Thermocoagulation and the electromagnetic spectrum

Hair Removal Methods Professional Electrolysis
#1

In reading through the posts, I have come upon some misconceptions and mis-statements concerning both thermocoagulation and the electromatic spectrum. Maybe these points are what leads people to both underestimate thermolysis and, even among some pro’s lead to over-treatment.

First off, let’s take a look at 2 related terms.
Thermocoagulation vs. thermodessication;

Thermocoagulation refers to the process of inducing the coagulation of proteins in living tissue. Thermodessication refers to driving any moisture out of tissues.

In human tissues, thermocoagulation occurs at 127 deg. F (53 deg. C). Thermodessication requires a temperature of at least 212 deg. F (100 deg. C). As water boils at 212 deg. F., thermocoagulation occurs at a much lower temperature.

In order to be effective, and not cause damage to the skin, the temperature of the heating pattern during thermolysis must be maintained at a temperature much lower than 212 deg.F. An effective heating pattern will not exceed 160 deg F. adjacent to the probe (the hottest portion of the heating pattern) and the size of the heating pattern will be the point where the heating pattern is at the 127 deg. F point.

If there is a discernable “pop” when the H.F. energy is released into the follicle, too much energy is being used and the moisture is being driven out of the treatment area and the size of the heating pattern is significantly reduced - as steam is being produced, causing thermolysis blow out. This has the effect of taking the heat away from the follicle and significantly narrowing the heating pattern - not doing a good job of treating the entire follicle.

Frequency Vs. Wavelength

Simply stated, the wavelength of an electro-magnetic wave is expressed by the following formula:

300/f

Where 300 is the number of million meters per second of the velocity of an electromagnetic wave in free space and f is expressed as the number of Mega Hertz of the signal. For a 12.56MHz signal, the wave length would be 22.12 meters (300/12.56=22.13M).

The electromagnetic spectrum basically goes from .1 KHz to 20KHz as Very Low Frequency, 20.1KHz to 3MHz as low frequency, 3MHZ to 30MHz as High Frequency, 30MHz to 200MHz as Very High Frequency, and so on thrugh microwaves, infra-red light, visible light, ultraviolet light, x-rays, etc. The point being that the higher the frequency, the shorter the wavelength. As light waves are extremely high frequengy, the wavelengths are measured in Angstroms (millionths of a meter) as the number of insignificant zeros becomes too much for conventional communication.

The point to all of this is that the reason that things like microwave ovens and lasers work is that their wavelengths are in the quarter-wavelength to to one-wavelength to some aspect of the molecules and atoms that they stimulate into motion.

2 basic conclusions here:

  1. Too much thermolysis energy causes thermodessication - not thermocoagulation, reducing the width of the heating pattern and the net effectiveness of treatment with thermolysis. For this reason, the effectiveness of treatment with thermolysis requires both the proper application of power and accurate insertions to achieve maximum effectiveness.

  2. The higher the frequency of an electromagnetic wave, the shorter the wavelength. Laser wavelengths are so short they are referred to in terms of Angstroms.

With regard to item number 2, there is still some open room for debate as far as the long-tern effects from laser treatment goes. I am not taking a stand on either side of this issus as the empiracle data is not in yet. It will take years to develop the statistical domain to see if skin cancer, permanent hyperpigmentation, spontanious human combustion or any other long-term effect will result from laser therapy.

I have read articles where the Air Force has made the determination that laser enegies do have the ability to deactivate the P53 gene, wich controls human cell division, increasing the liklihood of skin cancers. However, these tests were run at laser targeting frequencies, not at the frequencies used for laser therapy. Again we are at the point of talking apples and oranges.

My best to all!
Joanie <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

#2

I have read articles where the Air Force has made the determination that laser enegies do have the ability to deactivate the P53 gene, wich controls human cell division, increasing the liklihood of skin cancers. However, these tests were run at laser targeting frequencies, not at the frequencies used for laser therapy. Again we are at the point of talking apples and oranges.
Please provide source of the article.

Since you pointed out that you were comparing apples and oranges, what’s the point to mention laser energies can deactivate the P53 gene and leads to skin cancer?

May I ask you directly, are you simply saying/hinting/suggesting Laser can cause skin cancer?

#3

Not that this helps at all, but there is a link and a copy of that article somewhere in the HairTell Archives, and probably on HairFacts as well.

#4

Hi Ants,

Like a lot of the patent nostrums available on the market, laser hair removal has not been clinically tested, nor has the follow-up research been performed to evaluate the potential for long-term health risks. The FDA has not deemed laser hair removal to be either “safe” or permanent. You can go to their web site and verify this.

