which method: shaving first? Not?

I’ve consulted with two different electrologists.
One says she has her clients shave to make sure the hairs are in the right stage.
The other says doing this is not necessary, the hairs can be zapped in any stage.
Is one method scientifically better? Is one more quick or more effective?
I want to start this ASAP, but I’m having a hard time knowing who to go with.
Thank you very much for any feedback on this.

Some of us like shaving first and some want as much hair as possible in area. Some believe that anagen, actively growing hair, is the only treatable hair and some are absolutely positive that hair IN ALL PHASES can be affected permanently.

Depending on the area being treated, I encourage my clients to let the hair grow and leave it untouched - do nothing for a two to three months. If they can’t do this for psychological or aesthetic reasons and they have to shave, I am okay with this, too. We will still get it done.

Hope that gives you some perspective.

I know I’m wrong by saying this, but you should run to the electrologist who told you she can zap hairs in any stage. It tells me the person is knowledgeable and experienced.

Thank you for both of your replies!

Fenix, let me make sure I’m getting this right…the person who said you can zap hairs in ANY stage is the one I SHOULD run to? Sorry, this is all stressing me so much I just have to make sure…

Thank you so much.

I “second” the comment made by “Fenix.” Oh, YES!

Here’s the thing. Sure, we all want to be magnanimous, kind and not ruffle feathers … but the thing, is those that insist “only anagen hairs can be treated” are wrong! There’s no scientific basis of this claim.

All the silliness about “dehydrated skin” etc., is based on old superstitions (excuses?) in electrology. Now, that doesn’t mean they can’t remove your hairs and do a pretty good job of it too. (Actually, if they only treat anagen hairs, they will eventually get you finished.)

You only have to weigh the point that they believe in something that’s false. What does that mean? I don’t know, I’m too busy eating my “wheat grass granola bar!” “Surf’s up dude!”

Does the length of the hair have any impact on ease of insertions? Effectiveness of current to hair root?

Not for me. If there is dense growth and long hair, sometimes I will clip the hair to navigate through the “jungle”. Effectiveness of the current to the hair root in relation to length of hair - no impact.

My probe arsenal consists of Ballet and Laurier probes, by the way. Top quality probes all the way. Kudos to your Dad, Dave.

No science…just a preference and a belief. You will still accomplish your goal.

The length of other hairs can get in the way, depending on the area. Length should have no effect on current application in the follicle.

Hi Barbara, THANKS for the great post! I’m really enjoying this dialogue about “hair stages” and “zapability.”

It’s sort of like this … well, some people believe the world is flat, and some believe the world is round. In reality, if you are driving your car or taking a boat (even a plane), you will still get to your destination; Columbus certainly did!. (Getting to the moon, however, might give you some difficulty.)

Is the “anagen only” belief “that bad?” Yeah, in my view, it is … !

Thanks each of you for your replies.
I am confused now though!
Looking through the forum I came across a post from James, that said hairs need to be anagen to be effectively zapped. That there is a “window of opportunity”, if missed “the hair will come back, though finer.”

Its called orthodoxy. While I have always treated all hairs in the treatment area, there are some things you are supposed to say, no matter if you believe (or know) them to be wrong. For instance, Americans are supposed to say that fire demolishes steel and concrete skyscrapers when any physics student can tell you that is not possible. If however, an American says that one requires a controlled demolition to do that, he is ridiculed and labeled a heretic.

Consider that my repeating what is written in the text books, and thus explaining what you will be told in your consultation and therefore what forms your practitioner’s likely strategy for treating you.

It is not bad, and the way most practitioners don’t do marathon sessions, it is actually irrelevant to the work you will get done.

What is true is that there is a window of opportunity to treat a hair, past which, you won’t see that hair again until next year and any hair that is treated, but comes back, will come back thinner and finer, and any hair that gets spill over treatment will as well.

Linn, I feel your confusion, but have a simple suggestion for you. Have a short treatment with both and based on you experiences,you will be in a better position to chose. Avoid having test sessions on upper lips and eyebrows, as skin on these areas are less forgiving if the treatment isn’t just right. Then come back here again,for further advice. Sometimes a practitioners’ knowledge can be dated, but their skill can be excellent.