Thermolysis effectiveness?

Hair Removal Methods Professional Electrolysis
#1

I have about 100 individual hairs on my chest. I’ve had 4 thermolysis treatments, about 10 days apart, lasting about 1/2 hour each treatment for total clearance. Each treatment, my electrologist has turned down the intensity because she doesn’t like the red dots that the treatment is leaving on my chest. She admits that the hairs are not sliding out as “nicely” under the lower intensity.

Also, the hairs are growing back much faster than when I used to tweeze. What’s the deal?

I found the following quotes regarding thermolysis on this website; http://www.transgendercare.com/electrolysis/methods/overview_methods.htm

" Thermolysis is ideally suited for thin, shallowly rooted hairs. However, its usefulness greatly degrades with the larger, course and deeply rooted hairs that generally comprise the typical male beard. We find the incidence of treatment complications to be somewhat higher with thermolysis as compared to multiple needle galvanic or the blend (described next). Additionally, treatment complications greatly increase with the use of flash (high intensity, short duration) thermolysis. We feel the adverse result of pitted scarring to be greatest with flash thermolysis. The flash method is intended for treating small follicles, but has been adopted for treatment of large follicles. The flash method dispenses a high intensity blast of high frequency energy within less than one second’s duration. When this intensity is proportionate to the size of small follicle, it is an acceptable method. But when this intensity is increased enough to treat larger follicles, serious permanent side effects may occur. This intense heat can cause pitted scarring. Thermolysis typically provides a 5 to 15 percent kill rate for follicles treated."

The hairs on my chest seem deep rooted when I tweeze them. They are sometimes 6 or 7 mm beneath the skin. I also believe them to be thick. Am I wasting my time and hard earned money on thermolysis? Should I find a blend or galvanic practioner?

Thanks.

#2

It’s scaring me that no one is replying to this.

James? Any feedback?

Please help.

#3

I’m not James, but I’ll try to step in and help out.

Thermolysis can destroy/damage a large deep hair follicle. Successful thermolysis all falls under the umbrella of how skilled your electrologist is at using special techniques, how powerful and up to date their equipment is (epilator,vision,lighting). There is nothing deficient or harmful when one uses thermolysis to treat the hairs you describe, when it is done expertly. Those hairs must slide out. That is a clue that something proper has happened to damage the follicle. If she/he is having trouble making this happen, then other strategies must be used. If you have 100 hairs, I would assume that one treatment could have cleared the visible hair if flash thermolysis was used.

That being said, for such a small amount of hair you have, if your person is struggling, you can possibly find someone in your area who can handle these hairs with thermolysis, correctly, and/or can perform blend. Blend would be very good for this area you describe as long as the person doing blend can regulate the currents properly. You must have the proper intensity for the proper amount of time for any method of electrolysis to be effective.

I am aware of the information on the transgender site you posted. The information is not wrong, but it is in my opinion, a little out dated. If the majority of electrologists out there are not up to par on how to treat deep, coarse hair using newer, more powerful epilators, with the correct size probe, for the correct amount of time, with the correct amount of intensity, then they should stick to the blend or multiple needle.

I feel for the consumer who has to be better than a blood hound and a detective combined to find the right person to remove their hair. We electrologists all have differing abilities, equipment and success rates,but the principles of a good electrolysis treatment have not changed.

Will your practitioner try blend on you if you request this?

Do you know what epilator is being used? Just curious.

Dee

#4

dfahey-

Thanks for the reply. My electrologist only has a thermolysis machine.

Are you familiar with this site; http://www.hairzapper.com/thermolysis.html

This galvanic electrologist goes into great detail regarding the following shortcomings of thermolysis;

Primarily meant for the removal of sparse or light hair.

Widely used by many operators because of simplicity of operation.

Difficult to obtain permanent hair kill.

Difficult to use without causing deep-tissue scarring and premature aging.

