Yes, this is the look one week after treatment. Maybe in your case, small scabs are slightly larger, because the hairs were also thicker, but the final look will be even more spectacular.
My kill rate and efficiency seems to be developing. So rapidly that it is really hard for me to dare any estimates. But recent progress with clients in the mid of their treatments looks as if i could treat an average beard in 130 hours or maybe even less. Which means quite good but still a lot of room to improve skills.
Thank you for the explanation Josefa! Indeed, I’ve noticed these patches of friction on the upper part of the leg:
In Beate’s picture you can also see the one leg is trimmed and the other is not. It clearly shows that while the hair are wiry and can grow very long, they are not too dense. They seem like a great candidate for laser but they are not.
Back to Laurier. 48 hours after treatment:
I like how most of the reaction remains below the surface, like it should. Even though I’m very prone to hyperpigmentation, I know that in a few weeks I won’t see much. (Except when the skin is wet, then I still see some healing redness underneath the surface.) This result was not possible with another probe.
That’s incredible, Notadelphin 
Such a good work! You’re very lucky, Beate and Lauriel probe are perfect for your skin. I’m really happy for you.
This caught my eye.
Prior to discovering how much I like Laurier probes, I was using Ballet Gold and Ballet insulated probes. I had and still do have great results with Ballet. Specifically speaking, there is none to very minimal scabbing, kill success is good and yes, I do have people that almost fall asleep. I love Ballet probes, too, and they hold a special place in my drawer right next to my Lauriers. I use different probes for different reasons. The 4.5 Lauriers were in response to me giving Mike Roy feedback on wanting just a little more stiffness in the probe for doing male back hair. Mike Roy is like Dectro. He is involved with electrologists and responds to our needs. He has an excellent probe because they are hand made, with love and great precision.
Yes, I can achieve much of the same with a Ballet if I choose my settings correctly and always do proper insertions.
I have yet to discover my reaction to the probes that are recommended for the Apilus Platinum - Pro-Tec probes. I hope to get more involved with that. Prestige has a new line of probes which I know nothing about? I am always curious, but hesitate to move away from the tried, true and comfortable, especially for facial work. Laurier and Ballet are the tried and true for me, but I may discover more?
My kill rate and efficiency seems to be developing. So rapidly that it is really hard for me to dare any estimates. But recent progress with clients in the mid of their treatments looks as if i could treat an average beard in 130 hours or maybe even less. Which means quite good but still a lot of room to improve skills. [/quote]
Glad to know that the Spanish and Germans did not greet each other when their planes fly over the Rhine, except for sightseeing.
I had and still do have great results with Ballet. Specifically speaking, there is none to very minimal scabbing, kill success is good and yes, I do have people that almost fall asleep.
Dee,
I agree that one can have good results with other probes too. Not a doubt. Skill is definitely more important than instruments and, as Beate mentioned, there are some cases where an non-insulated needle is more suitable.
It’s just that in my own particular case, the hair needed about 425 EL to epilate well with a Ballet gold probe but only about 290-308 EL with an insulated Laurier probe. I was impressed but then again I’m easily impressed. 
That difference is pretty large, larger than what i usually experience as a difference between Laurier and Ballet probes. And that requires a bit of thinking on possible causes:
The Ballet probe was run with synchro pulses between 0.22 and 0.4 secs, most of the time with my personal “default” value of 0.33 secs. The Laurier was run with Synchro at 0.2 secs and thus maybe better suited to the situation of an untreated leg with its large percentage of catagen and telogen hair. (Aren’t such details a topic of its own?)
The EL value is based on a simple model of the effect of the signals: proportional to the length of the signal and squared with its intensity. Therefore these numbers should not be taken too strictly, especially when comparing signals with different timings as was the case here. There also seems to be a tradeoff: shorter signals often appear less painful but the larger currents seem to cause stronger side effects (in average).
