Ah thanks!
What does this mean?
Does this mean the dermal papilla is always in the hairbulb? Even when you pull it out without electrolysis?
But that electrolysis is there to kill the blood supply and not the papilla? As it gets pulled out with the hair anyways?
Anyone?..James maybe?
Yes, the dermal papilla continues to exist when the hair is removed with tweezers, thread or wax.
The dermal papilla is a moving target and it should be destroyed when the follicle is treated with electrolysis, but it is not enough, you must remove 3 / 4 parts of the follicle, to the hair is permanently removed.
Small scabs are the result of healing in the epidermis layer. This is not serious provided that the dermis is not affected. The healing process does not end when the scabs fall off. The follicle should be slowly replaced by fibrous tissue called scar tissue, which lasts several weeks or even months.
If you have to remove 3/4 part…How can insulated needles work then!?
It’s pure physics. The high frequency and galvanic need water to function. First spent water in the bulb and then ascends to the surface for the rest of water in the follicle.
Insulated needles really only affect distribution the DC (galvanic) current. The high-frequency current goes right through the thin layer of insulation on insulated needles. So you will get heating all along the needle. Technical term for this is “capacitive coupling”. Electronic components called capacitors are based on this principle. they are made with two layers of foil separated by a thin layer of plastic. They block DC and pass AC. The higher the frequency, the less impedance they have to the AC. This is actually mentioned in Hinkle’s book in the section on needles.
3/4 of the follicle…
Funny how 90% of all electrologist-sites only say that one has to kill the papilla and nothing more.
I do not believe that anyways…As the follicle is build of keratinocyte and melanocyte cells…Killing only the papilla would let those cells regenerate the complete follicle.
Even destroying the bulge area along with the papilla is not enough in my opinion.
I have studied medical sciences and am now a PhD in Biopsychology, though a different field I know quite a lot about cell reformation.
So your statement that 3/4 should be killed sounds very credible as I also believe that when the largest part of the keratinocyte and melanocyte cells are destroyed, the follicle can not return.
If these two kind of cells remain in close proximity, even when the bulge and papilla are destroyed, I am sure these cells can multiply and reform a complete hair follicle.
The regenerative power of these two kind of cells is extreme and they can be found all over the body…
I also think that the small vellus hairs which seem to appear quite a while after an area has been treated aren’t actually weakened hairs…But regenerated hairs due to residual cells remaining after electrolysis.
The fact that they are vellus hairs is due to the stemcells regenerating a follicle in it’s original form as at birth…
Ofcourse, any input is welcome…
this busines about killing a large fraction of the follicle is covered in Hinkel on page 48. Although he says 2/3 must be destroyed the difference between 2/3 and 3/4 is moot. It seems clear that more than just the bottom needs to be killed. Given that he wrote his book in 1968, I can’t imagine why 90% of electrologists would not know this. I guess its not being taught in the schools.
Yes, very strange indeed.
To obtain the permanent elimination of the hair, they must be destroyed,
If the follicle is in anagen:
1.- The papilla,
2.- The transitory area
3.- Part of the Isthmus (including the Bulge)
If the follicle is in telogen:
1.- The papilla,
2.- Part of the Isthmus (including the Bulge)
sounds logical to me…
However, keeps me wondering if the cells (also keratinocyte) in a sebaceous gland aren’t able to reform a follicle…
Come the case, this would be a sebaceous follicle without one of his elements, the hair.
The sebaceous follicles are formed by big sebaceous glands and tiny hair. And since the principal protagonist of this organ is the sebaceous gland, the scientists were called it a sebaceous follicle instead of hair follicle.
Toeman, I am not sure of this, but I believe that the mechanisms capable of producing hair, are similar to the mechanisms capable of reproducing a sebaceous gland, but they are not related. If to eliminate hair we have to injure irreversibly the walls that support it, to eliminate a sebaceous gland also we will have to injure the capsule that contains the seborrhea.
Of a thing yes I am sure, a follicle eliminated will never produce either hair, or sebaceous cyst, not hiperplasias sebaceous, not either a type of tumor that originates in the intact follicle.
In his book, Mr. Bono illustrates a phenomenon that happens during the healing of the treated follicle.
Apparently, the damaged follicle fills with white seborrhea (with a creamy consistency that falls apart easily in the fingers). When the healing reaches the surface of the skin, this seborrhea that already is dry and lasts, it goes out on the outside. This one is a symptom that demonstrates the substitution of intact tissue for fibrous tissue, we have at the time the safety of which the follicle has disappeared.
I raise an image of this phenomenon:
Interesting…does this happen right after treatment? Or weeks later?
I have never seen it after 2 years of treatment…
Weeks later, when the small scabs come off.
This phenomenon is not a constant, happens fundamentally in the line of the bikini. I suppose that it is related to the great size of the treated follicles.
Basing on a hypothetical situation:
Crusts act as the stopper of a bottle, the sebum accumulates inside the follicle because it cannot be excreted on the outside. We know that it is a recent sebum (made after treatment) because the cells contain much water (of there his creamy consistency). With the step of the days, the small point of sebum loses the water and becomes hard. A bit of exfoliation it is welcome in this moment, but not before.
Well, Toeman, these white points are PAPULES SEBACEOUS that disappear in a few weeks. I have been late 30 years in putting name to this phenomenon.
The good news is that these papules demonstrate the death of the follicle. Also I could have confirmed in Michael Bono’s book that the sebaceous gland remains intact.
The book of reference: Treatment Strategy for Electrology.
