Why Laser Really Does(Not) Work

Hair Removal Methods Laser hair removal
#21

I was reading your post and i totally agree, laser hair removal and different results for everyone based on many variables. While I am waiting for companies like sirna, photoderma SA or questpharmatech to come out with a better product (I think that take a much less riskier idea to hair removal and one with the potential to target specific hairs at the follicular level, rather than shooting a bunch at skin level and hoping some follicles catch fire.)

With that being said, I believe that the main problem with LHR is its inabilitly to get to the follicle. If you can’t wait, for the time being I suggest trying or finding out if someone as tried aesthera’s new ppx laser. It use a vacuum type device to suck up the skin and make it easier to get to the individual hairs. Hopefully this does a little to help eliminate some of the depth of hair follicle problems.

So I guess I am asking if anyone has used it and offering it out there for you others to research and see if its for you

website- www.aesthera.com

#22

Not sure I follow the logic on that…

If we are agreeing that the problem they’re looking to solve is with the depth of the follicle and getting the laser to penetrate to the base with enough intensity to destory/cauterize the follicle, then how does a vacuum help? That would pull all of the skin in the area up…yes the follicle would be pulled up, but so would the surrounding skin, potentially even worsening the problem as the surrounding tissue is generally more malleable and will be pulled preferentially upwards, effectively deepening the follicle for the critical point of the application of the laser.

#23

I’ve been using a GentleLASE at near the maximium settings (18 J/cm2, 18mm spot size)

IS that the maximum settings? My tech just put me up to 16 J at the 18MM spot size.

I’ve felt like such a sissy because everyone is talking about Joules in the 20s and 30s. My tech appears to know what she is doing and I ask questions and she answers.

My results have been pretty good. Upper lip hair appears to be mostly gone other than a bit at each end. This is after 4 treatments.

Chin hair - I still have some. Under the neck, the patch of black hair that was the size of a half dollar came back much lighter. I could have lived with it (if it’s almost invisible, it’s not a problem! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> ) but we’ll see what happens after the treatment I just had.

I have 10 gray hairs on the chin which’ll have to be electrolysis.

I’m ready to move on to the underarms (I had one treatment there.)

So for me, laser has worked reasonably well. Not all the hair is gone, but what I went in for (the patch on the neck) is at the very least not visible to others and I don’t have to shave it. The upper lip results have been excellent.

My youngest is having her upper lip done, like Mom, she is very dark haired.

I would not have recommended it had I thought it was a bad deal or not working.

I guess it’s different for everyone and one must have realistic expectations. I’m lucky in that I got a good tech and I didn’t go to one of those big ripoff clinics.

#24

At an 18mm spot size, the maximum setting on the GentleLASE is 20 J/cm2. As near as I can tell, that’s reserved for albinos with no central nervous system <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

The spot size determines the maximum fluence. The main thing to remember is that you’re after maximizing the energy delivered to the base of the follicle (and not going so far as to burn the skin in the surrounding area).

Fluence = J/cm2

J = energy…you may be better able to visualize it as:

Watts = J/s

So for fluence, you’re talking about a certain number of Watts being applied over time. Longer time, greater wattage, higher fluence. Similarly, the fluence is averaged over the area applied – increase the area, you decrease the fluence.

Area = pi*r2 – it increased with the square of the radius.

The math does not entirely work out when you drop the spot size (decrease the radius) with the max setting that you can then achieve. The piece that is missing is that the 18mm spot size, for some reason that I’m not entirely clear on currently (anyone care to help out?) is able to attain a deeper depth into the skin without losing intensity – i.e. it’s not absorbed by the skin as quickly as smaller spot sizes. Once you factor that bit in (I’ve seen statements that a 15mm spot size only delivers 92% of its intensity 4mm beneath the surface of the skin or something like that), the actual energy that you are imparting with the 18mm spot size is higher than lower spot sizes.

#25

various lasers penetrate at different levels, and that’s also why the settings are adjustable. the higher the spot size, the deeper it penetrates. so as your hair is getting finer, they should be lowering the spot size and increasing joules. 20 joules is max on the laser you’re using with a 18mm spot size, but if they change it to 15mm, you can go up to 30. i started with 14-16 joules at 18mm and went up to 30 joules with 15mm on finer hair.

electrologists don’t insert the probe into the entire follicle till they hit the root. the heat/chemical from the probe shoots down to the root.

Yes, I’m always questioning the settings if someone says the treatment was confortable. different skin reacts differently, but generally, you should have redness at least for a few hours and redness around the follicles for up to several days.

#26

I think that’s the part I’m still trying to work out the science behind – do you know why larger spot sizes tend to penetrate deeper? I’m not questioning it, really (I’ve seen too many scientific papers/analyses that take it as a point of fact), but I’m unclear as to the physics behind it.

#27

electrologists don’t insert the probe into the entire follicle till they hit the root. the heat/chemical from the probe shoots down to the root.

Since that quote is a little fuzzy on meaning, and I can’t quite figure out what you wanted to convey, allow me to just point out that well performed electrolysis actually places the probe/needle into the follicle, and discharges treatment energy at the base of the follicle, and ends the reach of that treatment energy someplace between the bulge and the anchor of the follicle. Treatment energy should not travel above the anchor, as that would cause unwanted, unneeded tissue injury. An electrolysis insertion that doesn’t go to the bottom of the follicle is referred to by professionals with terms like, shallow insertion, improper insertion, blow out, skin blanching, pitting and so on.