Furthermore, we had used a moisturizer before the Laurier treatment which we did not apply during the testing session - a consequence of the outcome of the test, because these 400+ EL appeared pretty much to me. And it simply was a different day - this alone might have had a significant effect on the moisture content of the skin. All in all i would probably achieved an improvement between testing session and the recent treatment with a Ballet probe as well, and i guess i would have ended up somewhere in the 330-350 EL range.
best
Beate
Beate, to compare the IBP with even our own uninsulated tapered needle is to compare apples to oranges.
An uninsulated needle releases the RF energy along it’s entire length. The IBP concentrates 90% of that release to it’s tip.
Nerves have nothing to do with the production of hair and are concentrated above the area that does. The focus the IBP provides lessens the trauma that reaches up to them. This is why there is less pain experienced by the client.
As the operator becomes accustomed to the IBP power reductions of 50% and more are quite commonly reported.
I never put that in percentage form, but it became quite evident to me from the beginning that I had to reduce the energy level dramatically or I was cleaning sticky matter or hair off the probe too often, thus ruining the probe and slowing me down. I got it together now and don’t let that happen.
That’s why I say start way low and work your way up to where you want to be. If you start where you would be with a common insulated needle, you’ll be overtreating down deep. Another clue is if the skin blanches around the Probe when the pulse is fired, you’re a bit high. You don’t need near as much power because it is focused at the tip.
Claiming that level of focus is not the same as providing it 
I haven’t read the whole thread and this has likely been answered but if someone could repeat it briefly: less skin damage is established but what is the overall consensus on efficacy of treatment with this probe vs. the regular ones? Does not ‘destroying’ the follicle/pore along its entire length necessitate additional treatments, in other words does it decrease kill rate at first attempt?
No it does not. The whole point is to kill only the cells that are involved with the production of the hair. Most patient irritation is caused by treating the area near the surface that is not the electrologist’s target in the first place. If anything, the IBP allows it’s operator to deliver more energy to the target cells when it’s called for as evidenced by the reduced power levels needed when compared to a common insulated needle. One needs less power when it is focused on the target.
I can categorically say NO, kill rate is the same.
This was one of the objectives we set when this thread was created. Keeping track of the regrowth to verify the degree of effectiveness. Some of my colleagues and myself had some doubts about this. For this reason, I chose my daughter’s arm to track a person who was always close to me, and being sure that the area remained untouched. Many of the Hairtell boys and girls were able to observe the results in the test arm and on her eyebrows, (also made with the IBP). These are Marta’s eyebrows several months after the last session.
The patch test on the arm, 8 months after second clearance (photo made 5 minutes ago):
The rest of this arm will be done shortly. Sorry, but I am terminating the test.
Your daughter has such beautiful eyes, Josefa!
Sounds great, Mike.Thanks!
Josefa, amazing work as usual. And I agree with ekade above: pretty eyes!
It appears to me from this photo that Marta has some obvious, what I would call, “pitted marking” under the outer part of both eyebrows, particularly the right eyebrow. Anybody else brave enough to comment?
I gather that you are an electrologist. I am therefore surprised that you are not able to distinguish between the pores of oily skin and the marks of over-treatment. But tomorrow I’ll make sure to look carefully these nonexistent marks which you speak. Maybe I missed it, only took 25 years looking at her beautiful face. :crazy:
Oh by the way, if you are trying to discredit my work, maybe it’s time to analyze what your colleagues are doing there. This is a scar from overtreatment by a member of BIAE.
Perhaps it is time to recommend to your colleagues the Laurier.
I expanded Marta’s eyebrow pictures on my iPad and I saw normal pores. The pores were very noticeable above the eyebrow on the lower forehead, especially. This is a natural occurrence on many peoples skin. Nothing to get excited about. All looks very good to me and I would be so honored to have Josefa work on me, my three daughters, my Mother, my friend from grade school, my personal guru, my hair dresser, my “sister” neighbor down the street, the homeless woman that lived with my family for eight years, and all the women I love and care about in my life - including my female granddogs .