Can require up to 30 or 40 passes before hair growth is substantially reduced

Can cause imbedded debris, ingrown hairs, circular scars (pits)

Can damage surrounding tissue and most notably, sebaceous glands surrounding the hair follicle

She is very convincing.

If James could review that website and respond I would greatly appreciate it. No offense to you dfahey, but it just worries me that James responds to most posts, including posts before and after mine, and hasn’t responded with anything yet. In my paranoid little mind, that seems to give credence to the criticisms of thermolysis.

#5

jeez, cut the man a break. you post something on Monday, and we’re not even a full 24 hours from your original post and you’ve concluded that James is hiding from you. He may have other things to do at this time. Also, he doesn’t hide from anyone. In case you haven’t noticed, he posts all over the place, even in the Laser forums…and he doesn’t believe in laser! Lastly, dfahey is also an electrologist. I trust her posts just as much as I trust James’s. So calm down and quit with the accusations.

#6

I know you are new here, but in case you did not understand this, the electrologists who post here, do so in their spare time. Something I have little of. In fact, you can thank my fast typing speed to the number of posts I do answer here.

As for your question, I have answered this questions so many times on this board that if you just learned to use the search feature, and put in the word Thermolysis, and my user name, and make the search parameter as small as the past year, you get in the top of the search many post strings that answer your question.

Modalities

Transexual Thermolysis

Includes Hair Percentages and Most Times Per Hair
I did not answer your question, because I did not have the time to either go looking for a post string that would, (hoping someone else might point you to one, or that you would use the search feature yourself) or that I could post you yet a new post that would restate what I have stated all over this site in many other places.

Sorry that it seemed that I was ignoring you, but your answer really is already on the site in many places, in many ways.

I remove over a million hairs a year, every year, and the overwhelming majority are in thermolysis, although I also use Blend and Galvanic where appropriate.

The gentleman who just left my office would tell you that Thermolysis has worked for him. He had over 500 hairs per square inch, and a testosterone problem that left him with a face that was bent on stimulating every single follicle on his face to life before we were done. Without taking female hormones, he had no hope of a hair free face without literally treating every single follicle on his face and neck before we were done. Most electrologists would tell him there was no hope, but we jumped in, and I kept him clear, with his co-operation on attending appointments, and we are now to the point where I see him once in 4 to 6 months. We are effectively done.

It works, and it can work without scarring.

Now click search, and input key words, and you will find many expanded discussions on this subject.

Now, my next client is here, and I have to go.

#7

Thank you Susie for your kind words and no offense taken at all lestat. I fully understand people wanting a response from James because I, like many, consider his the bottom line regarding hair removal. He’s very humble and may not agree with me,but that’s how I see it.

As an electrologist, I contribute to this this site because it helps me feel the pulse of the consumer looking for good hair removal. It’s not meant to promote myself or my practice. Don’t need to as I have plenty of work. In fact, I have taken a day off from work today to “re-charge my battery” so to speak.

I offer what I can to be helpful and I am very grateful to the consumer’s that post here because they continue to teach me more than I could ever learn elsewhere. People like myself, Susie, RJC2001 and now lagirl, etc., try to take some of the burden off James, who, like the rest of the regulars that post, give their time unselfishly and for no reward other than to spread helpful information for others in need.

Dee

#8

Oh, I forgot to answer your question about the hairzapper website you mentioned. Some of Susan Laird’s information is out dated about thermolysis.

#9

Alright.

I just got a well deserved reeming. James, my apologies. I see that you, and others, have helped educate a lot of people on this site.

But you must understand that in addition to demanding, short-tempered, idiotic patients like me, there are a lot, and I mean lot, of shady, greedy, apathetic electrologist/plastic surgeons out there who are motivated mainly by money. I’m somewhat jaded after spending a lot of time and money fighting acne scarring. And I am sure the electrologists here are aware of the B.S that the laser people are slinging.

