Larry Kunze and Wally Roberts … it was pathetic. Wally was escorted out of the convention by security with threat of calling the police … NOT a nice day.
Secondly, The AEA has not recognized that they are not an “arm” of the licensing agencies. I see the licensing agencies as “the enemy” … although I DO support licensing, I don’t think the association has any business second-guessing or trying to conform with “the government.” Overall, government limits us and is “the enemy.”
Thirdly, if a person is not liked, they will be ignored. Lots of people didn’t like Harvey Grove and that played a big part in turning their back on him. He was an odd-ball; but so am I!
Not me. I want to hear everybody … even people I don’t personally like. Who cares “who I like” … means nothing. But the various committees become “cliques” and “group think” often rules decisions. Horrid little groups of “who likes whom.”
I think that the AEA president seems to be trying … but mostly she’s very busy in her own practice and besides, it’s easier to just go along with what’s been done for decades. New ideas are “talked to dead and forgotten.”
The nice thing about the internet is that NONE of us can be censored … and, that totally inspires me: maybe I can finally show the techniques I’ve wanted to show for the last 40 years … without being told, “You will be thrown out of the meeting if you talk about this or that.”
I still do support AEA … who knows, maybe in the next decade or so it will advance. (Of course, I’ll be dead by then … my clock is “TICKING” and I don’t have a lot of time.)
I agree about keeping the government controls out of it. But the AEA doesnt really serve its purpose as an educational outlet as a result. I’m not really looking as in comparison to the AEa because they are what they are. But I do wonder why the industry has not developed a professional organization that does serve the needs of the electrologists. To advance techiques. to educate members. Professional development is a key part of any profession. Why have electrologists as a whole not done this, regardless of whether the AEA exists? You’ll get cliques in any organization, but that’s the beuty of a good professional organization is they are designed to NOT censor information, cliques or no. There’s the facebook group, but why has something like that not gone to the professional organization level?
Seana
Seana … The AEA members are, actually, GREAT! Many many close friends and super-smart people … My hope is that they get a good benevolent dictator at some point: a CEO; not a "president.’ AEA is too democratic, and that’s a mistake with any corporation.
So, here was my suggestion and it looks like it MIGHT take root: maybe? I want the AEA to put a full and total electrology course ON-LINE. I would like the course to be open … in that you don’t have to pay for it … or it’s not private. Not a curriculum! A curriculum only lists what "should be taught’ … instead I want to see a real course! The whole enchilada (or Wienerschnitzel … if you prefer.)
THEN, if the person wants to actually become a "zapper,’ the AEA would have designated "hands-on’ instructors in every State. These "chairside’ instructors would be CPEs … and also be "AEA certified’ by taking some sort of course from the AEA. The "chairside’ instructor would be paid by the student. Because "nobody does nothing for nothing!’
After that, AEA would/could grant their own "genuine’ certificate. Most likely, the States would give up their own contradictory programs and eventually recognize the AEA program … ONLY. In this way, we would finally have a sort of UNIVERSAL understanding of electrolysis … and not the "bits and pieces’ of goofy and regional ideas … "all over the floor!’ ("Regional’ used to be what medical schools were like … "goofy’ … now, medical school MEANS universal medical school!)
Having the entire course OPEN and on-line would be beneficial. First, the person could see if the subject matter is "really for them.’ (You know LIVE TOGETHER … before you get married?) Opening the field would encourage more electrologists to enter the field. And, we need hundreds more … The AEA would rise in stature, gain membership and eventually become the actual "authority’ in the field. Yeah, big ideas …
My inspiration was what M. I. T. did a few years ago. With flagging enrollment, they put all their courses on-line. They got 25,000,000 HITS in one year … and their enrollment went to "full and waiting room only!’
The internet age is the age of OPEN … OPEN OPEN OPEN! The "kids’ in the AEA are young. I’m an old bastard. Why do "I get it’ and they don’t?
