although the reviews seem mixed, i was wondering if it was the case that this type of treatment was only likely to show substanital long term effects in conjunction with hormone therapy?
i don’t have a hormonal imbalance, and i would really like to be rid of the hair on my legs, in addition to small amounts of vellus hair in other areas, but it seems from the postings here that this probably isn’t possible - and that, perhaps, for purely cosmetic purposes with no other underlying hormonal issues, this treatment is largely ineffective and is likely to leave residual amounts of hair?
all of the studies that have been done seem to have focussed on women who suffer from hirsuitism - thus any reduction in growth is likely to be welcome? - and it seems likely that this would have proceeded in conjunction with other hormone based therapies?
If you are talking about electrolysis and leg hair…the answer is NO, this type of treatment does not just show substantial long term effects in conjunction with hormone therapy.
For hair growth on hormonally influenced areas such as the face, the treatments work, but balancing hormones helps prevent future NEW growth.
Most electrologists get the opportunity to work on all areas of hair growth. Those that ARE hormonally influenced and those that are mysteriously influenced by genetics/heredity. What we find is that most body (and facial) areas are successfully completed without additional hormonal treatments, but some facial areas do need either hormones (anti-androgens) or life-long clean-ups to keep ahead of the hormonally influenced growth.
One reason you might believe that the reviews are mixed is that more people are going to complain about what didn’t work for them than people posting that they had success. The successes are so grateful for the relief from worrying about the hair growth that they went out and had a life.
The hair that’s presently there can be killed without issues. People with hormonal issues experience continuous development of NEW hair at a fast rate. So that NEW hair needs to be killed, i.e. future touchups are necessary. If you don’t have any issues, then you shouldn’t really need many touchups at all. Leg hair, in fact, is known to lose hair with age. So it’s not really something you need to worry about at all.
Btw for coarse dark dense leg hair, laser is an option as well.
So, if I don’t have a hormonal imbalance, it would seem likely that after I have completed treatments to a stage of full clearance, I would be unlikely to need major remedial work in the future - and certainly not every few moneths, twice a year etc, as it seems to be discussed in the clinical literature (that’s the impression that I got from the extract of Richard’s study that I managed to locate). In the event of regrowth, it would likely be vellus hair, assuming that vellus hair had been present in this area originally - and for other terminal hairs, it would be slower and low frequency? Thanks!
thanks LA Girl! the impression that I got about laser though was that it wasn’t a permanent option though, and that it could only hope to provide temporary reduction in growth, certainly not lasting for more than a few years? the arguement that was used was that chemotherapy for cancer kills hair follicles, but over time they grow back, albeit generally of a different colour, strength and density - and thus thinner. i’m thinking though that if you had chemotherapy enough times, you would probably end up blonde, or bald?
You won’t need any major touchups after either good electrolysis or laser treatments. What you’re reading applies to cases where hair is due to hormonal issues. As I mentioned above, for legs, you really have nothing to worry about. I’ve had 3 lower leg treatments with laser and I killed a good 60-70% of the hair. I’m not even getting more treatments for now (it’s been a year since my last one) since the remaining hair really doesn’t bother me.
I don’t know where you heard any of that, but chemotherapy has absolutely no similarity to hair removal, either with laser or electrolysis. Laser technically does the same thing as electrolysis, i.e. it disables the follicle using heat. The main difference is in HOW the heat is administered. Hair removal lasers work via targeting the dark pigment, which is the hair. So it only works on DARK COARSE DENSE hair. Thermolysis Electrolysis treats hair one by one by inserting a metal probe and thus applying heat directly to the follicle. So it doesn’t matter what color or type the hair is.
I’ve had both laser and electrolysis done on many areas depending on the type of hair I had on each area. They both worked beautifully and both are permanent. I haven’t touched many areas in 2-3 years.
As with anything else, the main thing you need to worry about is finding someone who knows what they’re doing and are using a good machine (and the right one for your skin type when it comes to laser). That’s how you get resultls - permanent results.