Now as far as searching the forum, I know how to do this and did so before my post. I searched for “Galvanic” and “Thermolysis.” And of course the results were many. 200 for each term. I read the first hundred each. I couldn’t find anything directly disputing the scathing accusations of Susan Laird on www.hairzapper.com . In order to save time reading additional posts, and because I couldn’t think of any better search terms, I posted my post.

Now Susan Laird’s thermolysis accusations still frighten me
When dfahey says that Laird’s info is outdated, that makes me feel better. But I’d feel a whole lot better, if some one specifically addressed her take on 1.deep-tissue scarring and premature aging, 2. imbedded debris, ingrown hairs, circular scars (pits), 3. “With thermolysis, we find that with each pass, we remove the main hair, but stimulate follicle sites surrounding the original offender. The skin, does what it does best, and that is to protect itself against stimulation and one of those mechanisms for protection is…(good grief)…HAIR. Often the harder you work, the more there is to do!!!”

Now my experience seems consistent with this last point. As I mentioned earlier, the hairs on my chest are growing back more quickly and in greater number than when I use to tweeze. Not more than three days after a treatment, do they come back with a vengeance. I’ve been tweezing for years. And the hairs are few enough in number and spaced far enough apart, that I can tell you my observation is accurate. Back when I would tweeze a hair would be gone for two weeks or more. Not anymore.

Susan Laird’s arguments are presented thoroughly enough that I don’t see them as typical salesperson scare tactics. They come across as legitimate.

I’m not a doctor or a scientist. I am a moron. That’s why I’d like someone smarter than me to thoroughly dispute Laird’s claims.

Thank you to all contributors.

#10

Ok, Although I am sure I have something that addresses this elsewhere, I will take on this one part now.

Although Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation causes lots of damage throughout a large area, and therefore does cause this phenomenon described by Susan, Electrolysis is less likely to do so, and when done well, won’t. The problem is that one would seem to see proof of what she says occurring in the early stages, as one either gets hair removed, and it seems to grow back, or, one gets totally cleared and the same seems to happen.

The difference is, most people do way too little time way too infrequently in the beginning to really take the hair removal bull by the horns, and plod along getting small improvements, unless they have something like PCOS, in which case, they can be recruiting new hairs at the same pace they are loosing them.

If one has an electrologist who can bare an area totally, and you keep going on the right schedule, and you take before during and after pictures, you will see a steady decrease in hairs, and you will be done in a reasonable amount of time.

I go through this with every transsexual client I have. It will look like “all the hair is returning” but it is just the next phase of growth coming in. Those are hairs never treated before. Of course, that is all discussed in the “Most times per hair” post.

The transsexuals who work with me get bare faced in one to six weeks, depending on how they approach the task. After that, we do our best to keep them clear faced, depending on how they schedule things, we have better or worse luck at that. In either case, we finish with a bare face in about 12 to 24 months depending on how they come in for treatments. I have never had a transexual client (the hardest test of any hair removal system) come to me after we are done and say that they had regrowth, or that we stimulated more hairs to grow than had grown before. They just visit me years later to tell me how much they appreciate the fact that they never had a face that looked like they were suffering from deep acne scarring, like some other girls they have met.

My clients get done and happy. If you were one of my clients, I would gladly prove it to you. As it is, I can only tell you to look hard to find someone who will give you the best work you can get in your range of possibilities.

#11

Now as far as searching the forum, I know how to do this and did so before my post. I searched for “Galvanic” and “Thermolysis.” And of course the results were many. 200 for each term.

If it was only 200 per term, there must be something wrong with the server because those words appear in nearly every post! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> You’re going to have to get way more specific in your searching.

But I’d feel a whole lot better, if some one specifically addressed her take on 1.deep-tissue scarring and premature aging, 2. imbedded debris, ingrown hairs, circular scars (pits), 3. “With thermolysis, we find that with each pass, we remove the main hair, but stimulate follicle sites surrounding the original offender. The skin, does what it does best, and that is to protect itself against stimulation and one of those mechanisms for protection is…(good grief)…HAIR. Often the harder you work, the more there is to do!!!”

