My question relates to treating a vellus hair that at a later date would become terminal hair.
If a hair is effectively treated as a vellus hair, does that mean that the same follicle is unable to produce a terminal hair?
For example a younger male may have a large number of vellus hairs but does no want to wait for them to become terminal. Does treating them as vellus hairs “nip them in the bud”, so to speak?
Or if you treat the vellus hair follicle, can it still produce a terminal hair later?
Thx
I would say that once a hair follicle is disabled, it will be disabled forever, no matter what the hair structure.
It’s really a matter of judgment.
A seasoned electrologist will be able to predict which vellus hairs will enlarge and which will not, given the man’s (or woman’s) age and ethnicity (and relative onset of the hair pattern development). Indeed, with this last “big case,” I spent a lot of time taking-out pre-terminal vellus hairs (the boy is only 20, so more hair is “on the way.”) By the way, I LIKE your term, thanks! I will be using this term from now on.
However, there were areas on this male client that will never go “vellus to terminal” and to treat those microscopic hairs would have been a complete waste of time. Also interesting is that several areas on both men and women will “retrograde” over time … So, in a sense, it’s useless to spend too much time removing even the large terminal hairs in these specific areas. (Take a look at an old man’s legs some time. Hairless! And HIDEOUS too!!!)
The human body is not static and we change progressively both internally and externally. Indeed, skin health is a reflection of overall health and a big reason we spend so much time keeping it beautiful. Skin is our most important “sexual organ.”
Again, thanks very much for your noteworthy comment. I learn a LOT from clients and you have set my “withered little brain” thinking about this. This was good!
BTW … I think Dee’s comment was 100% correct, as always.
Thanks for your responses.