Subscribe & Support This Site!
consumer hair removal forum
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
Hop To:
#5749 - 04/30/02 01:36 AM Ripped off by Finally Free!
Andrea Offline
hairtell.com founder
Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 03/22/02
Posts: 4148
Loc: Los Angeles
Thomas sent me the following letter in March:

"Dear Andrea; I bought a finally free ultra, and it does nothing for me. As far as I can tell, it is identical to plucking. The website for the product makes several false claims, including stating that after treatment the hair will glide out of the follicle, which I have not found to be true at all. Thanks"

Sorry to hear you got ripped off, Thomas, and thanks for alerting others!

Top
Sponsored Links
#5750 - 07/21/04 08:10 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free!
Salhope Offline
Member

Registered: 07/21/04
Posts: 2
Loc: Canada
Hi,

I just came by this site recently and I'd like to say first thanks to all the people who put this up [Smile] it's great and very helpful.

I saw this site today too http://www.nevershaveagain.com/info.aspx regarding the product "Finally Free" it says: "Finally Free uses a unique, patented hair removal process, that sends a painless radio frequency wave through the hair, deadening the hair at the root. After a few applications, the hairs are gone for good and will NOT grow back.
"

So has anyone ever used this and had it work for them?

Top
#5751 - 07/21/04 08:51 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free!
Salhope Offline
Member

Registered: 07/21/04
Posts: 2
Loc: Canada
Ops I apologize, I just read some of the other threads regarding this "Finally Free" but just incase, does the radio frequencies do nothing at all to the hair follicles?

Do any of these electric or radio frequency tweezers cause any hair reduction? or thinning and shrinking in size?

Top
#5752 - 07/22/04 12:04 AM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free!
James W. Walker VII Offline

Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 06/03/02
Posts: 8040
Loc: Buffalo NY, & Traveling the US...
Radio frequency can only effect permanent hair removal if a fine wire probe is inserted into the skin and the fm frequency is directed to cause vibrations to create heat energy sufficient to make a temperature of 127 Degrees F. for a second or less. Tweezers obviously won't do this because what ever radio waves it does make are dispelled into the atmosphere.

Radio frequency tweezers never work, and Galvanic tweezers can only make it easier to tweeze out your hairs, while no permanent hair removal takes place.

Top
#5753 - 04/06/04 05:24 PM Money Back From Finally Free
mrguy Offline
Member

Registered: 03/31/04
Posts: 4
Has anybody successfully got a refund from Finally Free or nevershaveagain.com?

I found this site a little to late, and now am trying to get refund but they won't respond to me.

Top
#5754 - 10/18/04 09:47 PM Re: Money Back From Finally Free
Andrea Offline
hairtell.com founder
Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 03/22/02
Posts: 4148
Loc: Los Angeles
They are very good at keeping consumers from getting money back by making it not worth your time for the amount of money involved.
_________________________
Was this helpful? this site is reader-supported. Donate or subscribe today!

Top
#5755 - 10/19/04 01:51 AM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free!
mraj Offline


Registered: 10/19/04
Posts: 8
Hi.

I'm a new member and I have used Finally Free Ultra and I think it has worked. I won't tel u where I have used it but all i want my hair back ther but i can't regrow it there anymore. There are fine hairs there but i want think, deep rooted hairs there. What can i do to get it bak?? It has been around 6 months since i last used it.

Top
#5756 - 10/19/04 02:07 AM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free!
Andrea Offline
hairtell.com founder
Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 03/22/02
Posts: 4148
Loc: Los Angeles
A number of factors affect regrowth time, including the area and your age. We ask people to provide more information than you have in order to make their reports more credible.
_________________________
Was this helpful? this site is reader-supported. Donate or subscribe today!

Top
#5757 - 10/21/04 09:30 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free!
mraj Offline


Registered: 10/19/04
Posts: 8
thank you for the quick reply andrea,

i have used finally free not on private places but somewher where people wouldnt use it. i am male aged 19 years old. i used first exactly a year ago and i want my hair bak.

i have taken after my mum wen it comes to hair becuase she has very thick hair but my dad has thin hair. my mums dad also has very thick hair which he stil has.

i hope thats enough information to go on. if not, is ther anything else i can tel you??

Top
#5758 - 10/22/04 02:38 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free!
mraj Offline


Registered: 10/19/04
Posts: 8
hi andrea

i just realised that i used a very intense halegon light bulb at close range to see what hairs i was plunking with finally free.

Do you think ths may have an affect like a flashlamp perhaps as the halegon light bulb was soo intense at close range??