#28

Since that quote is a little fuzzy on meaning, and I can’t quite figure out what you wanted to convey, allow me to just point out that well performed electrolysis actually places the probe/needle into the follicle, and discharges treatment energy at the base of the follicle, and ends the reach of that treatment energy someplace between the bulge and the anchor of the follicle. Treatment energy should not travel above the anchor, as that would cause unwanted, unneeded tissue injury. An electrolysis insertion that doesn’t go to the bottom of the follicle is referred to by professionals with terms like, shallow insertion, improper insertion, blow out, skin blanching, pitting and so on.

OK…that helps. So, from this, I take it that you would be able to determine on someone that they had very deep-seated hairs versus shallow hairs? Or is the difference generally too fine to detect?

#29

A good electrologist would know the depth of one’s follicles, as one needs to know how deep to insert the probe. I have had clients whose follicles took the entire probe length. For that matter, my own facial hairs were that deep when I began receiving electrolysis treatments.

#30

I think that’s the part I’m still trying to work out the science behind – do you know why larger spot sizes tend to penetrate deeper? I’m not questioning it, really (I’ve seen too many scientific papers/analyses that take it as a point of fact), but I’m unclear as to the physics behind it.

this has been discussed a few times. check out cosmetic enhancements forum and read sslhr’s posts. he is very good at explaining the science behind it.

#31

A good electrologist would know the depth of one’s follicles, as one needs to know how deep to insert the probe. I have had clients whose follicles took the entire probe length. For that matter, my own facial hairs were that deep when I began receiving electrolysis treatments.

Cool!

Now (assuming you don’t mind me asking a few more questions):

You seem to have a sizable amount of experience in electrolysis from what I’ve been reading. You also seem to have seen a goodly number of people for whom LHR has not worked, which may give us some rather good data points.

On those individuals that you would normally assume to be ideal LHR candidates (light skin, dark har, yadda yadda), have you found the areas that did not respond to LHR to have deeper follicles? This is still just conjecture on my part (with a touch of theory tossed in)…so I’m curious to see if any empirical data supports it.

#32

As much as I would like to launch into a long answer to your question, if I train my skills on the question as asked, the only answer I can give is that I can not answer the question as asked, because a good answer to that question would require that I have at least a consultation and sample treatment on the person prior to their first Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation treatment. This would be the only way that I would know the state of their original untouched follicular depth.

Although I have spoken to some people prior to their LASER work, most people don’t come to see me until after they are already $3,000 or more in the hole on their LASER treatments, and dissatisfied with the results.

#33

Interesting…are you saying that LHR could change the follicle depth?

#34

I tried the Aesthera. I had some reduction with it but it was far outperformed by the Cutera ProWave 770 IPL. The PPx from Aesthera is an IPL not a laser. It only has a maximum setting of 10J. The PPx did absoultely nothing on my beard. My practitioner said other clients complained about it not working at all.

Laser hair removal is painful. Pain varies by body part but you definitely should feel it. If you don’t feel any pain I would say that you were undertreated.

To answer another question, larger spot sizes penetrate more deeply as there is less light scatter. Check out the bottom of this page for an illustration.

http://www.radiancy.com/int/lhehair.htm

I’m not recommending the device though, just the illustration. Never been treated with SkinStation but have not heard good things about it.

If a follicle is not totally destroyed, it may produce vellus (finer hair) instead of terminal (coarse hair).

My experience has been any regrowth that happens will do so in 2-3 months. After that it remains stable at that amount. If the remaining hair is too fine, it will not be effectively treated with laser.

RJC2001

#35

OK…that helps a lot on the spot size.

Basically talking about “surface area” – any light that scatters outside of the spot is considered “lost” and really has no effect. If it scatters internally to the spot, it’s still in play and doing what it was intended to do.

So a larger spot size gives you a greater area with proportionally less of a perimeter (same as saying greater volume with less surface area…just in 2 dimensions).

Thanks for the link!

#36

Laser hair removal is painful. Pain varies by body part but you definitely should feel it. If you don’t feel any pain I would say that you were undertreated.

Couldn’t agree more on the pain varying by body part <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Back of the fingers was (surprisingly) far and away the worst for me.

#37

Interesting…are you saying that LHR could change the follicle depth?

I am not saying that. This thread has requested to be a scientific study based on measurable or experiential observations. My reply pointed out that I could not answer your question because I can not refer to a study that looked into this question, nor have I probed a person prior and subsequent to L.A.S.E.R work. Therefore, I can offer nothing to this discussion in that way.

What I CAN say from observation is that one person I saw at a party and talked with about his options went from having long thick straight hairs to having thick hairs curled over with a shingling effect on the skin surrounding his follicles. All follicles in the treated area became distorted in a curled fashion. That, in addition to the shingling effect made electrolysis 3 to 4 times slower than it would have been had he done electrolysis without ever having had L.A.S.E.R., so in his case, it was an epic disaster.

#38

Out of curiosity, were you able to determine the direction in which the follicles were distorted? e.g. they were curled upwards in the direction of the surface of the skin, or downwards, away from the surface…or was it just random?

I ask because the main mechanism that I can see for that is a singularly poor setting on the laser – one which was able to cause some damage to one side of a somewhat laterally-facing follicle and not as much to the other.

#39

Thinking about it more, an effect akin to the vacuum device described earlier in this thread (coupled with poor fluence settings) could do the same thing.

#40

James, I’m wondering, have you had an electrolysis clients who DID get results from laser treatments? Dee says she has both, some with amazing results, some with ok, some with none, and some with more hair that what they started with on a woman’s face usually. What has your personal experience been?