Here are some tips on how to do research. You just listed specific things you’re worried about. I promise you that if you search for “scarring” you’ll get a ton of posts back. Try “aging” and “pitting” while you’re at it. Probably even “deep tissue scarring” and “premature aging”. You will find many fascinating threads (well, fascinating only to us hairy or ex-hairy, <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> ) The bottom line I remember about scarring/pitting is that electrolysis can cause those problems—and I think it was any kind of electrolysis—but as with all things, it comes down to the skill of the practitioner. Based on what I’ve read here, galvanic is more forgiving of a bad practitioner. Someone competent with thermolysis knows what the limits are. This is why it’s important to try several electrologists before deciding on The One—check out their method and speed and skill and how you react to each one. You will quickly see what is “normal” for you and what isn’t.

re: #2
Imbedded debris and ingrown hairs are not unique to electrolysis nor are they the boogeyman incarnate. I get them from waxing my legs and bikini. Do a search for “tombstone” and “tomb stone” (as 1 and as 2 words) and you’ll learn about the debris issue. It’s just a stump of a hair which your body will push out on its own. Try a search for “ingrown” and you’ll see that many people get this. The main solution here is to purchase Tend Skin or to make it on your own, and if you search for “tend skin” you’ll find posts with the recipe.

As for point #3, that hasn’t been my experience. I’m not sure if it’s been addressed here. Hey, maybe a search for “stimulate” or “stimulation” will bring something.

Now my experience seems consistent with this last point. As I mentioned earlier, the hairs on my chest are growing back more quickly and in greater number than when I use to tweeze. Not more than three days after a treatment, do they come back with a vengeance. I’ve been tweezing for years. And the hairs are few enough in number and spaced far enough apart, that I can tell you my observation is accurate. Back when I would tweeze a hair would be gone for two weeks or more. Not anymore.

If you’ve only been at this for 10 days it’s not physically possible for those hairs to be regrowth of what was just removed. Hair growth takes a few weeks for a new one to come to the surface (but to really find out, check out this hair growth cycle chart ). Remembering that I’m not a pro, I have a few theories to explain what you see:

  1. You had old, dead, shedding hairs removed and the new growth was lurking right below the surface and now came out.
  2. You used to tweeze the most visible hairs. Now that they are gone, you are noticing all the mid-level ones that you had never noticed or had never bothered you as much. You’re starting to see your full amount of hair for the first time.
  3. You have a lot of tombstones/debris that is pushing itself out. It looks like new hair growing in.

My money is on #2, but maybe someone else here can weigh in on this.

Susan Laird’s arguments are presented thoroughly enough that I don’t see them as typical salesperson scare tactics. They come across as legitimate.

I’m not a doctor or a scientist. I am a moron. That’s why I’d like someone smarter than me to thoroughly dispute Laird’s claims.

Since when do salespeople not use thorough arguments? Also, I’m sure that she believes what she says—but there are others who disagree, and this is where the whole unfortunate responsibility of being a hair-removal consumer comes in: It’s up to us, who are not doctors or scientists either btw, to figure this all out. And hey, we do. You can too, even though you’re a moron <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

The state of hair removal technology sucks. There is no one easy method. They are all imperfect in their own ways, and it is no one’s job to thoroughly dispute Laird’s claims to you, except maybe electrologists you go try out. It’s up to you to do your homework and decide which point of view makes the most sense to you personally and which method you’re most comfortable with. It’s not easy because it requires a leap of faith. But ask us when you have questions. Just don’t get pissed if we don’t come running at that very minute.

–susie
p.s. fwiw, i’m getting thermolysis on lip and chin for 15 months now. I started at 60 mins at least once/week. Now I’m down to 15 mins every 2 weeks for clean up in that area and work on some new areas. I chose thermolysis for its speed. It was important for me to get to first clearance asap and be able to look hair-free after every appointment.