Most of us tend to fall into the camps of either being too busy or not really caring all that much about professional development… The more apathetic ones will go “well, the AEA is out there,” while the ones that would like to see something better largely don’t have the individual resources or talent to do what would be required to start a body that actually educates the professional and the consumer.
I’d love to see an actual professional development body that takes the industry seriously. The FDA banned electrolysis equipment in the US from being able to do cataphoresis last year because it could be used to push drugs into the blood stream. Was anyone actually using electrolysis equipment for that purpose in the last year? Probably not, though a lot of us see cataphoresis as a vital part of post-treatment care… but good luck getting a brand new machine that doesn’t have it disabled now. Where was the AEA to stand up for electrolysis on that front? How about when the medical board in Connecticut tried to ban electrolysis from non-doctors last year in an effort to spite the laser people - it was the FB groups that got people mobilized.
"The medical board in Connecticut tried to ban electrolysis from non-doctors last year in an effort to spite the laser people - it was the FB groups that got people mobilized.’
The medical board was "being vindictive’ against laser-users by banning electrologists?
I don’t understand this sentence. Also, what are "FB groups?’ Please "’Splain!’
So, the doctors in CT were upset that laser practitioners are eating into the field of dermatology treatments… and they went to the medical board there, somehow deciding that banning the insertion of probes into the skin would be a strike back against the laser people since, apparently, doctors in CT don’t understand electrolysis and laser are different fields and not necessarily practiced by the same people.
A day or two before the decision, someone brought it up in the Electrology International* FB group and a bunch of people contacted the state about the issue.
- you were briefly a member for a month or two last year and then left it, I’m assuming since it was a private group for electrolysis professionals only
AEA does have a facebook group for public consumption and it has a closed facebook site for electrologists only. They made a “rule” in order to “clean up” the list, that allowed only dues paying members to participate on the closed site, but then quietly back tracked to allow non-members back into the exclusive group, so I have been told. I really don’t participate on that site any more, as I prefer Electrology International now. It is much friendlier and welcoming.
Thanks Seana. I will!
In this thread Mr. Groove describes his method in great detail. http://www.hairtell.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/901/1.html
According to him, if everything is done according to his description, the results should be the same. Well, I’m totally open and willing to try to see if this method really saves the client time and money.
However, some of Mr. Grove’s statements totally contradict my observations.
One of these statements is:
[color:#000099]Excluding the face of a man and the scalp of both genders most hairs are treated while in the catagen stage when treatments commence in virtually all electrology offices. This means there will be significant �tugging� of hairs because our machines (short wave) operate on the basis of how much moisture the treated hairs contain below the surface.
IF you run a test on yourself and turn up the timing to maximum and the intensity also and put it on your DRY fingernail you will find NOTHING HAPPENS because there is no water in your nails. If the areas to be treated are shaved about 4 days before treatment it is very easy to select only the anagens in the area as they will have grown during the 4 days. This means the electrologist can treat the most vulnerable hairs and this will speed up treatment because anagen hairs have more moisture in them as they are growing. Patients have to be EDUCATED about this or they will be complaining about the length of time it takes to get results because when you treat catagens it is doubtful if the treatment will be successful.
[/color]
While it is true that the current will have little or no impact on our nail, we are not working on the surface of the nail, we are working on the skin. If you do the same test on the surface of the skin, you’ll see a white dot appear, an unmistakable sign that the needle tip has produced a burn. Given that it is practically on the surface of the skin where we must perform to eliminate what Mr. Grove called catagen follicles (I think he is confusing the catagen phase with the telogen phase), his statement makes no sense.
I cant comment on Electrology now as I cant get in at present to my knowledge and have no idea what they do or how as a result.
I didn’t want to make this into a for/against AEA thing either. But it seems tome when a professional organization outlives its usefulness its generally replaced by something better, I just wondered if from Michaels perspective he ever saw this happening.
Alot of research is lost because there’s no place to archive it, and talk about it freely.There’s been a lot of advances in electrology in the last few years, think how much more would have been possible.