Electrolysis/LASER should damage skin per research

“The new finding suggests that any form of hair removal that damages the follicles could impair the long-term health of the skin by depriving the area of its stem cells.”

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0CE5DC153EF93BA2575BC0A9669C8B63

Do we know what the skin of someone who had his/her beard permanently removed 20-30 years ago looks like at the moment?
I assume the answer is that for some reason, the stem cells do not get damaged when the follicle root is destroyed. Interesting nonetheless.

Most of us long time electrolysis practitioners have had work done on ourselves, and have friends and clients we have known for years, and can vouch that they just look like they have no facial hair where they once had it.

Certainly, the first person I brought to full clearance 20 years ago looks no worse for the wear, but then again, I have not done DNA testing, Collagen studies, nor controlled for smoking, environmental impacts, and sun damage, so my observations won’t mean much to you.

Well… I can testify with my hand over my heart, on the word of God, that I had electrolysis and full hair removal on my arms and legs over three decades ago and all looks smooth and lovely. I even had the worse temporary reaction you can imagine with huge scabs and redness that lasted for weeks to months. I had electrolysis on facial areas as well and the only sign that I had some damage is on a small part of my upper lip that I can see when I look into a 10X magnification mirror. It is not obvious to people looking at me head on.

If I had been a smoker, drinker, sun worshiper, hard-core living kind of gal, I suppose any skin reaction I had would have been blamed on electrolysis instead of my lifestyle.

What must the heat of laser be doing to people? I’m sorry your subject title did not say
"Laser and Electrolysis Should Damage Skin Per Research? Would you be amenable to having the subject changed, Tembo? James or Andrea could do this in the name of fairness.

No problem change the title. Laser permanent damage/cancer etc… are well known concerns brought up by many people.

Electrolysis permanent damage is generally not brought up so thats why I posted that link in the electrolysis section.

It has only been about 15 years for myself, but again Dee, my results are similar to yours. What I was taught was that the cells around the bulge were Re-generative hair cells. These cells come from Stem Cells but can only differentiate into hair. If it is true that they can differentiate into other types of cells, then they have the capacity to differentiate into any type of cell in the body. Not just hair or skin.
One point to make is that the research was not observed in humans. It may are may not work the same in our bodies. If what the article says is true in humans, then in reality, one could clone a new human from just a patch of skin.

Thanks, Tembo. I will contact James or Andrea and ask them to make that subject more specific, since both laser and electrolysis can destroy the hair growing tissue with heat. I’m not sure they will agree to change this, so we will see.

I’m not so sure we want to pin the word “cancer” to laser. This has been ballyhooed here numerous time, but we don’t have any definite well-designed studies to prove such a statement. We want to be fair to the laser industry as well.

Thanks for posting the article.

Dee

There hsa been no conclusive evidence thst laser causes skin cancer and the science behind laser would suggest that as well.

Laser light is completley different to others such as UV light, which is known for causing skin cancer and generally is the primarty cause in the majroity of cases. I have had laser over my moles, and I have quite a few larger ones on my back a lot of small ones on my upper arms and legs - yet nothing has come of it, they are all reasonably healthy. I am also more vulnerable to skin cancer, especially as my father was diagnosed with it back in 1997.

This is just my observation though, but I’ve yet to find a study or a case where someone has developed cancer as a result of laser hair removal. Laser has been around for around 10 years now and is one of the most popular non-invasive cosmetic treatments around, so if this were the case - why has it not been highlighted?

Just my thoughts.

Regards,
Benji

Tembo.

One very important sentence has been left out of your original post, which I have copied and pasted now that I have had the time to carefully persue the article instead of skimming the article.

You quoted this line from the article:

“The new finding suggests that any form of hair removal that damages the follicles could impair the long-term health of the skin by depriving the area of its stem cells.”