Top
#5759 - 10/24/04 09:55 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free!
mraj Offline


Registered: 10/19/04
Posts: 8
thank you for the quick reply andrea,

i have used finally free not on private places but somewher where people wouldnt use it. i am male aged 19 years old. i used first exactly a year ago and i want my hair bak.

i have taken after my mum wen it comes to hair becuase she has very thick hair but my dad has thin hair. my mums dad also has very thick hair which he stil has.

i hope thats enough information to go on. if not, is ther anything else i can tel you??

i just realised that i used a very intense halegon light bulb at close range to see what hairs i was plunking with finally free.

Do you think ths may have an affect like a flashlamp perhaps as the halegon light bulb was soo intense at close range??

Regards

Top
#5760 - 11/03/04 04:45 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free!
mraj Offline


Registered: 10/19/04
Posts: 8
Hi...

Please can you read my experience and answer it as best as you can...

I would greatly appriciate this, thank you.

mraj

Top
#5761 - 05/13/05 06:22 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free!
Finogior Offline
Major Contributor

Registered: 12/25/02
Posts: 108
Loc: 15 Bond St.
All electronic tweezers are classified by the FDA as "Quackery!" I was in USA Federal Court for 11 years proving they do not do anything but tweeze hair. FTC agreed with the FDA!

If your wish to understand why hair did not regrow, study the site: ElectrolysisInformation.com Sometimes simple tweezing will remove a hair "follicle"! Don't give credit to the useless machine.

Top
#39220 - 02/10/07 08:10 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free! [Re: mraj]
Michie_Lee Offline
Member

Registered: 02/10/07
Posts: 2
Wasn't it time consuming to remove the hair with Finally free?
Do you feel that you're lucky that it worked for you bc i read a lot of comments saying that Finally Free did not work for them.

Top
#39221 - 02/10/07 08:12 PM Re: Money Back From Finally Free [Re: mrguy]
Michie_Lee Offline
Member

Registered: 02/10/07
Posts: 2
 Originally Posted By: mrguy
Has anybody successfully got a refund from Finally Free or nevershaveagain.com?

I found this site a little to late, and now am trying to get refund but they won't respond to me.

Did you respond to them within 30 days of purchasing Finally Free?

Top
#39305 - 02/14/07 10:54 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free! [Re: mraj]
bobbi Offline
Member

Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 1
How many of your members have actually used the Finally Free device? I recently located it on-line & was thinking of ordering it when I stumbled upon your website. I would like to hear from both satisfied and dissatisfied customers so that I can make a more informed decision. If it truely does not work, what will????? Thanks for any replys!

Top
#39306 - 02/15/07 12:11 AM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free! [Re: bobbi]
dfahey Offline

Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 10/27/03
Posts: 9556
Loc: Columbus, Ohio
This question is asked weekly,or at least it feels like it.Please read all the posts above yours.

Bottom line is: electronic tweezers do not work. Save your money. Put your effort, time and money into professional electrolysis of laser, depending on your needs. That's what works if you want permanent hair removal/reduction.

Visit http://www.hairfacts.com and you will see all kinds of useful information. Specifically, type in Finally Free in the search box and see what pops up. Here are some examples to start you off:

Hairfacts: Mehl/Group MarketingOn 14 November 2001, I received a note from Greg Gilbert of Finally Free ... Mehl was the owner of the Finally Free hair removal appliance described below. ...
http://www.hairfacts.com/makers/etweezer/mehlgrp.html - Similar pages

Hairfacts: SLS BiophileMehl receives FDA clearance to sell his electric tweezer, Finally Free. 1985. Mehl sells Mehl International and his Finally Free electric tweezer to Selvac. ...
http://www.hairfacts.com/makers/laser/mehl.html - Similar pages

Hairfacts: Hair removal scams and misinformationAfter a long career selling electric tweezers as permanent under the names Finally Free and Forever Free, Mehl branched out into lasers. ...
http://www.hairfacts.com/scams.html - Similar pages

Hairfacts: Frequently-asked hair removal questionsFinally Free Ultra: An electric tweezer scam that uses a transdermal patch. Forever Free: An electric tweezer scam that uses a transdermal patch. ...
http://www.hairfacts.com/feedback/faq.html - Similar pages

Hairfacts: "Transcutaneous hair removal" manufacturers (WARNING!)Finally Free Ultra. X. X. X. $80.00. Was this helpful? Support this site! Still have questions? Ask them at my free HairTell hair removal forum! ...
http://www.hairfacts.com/makers/transcutmfr.html - Similar pages