As far as the as the effects of laser energy on human tissues, this was a topic in the: Life Sciences & Biotechnology Update , June, 2001. A copy may be obtained by contacting: LIFE SCIENCES & BIOTECHNOLOGY UPDATE reviewed report from InfoTeam Inc., P.O. Box 15640, Plantation, FL 33318-5640; Phone (954) 473-9560, Fax (954) 473-0544: Report No. L20010607; 1999, 13 pp. Price: $89.00, prepaid. E-mail to: InfoTeamMA@aol.com)

BTW. I never made the claim that laser causes cancer. However, as information from other studies involving laser radiations have indicated the possibility of genetic damage to the skin, it may be possible that laser can increase the risks of cancer. However, as there is no clinical data proving that laser energies are dangerous to human tissues, there is also no clinical data proving them to be safe either.

In short, the laser manufacturers have jumped on the wagon, flooded the market with laser hair removal equipment, without doing their homework. Shouldn’t this give one a pause to reflect on the possibilities? The fact that all laser work in most states requires a M.D. license, and is being performed by technicians, who have no training requirements defined for the use of the equipment, contra-indications, and proper treatment guidelines does raise a red flag for me.

There have been other technologies used in the past with horrible long-term effects. One of these was x-ray hair removal. I don’t think that I need to frame a discussion of that technology, and I AM NOT COMPARING LASER TO X-RAYS. X-Rays, along with magnetism, various mineral crystals, and a host of other things have all been presented as having unique theraputic properties that just do not pan out.

Electrology has a 130 year history of proven effectiveness and safety. It is FDA approved as “permanent hair removal”, has had all of the appropriate clinical studies performed and all of the FDA reviews of the studies, their methodologies, results, negative effects, and primarily, empiricle evidence that the methodology does effect permanent hair removal.

BTW…I would avoid the use of any laser treatment center that still claims “Permanent Hair Removal”. The FDA has denied the use of that claim with laser until such time as acceptable clinical information becomes available for review and approval of the process. If these centers are denying the FDA ruling on this issue, what other facets of the treatment process are they clipping corners on? This does, after all, call their integrity into question.

(Edited Addendum)
The very fact that the cited study indicated changes in the genetic material of the skin at infra-red to near infra-red range does not rule out the possibility of chemical changes at higher laser frequencies. It is known that ultra-violet light is a contributer to skin cancer. Remember that the infra-red spectrum is at the low end of the portion of the electro-magnetic spectrum we know as light. Ultra-violet is the extreme high end of the light spectrum, right under X-rays. One of the things that is known about any form of alternating energy in the electro-magnetic spectrum is that the higher the frequency of the energy, the higher the average energy level will be for emissions of the same amplitude.

As U.V. does stimulate the formation of malignant cells and that laser emissions in the infra-red to near infra-red does cause damage to the p53 gene, there is a real potential for similar effects throughout the light spectrum. However, as this has not specifically tested and documentated, it is not my prerogative to make the claim that it does. Nature is very mysterious and things do not always have the expected effects when dealing with living tissues. At this point there are still some serious questions that require answers and evaluation before laser can be given a clean bill of health. These are, but are not limited to:

  1. What laser frequencies are safe to expose large areas of human tissues.

  2. Is there a threshhold at which laser energies become more harmful in terms of joules/sq.cm.? If laser exposures are below these values, are the effects completely reversable through the body’s natural healing processes?

  3. What are the specific effects to all tissues and chemical components of the skin when exposed to laser energies. Do these effects, if any, have the potential for long-term damage illness?

  4. As coherent light does not occur naturally, the human organism has not developed specific mechanisms to deal with this type of radiation. So far, the risks have not been completely cataloged or defined and there may be some specific long-term problems with exposing living tissues to this type energy. At this point we simply do not know all of the risks or benefits.

The very fact that the study cited indicated changes in the genetic material of the skin at infra-red to near infra-red range does not rule out the possibility of chemical changes and genetic damage.

In regards to my personal views on laser hair removal, I have girlfriends that have had good results with the technique. I also have girlfriends that have had their hair growth problems made worse by the same technology. A couple have incurred skin damage from laser. This tells me that laser technology has some very definate possibilities as a method of hair removal. It also indicates that the technology needs further study and standardization before it becomes a technology with defined application to acheive predictable results. I hope that all works out well, but so far it is a long way from being a proven technology with known benefits and risks.

Joanie <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

#5

Hi All,
I would like to try thermocoagulation on my new apilus senior 11 …would using a tapered probe be advised??
Thanks,
Livia