You failed to quote the next sentence after that:

“Dr. Stenn said that electrolysis, for instance, destroys follicles. But dermatologists do not know why the skin generally seems to escape damage in these circumstances.”

I have asked the moderator to change the subject title of this thread to include the word “Laser”. Thanks for giving permission to do so. This thread should also appear in the Laser forum as well, if you are listening James. We want information to be fair and complete so consumers that read this site know that people are presenting all relevant information.

I liked this article and have added it to my files. Thanks again for bringing it to light.

Dee

There are no cancer concerns with regards to laser brought up by anyone who knows anything about how hair removal lasers work or has any experience in the industry. What you probably meant to say is that the concerns are brought up by new consumers who first start doing research and are asking the question merely based on random things they heard about various things in the world nowdays causing cancer. There is absolutely no evidence or thought that hair removal lasers can or have contributed to any cancers. We have yet to see anyone complain about any permanent skin damage from laser. Everything has been temporary.

And there ARE posts here complaining of damage to the skin from bad electrolysis treatments. Bad treatments for anything for that matter can cause permanent damage. Waxing can cause permanent skin burns for example.

We really need to start to get into a habit of distinguishing potential side effects from bad treatments to side effects from good treatments (which are basically none).

And I don’t think there is any real way to judge damage to the skin 20-30 years later unless you only treat one side of someone’s face for example and leave the other untouched. Otherwise, there is absolutely no way to know what this particular person’s skin would have looked like in 20-30 yrs without any electrolysis. As James mentioned, if someone is a smoker, the effects of electrolysis, if any at all, would be very hard to associate with electrolysis vs their bad habits.

Yes I agree that lhr causing cancer is unlikely, but it gets brought up in discussions, just like mobile phones and microwaves causing cancer keeps coming up in spite of no evidence.

No-one ever postulates that electrolysis causes cancer.

Because it doesn’t. It’s been around for over 130 years in all forms. does that sound impressive enough? If we haven’t heard about it causing cancer yet, then how much longer do we have to hold our breath?

Well how on earth can you prove that electrolysis or laser hair removal caused skin cancer in someone ten years down the road? Most people who get skin cancer assume automatically that its the sun or some chemical, genetics etc… No-one would ever suspect electrolysis or laser hair removal.

There are entire hospitals and universities, and many non-profit organizations, dedicated to finding the cure and also the cause for various cancers. That’s how we know about those that do cause it. There IS evidence for cell phones causing potential issues, and mostly due to the fact that there is RADIATION that’s actually associated with using a cell phone. So to your point, there has to be something in whatever you’re attributing to potentially causing cancer, i.e. radiation for example. Laser hair removal lasers operate on a completely different laser wavelength, as do LASIK lasers for example. Just because something is called a “laser” doesn’t mean it produces harmful radiation. And yes, it has been well known for a while which radiation is harmful. For example, the one that comes from the sun to which you probably expose your skin daily. People are still tanning on their beach vacations and tanning salons haven’t gone out of business even when it is 100% clear that those things actually have an impact. It’s ridiculous to scare people about something that’s completely unsubstantiated. Your only reason seems to be the fact that it is called a “laser”.

Tembo, to answer your question…

I think doctors would have to ask every basil cell, squamous cell and melanoma patient if they ever had electrolysis or laser in the area where the cancer started.
Doctors look for patterns and register certain observations with local health boards or the FDA. Maybe there are other ways these patterns are noticed and reported, I’m not an expert.

The Article discussed appears below:

Hair Follicles Identified as Probable Home of Skin’s Stem Cells
By NICHOLAS WADE
Published: August 18, 2000
Maybe it is not like discovering a new bone in the human body. But researchers have learned a new fact about human anatomy that could prove just as interesting: the hideout of the source cells that replace those lost every day from wear and tear on the skin.

Those source, or stem, cells turn out to be lurking in the roots of the hair. The finding, if confirmed, could lead to a better understanding of how the skin heals as well as to insights into basal cell carcinoma, a common skin cancer.