Hairfacts: Hair removal facts for consumersHair removal facts for consumers. Entirely free. ... Finally Free/nevershaveagain.com (WARNING!) arrow consumer complaints ...
http://www.hairfacts.com/ - Similar pages

Hairfacts: Hair removal terms: FFinally Free: is a brand of electric tweezer. Fingers. Fischer: manufactures a professional electrolysis machine. Flash thermolysis. Follicle. Folliculitis ...
http://www.hairfacts.com/terms/termsf.html - Similar pages

Hairfacts: Electric tweezer manufacturersFinally Free. Global TV Concepts. Sonique Hair Remover Feminique Sonic Hair Remover. Mobit. Emjoi Beauty [?] Wellquest International. Dapelle Hair Remover ...
http://www.hairfacts.com/makers/etwezmfr.html - Similar pages

Hairfacts: FDA 510(k) clearance: Tweezer-type epilatorsFinally Free, Mehl/Group Marketing, 10/22/97, K972695. IGIA System, IGIA Direct, 07/01/97, K970338. Epi 2, Universal Hair Removal System, 02/11/97, K935706 ...
http://www.hairfacts.com/govregs/fda/kcx510k.html - Similar pages

2.0 link0 HairFactsWiki - Recent changes [en] link1 Track the most ...... font-size: smaller;">Finally Free Electrolysis</td><td>+</td><td ... '''</span>Finally Free Electrolysis<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">, ...
http://www.hairfacts.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges&hideanons=1&feed=rss - Supplemental Result - Similar pages


_________________________
Dee Fahey, R.N., C.T.
Licensed by the State Medical Board of Ohio for Nursing license and Cosmetic Therapy/Electrolysis license
_____________________
ELECTROLYSIS FAQ'S:

British Institute & Association of Electrolysis

http://www.electrolysis.co.uk/?page_id=16

Top
#39309 - 02/15/07 02:16 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free! [Re: dfahey]
James W. Walker VII Offline

Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 06/03/02
Posts: 8040
Loc: Buffalo NY, & Traveling the US...
Duh, yeah, but does it work? Or are you just an electrolysis professional protecting your turf trying to misinform the public?
(that is a joke folks)
_________________________
http://www.executiveclearance.com/beforeandafter.html
Setting a goal is not the main thing. It is deciding how you will go about achieving it and staying with that plan. --- Tom Landry
Has this site helped you? Pay it forward. Donate to keep HairTell & Hairfacts Online at http://www.hairfacts.com/feedback/support-this-site/

Top
#74891 - 05/28/10 07:04 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free! [Re: James W. Walker VII]
MarkB Offline
Member

Registered: 05/05/10
Posts: 3
I'm a rep for Finally Free. I've already responded to one thread here, but would like to specifically address the two major concerns I see coming up in this one.

a.) We are working to improve our customer service to be more timely and helpful. We've also upgraded our FAQ section to include videos to show helpful tips on how to use the product.

b.) Finally Free is not an "electric" tweezer. It operates with radio wave technology and does NOT need to be inserted by needle into the hair follicle.

We have also created a page with links and other useful information to help clarify various questions consumers have. If you would like more information you can try nevershaveagain.com

Thank you!


Edited by Andrea (10/30/12 07:00 PM)
Edit Reason: rm link

Top
#74896 - 05/28/10 07:17 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free! [Re: MarkB]
James W. Walker VII Offline

Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 06/03/02
Posts: 8040
Loc: Buffalo NY, & Traveling the US...
When the Finally Free/Never Shave Again product is described as electric tweezers, it is because it is a tweezer device hooked up to an electrical machine. There are two types of these, one that delivers galvanic current from the item that contacts the hair, and another type that sends FM signals from the item that contacts the hair. In any case, no permanent hair removal takes place unless this system involves contact between the current, or radio frequency via direct contact of the bulge area of the follicle and the instrument delivering the current. This is because the treatment energy is otherwise dispersed into the air, or surface skin, rather than delivering the packet of energy to the hair's growth cells.

