Although both protocols would work, I am a big fan of getting the job done in one zap. It leads to a potential of faster completion of the final clearance, as one would do more hairs per hour, if no thing else.
One of the reasons that I am not a fan of the double zap is that it opens the door even wider to overtreatment. Lets say that the amount of treatment energy needed to perfectly treat a follicle is 7 units concentrated in the lower portion of the hair structure. A two zap artist might hit it with two shots of 5 unit packets of energy, which will hurt more because the first shot dehydrates the follicle, leaving less moisture for the second shot to work with.
Again, both will work, but I like the simplicity of the one shot deal. My clients appreciate the comfort of that protocol as well.
If the hair doesn’t slide out easily without resistance after one zap and needs to be zapped again, the insertion may have been not perfect the first time.
Hi Inuk,
You can’t determine if the one zap or more zap techniques are more aggressive or not. There are too many variables involved.
Have you thought about giving each of the electrologists a section to treat, just for a few minutes, somewhere else on your body, to see who is doing a better job for you?
Note to James:
When I use insulated, I still pulse at different depths but when I use gold non-ins., I just zap once. How do you feel about insulated probes? Do you ever feel the need to resort to them?
I used to do a treatment with an insulated, stainless and gold probe during each initial consultation. The clients always chose the gold probe for their comfort. Now I don’t bother to wast the probes. I had only one client who found the insulated probes to be more comfortable, and I finished that person ten years ago. I have not purchased an insulated probe in a LONG time. The Laurier samples I am now using to compare now, are the only ones I have had since the set I got with my Platinum.
So, no, I don’t feel the need to resort to insulated probes.