Hair follicles, small pockets in the skin from which the hair shaft sprouts, occur in varying density throughout the human skin, except in the palms, soles, foreskin and labia. Even in bald scalps, hair follicles are present and healthy but just arrested in midcycle.

It had already been known that a small bulge on the side of the follicle, just below the surface of the skin, houses stem cells that migrate down to the follicle root and repopulate the hair-making cells. But researchers report in today’s issue of Cell the surprising finding that the bulge is also home to stem cells for the skin.

These epidermal stem cells migrate up from the bulge into the surrounding skin, the researchers say. Given the general spacing of hair follicles in human skin, a stem cell need only migrate one tenth of an inch to cover half the distance to the neighboring follicle.

The senior authors of the study are Dr. Tung-Tien Sun of the New York University School of Medicine and Dr. Robert M. Lavker of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine. The two dermatologists have worked together in search of skin and other stem cells for 20 years.

Their experiment tracking the exodus of stem cells from the follicle bulge was done in mice. But human follicles also have a bulge and it seems likely this is a source of skin cells in people too, said Dr. Elaine Fuchs, a skin biologist at the University of Chicago. Still, there could be other sources of stem cells in human skin, Dr. Fuchs said, particularly in the regions without hair follicles.

She described the work as a ‘‘very important finding’’ because it localized the skin’s stem cell compartment and showed that the stem cells in the bulge are pluripotent, meaning they can develop either into hair cells or skin cells.

Most of the body’s cells have assumed their final, mature form, and if they divide at all will produce two identical daughter cells. Stem cells, when they divide, produce daughter cells that can either remain as stem cells or develop into mature cells of the relevant type. This means the population of stem cells is continually replenished, acting as permanent reservoir for replacing damaged tissue cells.

Recent discoveries about stem cells in other tissues suggest that the cells are remarkably versatile and that, with the right signals, one kind of stem cell can be converted into another. If stem cells should become an important way of helping to repair the body’s tissues, as many biologists hope, the bulge of a patient’s hair follicles would be a particularly convenient source.

Dr. Kurt S. Stenn, director of the skin biology research laboratory of Johnson & Johnson in Skillman, N.J., said that the new study was convincing and would advance the use of stem cells for healing the skin because the source of the cells was now known.

Dr. Lavker said he and Dr. Sun had not yet formally proved that a single cell could make either hair or skin. But he said he believed that if the cells in the bulge received a signal to generate skin cells they would migrate up into the skin; if the cue was to generate hair, they would migrate down into the base of the follicle. The relevant cues have not yet been identified.

The new finding suggests that any form of hair removal that damages the follicles could impair the long-term health of the skin by depriving the area of its stem cells.

Dr. Stenn said that electrolysis, for instance, destroys follicles. But dermatologists do not know why the skin generally seems to escape damage in these circumstances.

Dr. Lavker said his work may help explain basal cell carcinoma, a skin cancer caused by ultra-violet light. The light cannot reach the stem cells in their deep-set bulge but it can derange the stem cell’s descendants as they migrate closer to the surface. Dr. Lavker said he believed that these light-damaged cells, which have considerable capacity to proliferate, initiated the cancer.

Biologists do not yet understand the widely varying qualities and distribution of human hair. There is an evolutionary advantage in having no follicles on the palms or soles, Dr. Stenn suggested, because grip is improved by having no hair there.

But how nature arranges for this outcome is not yet known. Dr. Lavker said the copious sweat glands found in the palms and soles are probably the site of these region’s stem cells.

Yet there are still problems, or at least there are in England, with getting liability cover for treating moles with electrolysis. The world is a much more cautious being now than it previously was - hey, in the 40’s people were using X-rays for hair removal :o

Regards,
Benji

I treat hairy moles all the time with electrolysis, with a doctors prescription, and clients are elated witht the end results. I don’t think doctors will ever understand electrolysis.