Does having IPL first make electrolysis work faster?

cashferret

I've had 20 fortnightly sessions so far of electrolysis to permanently remove facial hair and although it's improved things, I still have quite a few dark, coarse hairs still reappearing.

From what I've read on the net (suprisingly poor data), it can take between 1 and 4 years to destroy all the hairs, with probably an average of 2 years. So I have a lot more time, expense and pain to go!

I have mid-brown hair and pale skin so would be a good candidate for IPL but didn't want to use a non-permanent method.

However, I've been reading up on Philips's Lunea (a home IPL device) and although it's clear it's not for permanent hair removal, it seems that sometimes, hair regrowth is finer.

I'm wondering whether it would make any sense to use a device like the Lunea for half a dozen sessions and then tackle the regrowth with electrolysis. I'm wondering if the hair would be weakened by the IPL and easier to kill with the electrolysis.

However, the IPL works by putting the hair in the rest phase so I'm not sure that IPL does anything to make the hair actually weaker. I'm surprised it doesn't just grow back as heavily as before as soon as you stop using it.

Does anyone know whether using IPL would make electrolysis kill the hair faster?

londonsurrey

I think it would. The Boots Smooth Skin actually kills off hairs, with 7-10 joules of power. The others, like the Lumea, are lower power, and just put the hairs into a resting phase.

cashferret

londonsurrey wrote: »

I think it would. The Boots Smooth Skin actually kills off hairs, with 7-10 joules of power. The others, like the Lumea, are lower power, and just put the hairs into a resting phase.

Thanks for this - one of the Amazon reviews of the Lumea mentioned the Boots Smooth Skin but when I went to the Boots site, it's not there. I can see some secondhand ones on Ebay. I can't tell what is official Boots blurb vs the sellers' version but some are describing it as "permanent hair reduction". On the product description of the Lumea on its Amazon page, it seems to be saying that this phrase means a permanent reduction in the number of hairs but that you've still got loads left. It says:

"Neither professional nor at-home light-based hair removal treatments can deliver permanent hair removal. Due to the hair growth cycle, light-based treatments are usually done in a series of sessions. Hairs that may have been dormant during your previous treatment may now be in the growth phase. With both professional and at-home treatments, hairs usually reappear after time, typically with a reduced amount or finer version. For professional treatment, maintenance sessions once or twice a year are often recommended. Philips Lumea uses a lower intensity than the professional treatments, but using it more regularly gives you breakthrough results at home.

Some competitors claim ‘permanent hair reduction’. According to the FDA (Richard Felten, FDA regulator responsible for light-based epilation) "Permanent hair reduction is defined as the long-term, stable reduction in the number of hairs regrowing after a treatment regime. Permanent hair reduction does not necessarily imply the elimination of all hairs in the treatment area." Unfortunately, most consumers mistake ‘permanent hair reduction’ (which can mean only 40% reduction, which would be an unsatisfactory result) for ‘permanent hair removal’, which is a myth.

So I'm not sure what to make of the Boots device. I wonder why Boots stopped doing it?

I wish all of these products would be tested on 100 people or so before they're released with full data on the extent of hair reduction! Amazed it's not the law for this kind of stuff.

cashferret

Oops, sorry, just found the new version of the Boots thing on their site - weird it was so hard to find, didn't come up using the search function but found it using the menu system.

It's called the Smooth Skin Plus and costs £400:

http://www.boots.com/en/Boots-Smooth-Skin-PLUS-Intense-pulsed-light-permanent-hair-reduction-_1160101/

cashferret

Just been reading up on the Boots thing's FAQs and it says:

"Boots Smooth Skin PLUS is considered permanent hair reduction. This means that the successfully treated follicle should not produce any new hair. However, dormant follicles can produce new hair due to hormonal changes, so no IPL or laser system can claim total permanent hair removal."

Interesting! I've already spent a painful (both senses) £400 on electrolysis so maybe I should get one of these off Ebay and give it a go. You have to buy a new head after 10,000 firings and they're very expensive (can't find that page quickly but £170 or so?).

cashferret

Have been reading yet more - I chased along the comments from one of the Amazon reviews and found a helpful comparison of the Lumea and Boots thing on a blog called beautyscribbler.com, here:

http://www.beautyscribbler.com/2011/05/boots-smooth-skin-ipulse-plus-new-and.html

Am seriously considering jacking in the electrolysis for a while and trying the Boots thing.

Thanks again!

londonsurrey

I've got the old version of the Smooth Skin, and am relatively happy with it. Quite envious of people getting the new version!

M.Holloway

If you have dark hair you would be a much better candidate for Nd:YAG laser hair removal.

It's a medical-grade laser, IPL is really just a fancy lightbulb that is not particularly effective.

You can get Nd:YAG laser hair removal in Hounslow.

Also a home IPL machine is going to be EVEN less effective than a salon version.