If the FF/NSA were powerful enough to work with simply sending radio frequency energy with a focused downward force into the skin, it would be thermodesiccating holes in the skin as well.
________
_________________________
http://www.executiveclearance.com/beforeandafter.html
Setting a goal is not the main thing. It is deciding how you will go about achieving it and staying with that plan. --- Tom Landry
Has this site helped you? Pay it forward. Donate to keep HairTell & Hairfacts Online at http://www.hairfacts.com/feedback/support-this-site/

Top
#74897 - 05/28/10 07:23 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free! [Re: James W. Walker VII]
MagicalPrincessKitty Offline
Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 09/01/09
Posts: 897
Loc: California
James is right. But I would like to add that I appreciate you identifying yourself as a Finally Free representative instead of pretending to be a consumer or scientist or someone unbiased.
_________________________
3.5 laser sessions on lower legs starting 09/24/09 (GentleLASE)
3 laser sessions on bikini starting 01/15/10 (GentleLASE)
1 laser session on underarms starting 07/02/10 (GentleLASE)
1 laser session on right arm starting 07/02/10 (GenteLASE)
6.75 hrs electrolysis on tummy starting 01/07/10 (Apilus Platinum, picoflash)
10 hrs electrolysis on arms starting 01/30/10 (Apilus Platinum, synchro/picoflash)
37.25 hrs DIY electrolysis on left arm (OneTouch and Instantron)
1.75 hrs DIY electrolysis on tummy (Instantron, thermolysis)

Top
#74907 - 05/28/10 11:35 PM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free! [Re: James W. Walker VII]
dfahey Offline

Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 10/27/03
Posts: 9556
Loc: Columbus, Ohio
The science associated with permanent hair removal doesn't match the hyperbole.
_________________________
Dee Fahey, R.N., C.T.
Licensed by the State Medical Board of Ohio for Nursing license and Cosmetic Therapy/Electrolysis license
_____________________
ELECTROLYSIS FAQ'S:

British Institute & Association of Electrolysis

http://www.electrolysis.co.uk/?page_id=16

Top
#74909 - 05/29/10 12:02 AM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free! [Re: MarkB]
dfahey Offline

Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 10/27/03
Posts: 9556
Loc: Columbus, Ohio
Is this information related to your product? It is dated, but I ask, is anything here related or pertinent to your product now in 2010? I don't see the word "approved" by the FDA in this link. Can you provide a source?


http://www.hairfacts.com/makers/etweezer/mehlgroup-marketing/
_________________________
Dee Fahey, R.N., C.T.
Licensed by the State Medical Board of Ohio for Nursing license and Cosmetic Therapy/Electrolysis license
_____________________
ELECTROLYSIS FAQ'S:

British Institute & Association of Electrolysis

http://www.electrolysis.co.uk/?page_id=16

Top
#74913 - 05/29/10 03:55 AM Re: Ripped off by Finally Free! [Re: dfahey]
dfahey Offline

Top 10 Contributor

Registered: 10/27/03
Posts: 9556
Loc: Columbus, Ohio
Just checked the FDA site. It seems that your link to the FDA showing "approval" was not totally reported. Here is some extra information I copied and pasted that was not included on your website. Note the highlighted red part. I am seeing FDA APPROVED boldly stated on your website, but nowhere do I see this on the FDA website. Did you mean to say cleared by the FDA? I think this means that the FDA is saying that the product is reasonably safe, but in no way are they endorsing it for permanent hair removal. I think your website is misleading and you really should take corrective action. It would be in the interest of the consumer to do this.
Here is the complete link: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/98fr/102698a.txt

And here is the part I chose to copy and paste:



SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In the Federal Register of June 11, 1997 (62 FR 31771), FDA issued
a proposed rule to reclassify the tweezer-type epilator from class III
to class I based on new information respecting such device. FDA also
proposed to exempt the device from premarket notification procedures.
Interested persons were given until September 9, 1997, to comment
on the proposed rule. During the comment period, FDA received 10
comments. One comment supported the proposed reclassification from class III to class I without providing any specific reason for endorsing the proposed reclassification. Nine comments were opposed to the proposed reclassification.
1. Two comments raised concerns about the device's safety. They
stated that the device could cause burns and scars on the skin if it
was improperly manufactured or used. One of these comments mistakenly
believed that FDA was also proposing that the device be exempt from the
current good manufacturing practices (CGMP's) regulation.
FDA agrees that improper manufacturing and use of the device could
result in burns and scars on the skin. FDA also is clarifying for the
record that the device was not proposed to be exempt from the CGMP's
regulation (21 CFR part 820). FDA, however, believes that these risks
can be controlled by general controls such as the CGMP requirements and
labeling requirements.
2. Eight comments (from professional associations, a professional
magazine, practitioners, a former patient, and a manufacturer) opposed
reclassification because they believe the device is not effective in
permanently removing unwanted hair. Four of these eight comments stated
that there are no published scientific data demonstrating that the
device permanently destroys hair. Three of these comments stated that
hair is a dielectric material, i.e., a nonconductor of electricity so
that it is impossible for electricity to descend through the hair to
the dermal papilla and destroy it. Two of these three comments stated
that there is no evidence that the device destroys the dermal papilla
of hair. Another comment indicated that the effectiveness claims for
the device are anecdotal and that there is much information that the
device is ineffective.
FDA acknowledges that the published literature contains no evidence
of statistically significant data showing that the device is effective
in achieving permanent removal of hair. In the proposed rule, FDA
described the one published study using the device (Ref. 1) that
reported that the difference in the hair counts before and after
treatment was not significant. Also in the proposed rule, the agency
described the results of two unpublished studies (Refs. 2 and 3) and
evaluated these results as being only suggestive of effectiveness in
permanently removing hair. Thus, FDA agrees with the comments that
there is no body of significant information establishing the
effectiveness of the device to permanently remove hair.
FDA, however,
still believes that the device can be reclassified into class I,
because claims for the device can be addressed by the misbranding
provision of section 502 of the act (21 U.S.C. 352).
3. Three comments stated that the first sentence of the revised
identification statement that ``the tweezer-type epilator is a device
intended to remove hair by destroying the papilla of a hair'' is
misleading because the phrase ``destroying the papilla of a hair'' is
equivalent to stating the device permanently removes hair. They pointed
out that this phrase is part of the identification statement of another
device intended to remove hair, the needle epilator, 21 CFR 878.5350.
Although there is no universally accepted medical definition of
what constitutes permanent removal of hair, FDA acknowledges that the
phrase ``destroying the papilla of a hair'' is widely accepted by many
to be equivalent to stating the device permanently removes hair. FDA
now believes that the use of this phrase in the device identification
statement was inaccurate, and in this final rule, is removing this
phrase from the device identification.
4. Six comments related to the promotional material for the device.
They stated that this material frequently contains false and misleading
claims, specifically that the device is effective for permanent or
long-term removal of hair. Five of these six comments also stressed
that it is FDA's duty to protect the public from false and misleading
claims regarding a product's effectiveness and that reclassification
into class I could increase the number of such claims.
FDA takes seriously its responsibility to protect the public from
false and misleading claims about a product's effectiveness; however,
false and misleading claims may be controlled by

[[Page 57060]]

a general control, namely the misbranding provision of section 502 of
the act. Additionally, FDA acknowledges that there is no statistically
significant scientific data available at this time to support
promotional claims of permanent or long-term removal of hair through
use of the device.

II. FDA's Conclusion

FDA has concluded based on review of the available information that
use of the tweezer-type epilator removes hair and that use of the
device does not present a potential unreasonable risk to the public
health. FDA has also concluded that general controls would provide
reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device, and
therefore, the device should be regulated as a class I device.
On November 21, 1997, the President signed FDAMA into law. Section
206 of FDAMA, in part, added a new section 510(l) to the act (21 U.S.C.
360(l)). Under section 501 of FDAMA, new section 510(l) became
effective on February 19, 1998. New section 510(l) provides that a
class I device is exempt from the premarket notification requirement
under section 510(k) of the act, unless the device is intended for a
use which is of substantial importance in preventing impairment of
human health or it presents a potential unreasonable risk of illness
injury (hereafter ``reserved criteria''). FDA has determined that the
device does not meet the reserved criteria, and, therefore, it is
exempt from the premarket notification requirements.
FDA also notes that 21 CFR 878.9(a), Limitations of exemptions from
section 510(k) of the act, requires manufacturers to submit a premarket
notification for any tweezer-type epilator whose intended use is
different from the intended use of legally marketed tweezer-type
epilators.

_________________________
Dee Fahey, R.N., C.T.
Licensed by the State Medical Board of Ohio for Nursing license and Cosmetic Therapy/Electrolysis license
_____________________
ELECTROLYSIS FAQ'S:

British Institute & Association of Electrolysis

http://www.electrolysis.co.uk/?page_id=16

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >

Moderator:  Andrea 
Sponsored Links
Recent Posts
KREE imperial ? Galvanic epilator help
by Tommy750e
Yesterday at 11:54 PM
dearly departed zapper's family needs donations
by Iluv2zap
Yesterday at 10:47 PM
Local anaesthetic
by Pained
Yesterday at 02:43 PM
Selling My Silhouet-Tone St250
by templje
Yesterday at 08:24 AM
Tweezers
by Iluv2zap
Yesterday at 12:15 AM
Top Posters
LAgirl 9994
dfahey 9556
James W. Walker VII 8039
Andrea 4148
Michael Bono 3110
Who's Online
0 registered (), 96 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod