Questions about Tweezing, Waxing, etc...and Laser.

Hair Removal Methods Laser hair removal
21

Not to keep this going too much longer, but I was wondering if you were referring to the pink statement below that I got off this forum as well as the CEF,Arlene?

Since you are an instructor of electrolysis,what would you add or delete here if you could to make this fair and balanced? I agree that there is a lot of laughable stuff said about electrolysis “out there” that doesn’t come close to the truth as far as what the majority of practitioners can do time-wise and area-wise. I also understand your specific frustration with the the history section, or lack of it, but lagirl did not write the whole website. As you already understand, a laser supported website is not going to put a competitor in a good light and I’ve seen electrolysis websites that don’t put laser in a good light. It’s just human behavior at it finest.

Do you think this paragraph could be improved or is it fine as is for public viewing? I would respect your opinion on this.

[color:#CC66CC]“Electrolysis is considered a permanent hair removal method that has been used for the past 125 years. It involves treating one hair at a time and can take a considerably long time to complete a large area, but IS an option as well. It is also the recommended method for small areas (generally, chin, upper lip, eyebrows, etc), as well as for fine and light-colored hair. The most cost-efficient treatments to completely clear an area should start with laser to remove the bulk of the hair and finish with electrolysis to remove the remaining finer sparse hair.”[/color]

22

I sure know what I would change about this:

The most cost-efficient treatments to completely clear an area should start with laser to remove the bulk of the hair and finish with electrolysis to remove the remaining finer sparse hair."

Would become:

A possible cost-efficient treatment to completely clear an area could start with laser to remove the bulk of the hair, but this depends on whether the client sought an effective LHR technician and whether they respond to it well. The hair is best then finished with electrolysis to remove the remaining finer sparse hair."

…There’s just too many people that get ineffective light-based treatments or just don’t respond well to make such a statement as the original, we all know that here.

This statement:

Electrolysis is an alternative to laser hair removal. Sometimes this is a good choice for candidates that have very light skin and gray hair.

Just makes me laugh. Yeah, they’re showing their true spots here. Electrolysis has been established for 130 years, laser has been around with marginal results for just few years. C’mon, who’s really the new kid on the block here trying to fit in? And the word ‘Sometimes’ is best applied to laser, not electrolysis. Electrolysis has a strong, proven foundation. It’s laser that will work sometimes, and sometimes not. It is, in fact, a biased statement. As is their little history cartoon that says '20 century art and literature. What!!?? It’s proven in scientific journals in the 1800’s.

What all these forums, techicians, clients, and sponsors need to realize are BASIC leadership fundementals. Fairness, an equal voice, and not short changing any camp, will win the day and strengthen your position. Most of these people have yet to learn that.

I see the whole thing as very needy; The laser camp needs to identify with electrolysis. Electrolysis has history and success. It’s established. Laser, trying to get validity in the public’s eye’s is going to repeatedly bring electrolysis into their descriptions and comparisons, then attempt to explain why they think they are better. They need electrolysis. If they didn’t then by now they would just never say a thing about it. Really, every new hair removal form kicks the electrolysis camp. Whether it’s the No! No!, Stop!, laser’s, creams, rotary epilators, or whatever, even hand-held One Touch units, They need to transfer the credibility somehow to their own product.

Electrology on the otherhand, hasn’t got it’s collective sh*t together for 130 years. And knitting circles that throw parties once a year shouldn’t be confused with an actual, effective regulatory body. I honestly think they should have professionalized their discipline more. They should have fought for all states to be regulated, make it more centrally controlled, and promoted the opening of more schools. Now they’re paying for all that becuase they have a half-baked profession trying to ward off the AMA-fueled giant that the LHR industry is. What the AEA (here I go again) needs to do is concentrateon their own house, get their own profession organized, stop worrying about LHR. Yes, LHR is going to lie, republicans lie, democrats lie, the oil industry lies, the bottled water industry lies. It’s part of America; deceiving to make yourself look good. …okay my coffee wore off, i’m tired enough of this post.

23

Arlene, the best thing you can do is send a private message to “ladyelaine” who is affiliated with the company that runs that site. I honestly do not have the time to come up with new content and deal with this at this point. But you’re definitely welcome to send them what you already have and see if they will edit the content. I’m all for it of course.

Dee, is that quote from the FAQs? It’s been a couple years since those were written and I used some outside sources. It’s not a problem to edit. Just need to email it in to Andrea here and to the other site’s administrator. I don’t have direct access to change any of that myself. So it’s a bit of a hassle. I’ll try to go over the information in the entire FAQs in the next month or so and send in all edits at once since there are definitely more updates that need to be made anyways after many things we’ve learned here on the forums etc in the last 2 years.

24

Yes, lagirl, that is a quote from the FAQ’s and it could use some refining and updating. Thanks again for your cooperation here. You were great in the past about deleting some things that were a problem, so I appreciate your efforts once again. Maybe James, Arlene and I can collaborate on this, since my word should not be the last word about electrolysis. And thanks to you Mantaray for your input as well, I liked a lot of what you said.

Words do have meaning and that is especially true for both sides of laser and electrolysis story. I appreciate the value of each modality, and would think it appropriate to be as exact as possible with how we describe what each can do. This makes hairtell and CEF more valuable to the consumer, and consumers appreciate value and honesty.

Later… Oh and Mike856nj, we haven’t forgotten you. We stray off subject from time to time. Are you still out there? Any more questions?

Dee

25

Other than Mantaray’s response which is completely off the deep end, what exactly is wrong with this statement? I see it as being fairly balanced and reasonable.

26

First, a very minor point that would be easy to correct without controversy: electrolysis has been around for 132 years. That’s when Dr. Michel first published his findings (1875) regarding permanently removing ingrown eyelashes with a battery powered direct current needle epilator. If we care to get even more (picky) technical, we could actually count the years he was doing this before he published his paper. That would make electrolysis 139 years old.(1868)

I have a concern with describing electrolysis as something that ‘takes a considerably long time to complete’. More appointments are necessary, but the time to completion is not accurate.

For those that are not well-trained in the art and science of performing electrolysis, yes, it may very well take a considerably long time to complete a large area, ESPECIALLY if the electrologist has not updated to the better tools of the 21 century. Thus, we always plead for the newbies to sample different electrologists in their area, if they are lucky to have several. Likewise, it is recommended that consumer newbies shop around for the best laser for their skin type and laserologist for their hair removal needs.

For a well-trained skilled electrologist, with up-to-date computerized epilators, large areas are not a problem, unless you think a year to 18 months is a long time. I would assume that you do not think this is a long time since you said that lasing an area can take 1-1 /2 years to complete. We all have to deal with those hair growth cycles whether we perform electrolysis or laser.

As a practicing electrologist, I routinely do mens backs, womens bikini lines and I’m working on a woman’s lower legs now. She will be finished in less than a year at the rate we are going. I can hardly restrain myself to tell you that I will finish a mans back,shoulders and upper arms that was quite dense, within a year. You see, there are many electrologists that can handle any area, large or small, but many times the public is told that electrolysis should be restricted to small areas. So I have a problem with the term “considerable long time”. That leaves the neophyte consumer reading this to ask, “How long is a long time?”. Some consumers will assume 5 years, some will assume 3 years when in actuality, it is the same time as laser and then they have to deal with laser’s diminishing returns dead end. That’s when the client has to spend even more money to fine tune an area with electrolysis. So, it may not always be more cost efficient to start with laser and end with electrolysis.

Many electrologists are in the unique position to see the laser failures because they come to us for help and a suspicious eye about whether we can end their unwanted hair problem… that is, if they have any money left after failed laser attempts. We also rejoice with the clients that have had wonderful laser results, but are seeing us for unrelated areas where they want electrolysis.

This is not an attack on lagirl for what she wrote. What she wrote, on her own time, doesn’t even come close to most of the vicious stuff I have read about electrolysis. I have said and will say again, that lagirl does a wonderful job here and other places. She is so committed to helping the hairy and anyone who critisizes her should jump in and take her place and spend the time and effort to help out on the level she does. I’ll bet actual money that know one could even come close to what she offers. She is amazing.

In conclusion, I wouldn’t describe Mantaray as completely off the deep end. He offered some wording that sounds pretty gosh darn reasonable to me.

If you were an electrologist and you knew your trade very well, I think your ears would straighten up tall and wide everytime you repeatedly heard others using descriptions that were not accurate.

I guess we need an electrolysis FAQ’s sticky here on hairtell. I’m sure if I wrote it by myself, I would get blasted by others that think I could have said something better. So, for now, what lagirl has written will do. As I said before, it is not vicious and it is reasonable, for now, concerning electrolysis.

Thanks,

Dee

27

There is no such thing as the perfect phrase. Everything can be interpreted one way or the other. But I think the comment “considerably long time to complete” is essentially correct. And I totally agree with you that the time to completion is the same between the two modalities. It may be even longer for laser hair removal as it helps to wait longer between treatments.

Let’s say that it takes you 30 hours over a period of a year to pretty effectively treat a set of underarms. I’m sure there is quite a bit of plus/minus to this. If I am off on an order of magnitude, please correct me.

Let’s say that I can effectively treat a set of underarms in 3 hours over a period of 18 months. And I’m pretty confident of that time. By the way, neither time takes into account travel time or waiting in the waiting room. Just the time being prepped and treated.

Now I would argue that if you ask the average consumer which takes longer to complete, that most people would think that “30 hours of my time versus 3 hours of my time” as being longer. Regardless of whether it takes an extra 6 months or so.

Talking to consumers and trying to get a sense of what makes them chose one option over another, I would say that the time commitment of electrolysis is a major issue. And one that I am sure that all electrologists struggle with their customers. I don’t doubt that electrolysis would be a more preferred solution if the time commitment was smaller. Or in other words, if it took less time to complete.

28

Other than Mantaray’s response which is completely off the deep end

Just out of curiosity, what is your medical background?

Ibuprofen (Motrin/Advil) is better for your liver because it is metabolized in the kidney.

so this is the real story not an idle speculation.

Obviously, you have an agenda. Which is fine. Just please be honest about it.

I’m not sure what you are talking about. And I would like to think that I am not particularily stupid.

What I think you are trying to say, is that IPL is better because it can be tailored to the hair

…etc., etc.

Andrea, I really make an effort to steer clear of sslhr. Although he almost predictably posts negative, instigative comments after my posts, frequently misunderstands them and requests credentials (that would probably make him more upset, rather than satisfied. Yes, I was a certified member of the AMA, that’s: American Medical Association.), posts things that really aren’t helpful but just negative or inaccurate, I do my best to be peaceful here. Please note that his behavior is getting more on the flaming side, rather than the community side of things.

Frequently, I’ll read a post on this board, and I would rather disagree. But, that’s okay. Everyone is entitled to a voice if they keep it constructive. My solution is that I just don’t follow the post. I answer the initial post, and leave it at that. I think the intelligence of the initial poster is sufficient that, if two people answer a post, they can be intelligent enough to follow the advice they think would benefit them best. If a third or fourth poster chimes in, all the better for accumulated knowledge. I don’t try arguing the other poster with inflammatory remarks.

Please tell sslhr that if my posts upset him, then don’t read them.

Thank You,

Mantaray

29

If I could give my opinion here, I would have say that I disagree. We need various opinions here. I read all those posts and all those statements are very reasonable and constructive given the content that you wrote to which he was responding. They were not argumentative in any way. SSLHR stated that he is a physician and has 10 years of experience with LHR. The evidence is there since we know exactly who he is. I think it’s fair for him to ask what your medical background is given that you discuss medical content on this board and the readers have no way to judge if it’s fact or conjecture. It’s helpful to have someone who has a backround in this to give an opinion as well. I think the main reason you don’t respond is because most of the time he supports his argument well and he is right. For example, I remember you made a conjecture about a reform of LHR state laws and SSLHR clarified what actually happened because he is involved in it personally. I don’t think you replied when you could have said “thanks for clarifying. my conjecture wasn’t correct”. It’s understandable that some people just don’t like to be wrong, but this is an open board and if someone’s statement is well-supported and not argumentative (just to start something), I personally don’t see what the problem is. I think everyone reading SSLHR’s posts would agree that they are always informative, well-supported and unbiased. I always welcome it when he corrects my posts because he has much more experience on the subject and he supports his statements with evidence.

30

You can give your opinion but it doesn’t mean it’s true or correct. This wouldn’t be the first time. I remember that you once dispensed advice for LHR, yet mistakenly refered to nanometers as the power level of a laser.

There’s nothing wrong with giving an opinion, but when a poster makes a habit of continously following another’s with negative remarks, then it becomes a problem. It’s no surprise that you support him. Afterall, you both post on a pro-laser, laser sponsored web site’s forum. It’s clear that it is beneficial to you to minimize his targeted hostilities. Maybe we should look at the bigger picture here, is this just a tag team effort to debase all who do not agree with you two? It doesn’t matter if you wish to deny hostilities, they are there. They are there and it is negative. Also, this sslhr has never posted that I have seen (not that I care) that he is in fact an MD, Medical Doctor, educated here in the United States of America. I don’t flaunt that fact about my credentials because frankly, I don’t care what you wish to believe. Nothing you believe will change my life whatsoever. Whatever you are convinced of, whatever you doubt, whatever you hold in contempt. It’s not important to me to give out details of my life over the internet to convince anyone of anything.

I look at facts. If somebody makes one of the scientific statements as some noted above, they are pretty much kidding themselves if they wish to come across as a Medical Doctor, and that goes for rubbing vasaline on burns as well.

As for supporting his arguement, that’s simply not true. He continues to bluff with statements about recalling allergy rates off the top of his head, referencing articles that really do not pertain to what he is saying nor back it up, and grossly misunderstanding, and interjecting his opinion when it was never called for. Now please, speak your opinion, but back off on this “deep end” or “kidneys metabolizing” nonsense. It’s just plain uncalled for.

Mantaray

31

I too have come to the point where I just post once in a string, and don’t bother repeating, or following up on things that would be simply restating and nitpicking over facts and opinions.

Be assured that anyone on the board who gets testy gets a letter admonishing them to watch the attitude, and keep things to the point of the discussion and stay clear of personal attacks.

One of the largest problems with what we discuss here is there is so much clashing information, De-Bunking and Re-Bunking of the facts. It is possible to find a study that supports eating chocolate to reduce hair growth if you look hard enough. Those of us who are in the trenches are left to discuss real world results, and try to explain the faults in the pseudo-science and why a study that looks at 5 people over the course of 6 weeks is as good as not having done anything at all.

We have to put the information out here, and hope that those with diligence will read enough of the site to get some info, and those who don’t… well, I guess the devils will take the hind most. We really can’t have these ongoing tennis matches all over the board.

We have to hope that people who read enough of the board get the gist of the whole Long Term Hair Reduction vs Permanent Hair Removal definitions, we have to hope they understand the turn of a phrase such as Longer Completion Time vs. Total Appointment Time and can find a place in there to consider the coinciding monetary bet one places when selecting a hair removal method.

If you can gamble, you invest in business start ups and futures markets. Should you hit a winner, you strike it rich overnight, but should you lose, you lose BIG. If you your portfolio is “risk adverse” you stick with certificates of deposit, money market funds, and other insured, assured investements. You don’t make a killing in your sleep, but you don’t lose your investement, and one does receive a stable return on investment.

32

Mantaray, the bottom line is that this back and forth is useless. You’re once again throwing out bs to sway readers without any facts to support it. I’m not going to get into yet another futile discussion of who is unbiased here.

The “truth” that you’re talking about is blantantly obvious to anyone who reads both of our posts regularly. My positive laser and electrolysis stories are linked right below my name. Yours aren’t. If you did that, everyone would be clear on where your conclusions (i.e. bias) come from since you would have to post a negative story about laser and a positive one about electrolysis. The only biased person here with an agenda has been you.

It’s unfortunate - I was actually going to point out that you have become more unbiased in your posts lately. However, this thread doesn’t speak much for that now.

p.s. Just to clarify, I refer to joules as power, not nm. No need to make things up to attempt to support your point.

p.p.s. Hopefully James can just lock this thread now. It’s truly not helpful to anyone and unnecessary.

33

It’s not a matter of locking threads, it’s a matter of developing enough mutual respect so that threads do not have to be locked, and the whole point of my post is that I do not like going back and forth. The whole point of my post is that things need to be kept on the positive. That’s the whole issue, uncalled for remarks. They do nothing to help anybody. If you look at the listed posts, you’ll see that I most certainly do avoid back and forth. It’s very, very clear.

As for posting a link below my name, why? They can review my posts anytime they like. It’s not necessary. I believe the common user is smart enough to use a search button and seek those answers.

Mantaray, the bottom line is that this back and forth is useless. You’re once again throwing out bs to sway readers without any facts to support it. I’m not going to get into yet another futile discussion of who is unbiased here.

I think you have included yourself in this thread by your own free will, and by your own free will have decided to call my posts ‘bs’. This is not part of the solution as well. I merely want to see more positivity. Let others read the posts, let them decide. My experiences, views, results, and education speak for themselves.

Thank You,

Mantaray

34

Yes indeed. Sparks do fly when Mantaray and lagirl interact. Some of us here have already discussed it among ourselves and we would like to see the two of you go out on a date, oh, and we think that Mantaray should pay, no dutch. We know that the common bond here is unwanted hair so please, we ask you both, to leave the tweezers at home.

Keep us posted.

35

Let me jump in here in the spirit of cooperation.

The problem I see is that you tend to jump into discussions and make pretty brash statements. And my impression is that you tend to promote electrolysis (which is fine) but you seem to do it by putting down laser hair removal. Which isn’t fine when you make statements that I think are false. But one thing I try hard not to do is to make personal attacks, and if I have, I apologize. You on the other hand, throw bombs all over the place and never seem to give a straight answer. Let me give you an example.

In response to my asking you what was your medical background.

and requests credentials (that would probably make him more upset, rather than satisfied. Yes, I was a certified member of the AMA, that’s: American Medical Association.)

Why not just give a straight answer? Me? I graduated from medical school in 1982 from the University of Texas at Houston.

Here is another example.

posts things that really aren’t helpful but just negative or inaccurate

He continues to bluff with statements about recalling allergy rates off the top of his head, referencing articles that really do not pertain to what he is saying nor back it up

Please point out what I am saying that is negative, inaccurate, or not referencing an article properly. If I am wrong, I’m happy to admit it.

And just to set the record straight, you seemed to be concerned about this.

they are pretty much kidding themselves if they wish to come across as a Medical Doctor, and that goes for rubbing vasaline on burns as well . . . “kidneys metabolizing” nonsense.

In reference to a discussion about ibuprofen metabolism and your point that the kidneys can’t metabolize anything or something likt that.

From just a quick google search.
From http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic/ibup_cp.htm
“Ibuprofen is rapidly metabolized and eliminated in the urine. The excretion of ibuprofen is virtually complete 24 hours after the last dose. The serum half-life is 1.8 to 2.0 hours.”

How about Pathological and biochemical modifications of renal function in ibuprofen-induced interstitial nephritis - PubMed
“Moreover, levels of renal 2-arylpropionyl-CoA epimerase, a key enzyme involved in the metabolic inversion of ibuprofen, showed a significant reduction, which may result from the massive destruction of the tubular cells in these animals. These results support the premise that renal insufficiency is a prerequisite factor for ibuprofen-induced interstitial nephritis.”

There are two references. I could give you more. Please find a reference that states that ibuprofen is not metabolized in the kidney. Though I will give you that there is some liver metabolism that also occurs.

And about putting vasoline on burns, here is what Wikipedia says. There are plenty of other references if you would like. “Vaseline’s effectiveness stems from its sealing effect on cuts and burns, which inhibits germs from getting into the wound and keeps the injured area supple by preventing the skin’s moisture from evaporating.”

Listen, I’m willing to end this discussion. You can have the last word. But when you make posts I am going to point out your errors and call you on your facts, if I think you are saying something wrong. I owe that to people who are reading and don’t know what to believe. You can do the same to me.

But rather than responding to my questions with ad hominen attacks, just support statements with facts. So if you are going to say that I am wrong about stating that one should put vasoline on a burn please quote a reference that says that. But don’t say that it is nonsense when it is a recommended practice that a quick google search can prove.

36

Lord knows I don’t want to be triangulated into a fire fight, but the burn thing is a point that would inflame many.

According to The American Academy of Family Physicians:
“Do not put butter, OIL, ice or ice water on burns. This can cause more damage to the skin… Soak the burn in cool water. Then treat it with a skin care product like aloe vera… or antibiotic ointment… check with your doctor… use any Rx prescribed… 3rd Degree burns require immediate Emergency Room Care.”
http://familydoctor.org/638.xml

Electrolysis and LASER after care is the same as burn care because one is treating an intentional heat burn, and, or chemical burn. This is why so many use Witch Hazel and Aloe Vera right away, and Tea Tree Oil overnight.

One other reason I was given for not using petroleum based products on burns is that although they may seal the area, they not only hold in heat one wants to dissipate, but they tend to catch and hold both germs and ambient debris as time goes by. Since that info came from a conversation, I can’t show a link to that.

As to the lockdown request. It seems to me that everyone is finding their inner adult, and the points of contention have been discussed, and hopefully all have learned something that will help them in going forward and making more effective and informative posts. We don’t mind disagreements around here (you should have been there for the no disqualifications grudge match Andrea and I had over the “Is electrolysis 100% effective or not?” issue) but we do insist that our people try to manage to stay in a point, counter point kind of informative style.

Some people don’t like it when a point that they are trying to make is taken up as something that should always come with an asterisks that is helpfully affixed by some “post-stalker”, but depending on what that point is, the import of that asterisks becomes more or less intense.

Recently, Mr. NoHair announced that he was leaving us for good because he did not like people making a point to counterpoint his insistence that electrolysis is something that anybody can do at home, and so is building an electrolysis machine at home. I would have hoped that he would have just seen the logic in the stats that show that first, not everyone can understand the directions to do either, and the cost of mistakes in learning either skill could be damaging. Finally, I found it strange that someone who was always lobbying that people include both drive time and time spent in the treatment chair when figuring their electrolysis treatment times could not see that it still came down to a difference between a self worker who can do 1 to 3 hairs per minute, versus a professional who could do 4 to 30 hairs per minute depending on skill and modality utilized.

If the professional can treat even one hair more per minute than you can at home, that gives one as much, or more hairs done in the total timeframe AND provides better quality work at the same time.

He just did not like the fact that even if I did not point that out, someone else on the board would. Those who do have the ability and dedication to learn and perform both tasks have my salute to them. Even so, those who do this will find that the work they perform on others is of better quality than what they do on themselves. Thus, the official advise of this web site, “It is best to get a partner and both learn how to do it, and trade work on each other.”

I hope that this illustration has been helpful.

In conclusion, Electrolysis and Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation can co-exist. However, people need to understand that they are not the same thing, and they each have limitations. Some of those limitations overlap, others do not. In the end, it seems to be another classic race between the same ole Tortoise and yet another Hare.

37

The way all this started about vasoline was because I commented on the fact that it was better to use vasoline or some other petrolatum product than to use a triple antibiotic ointment. The reality is that there is an allergic component to antiobiotic creams, especially those that contain sulfa drugs. And that’s how we got started on that.

One of the things about medicine is that there is no right answer, mostly because the body tends to heal itself regardless of what we do. So you tend to find that one can do the same thing many different ways. And that it is very difficult to tease the right answer out of the literature, especially if you don’t have the background necessary to understand the differences between different approaches. And if you think this is an argument you should go to a medical meeting with different specialties and really hear the heated arguments.

As far as the vasoline stuff: First the discussion was never about putting vasoline on a new burn. Absolutely I agree that you don’t want to put on a greasy solution that will trap heat. The first goal is to let the burn cool down. But after awhile, the next goal is to help the skin heal. And you do that by retaining moisture in the skin so as to prevent a scab. And that is where vasoline comes in. You can do the same thing with antibiotic ointment, but you risk a reaction and it has a cost. And of course, one never puts any kind of ointment on a dirty wound, you have to clean it first.

Again, if you go and talk to a lot of family practice docs, they will tend to lean on antibiotic creams and ointments. That is sort of the mindset of the specialty. If you talk to dermatologists, they will recommend that you clean the wound and use petrolatum. You decide which you want to believe. But remember they both will work. And here is an article I was able to find on line (it is difficult to quote textsbooks here because they aren’t on line) from the family practice literature about wound care which is what we are talking about. And this is using bacitracin which has no sulfa products.

“The authors cite white petrolatum’s lower cost ($0.74 per 15 g versus $2.18 per 15 g for bacitracin), similar incidence of infection and degree of healing, and lower incidence of allergic reactions as reasons for advocating use of white petrolatum for wound care after ambulatory surgery.”
White petroleum vs. bacitracin for postoperative wound care - adapted from the Journal of the American Medical Association 1996;276:972-7 - Tips from Other Journals
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3225/is_n8_v54/ai_18989476

Finally, I completely agree with your point that the two modalities of permanent hair removal (and both are permanent) complement each other. It is silly to be arguing over which is better.

38

One other point. I think these kinds of discussion (arguments) do the public and readers good. It points out that there isn’t just one answer and it helps them to understand that everyone has a point of view and an approach to how they do what they do.

I think each of us should do three things and this includes me. 1. Not be afraid to state our opinions and back them up with facts, experience, and references when necessary. 2. Be open to being mistaken or learning a better way. and 3. (and most important) don’t make this or take this personally. It isn’t a value judgement about the quality of any of us as human beings.

39

Hey you guys, regarding petrolatum - petroleum jelly - vasoline, please note that bacteria can not survive in it. Since I see so many references to vasoline harboring bacteria at this website, let me know where that source comes from as it just isn’t so.

40

I agree. I also apologize for commenting on something without knowing fully what you all were talking about.

Seems we have a working agreement here.