Editorial
(September 2002)
Past Editorials
Technology; it’s a wonderful thing. In the late 1600’s the first
projector came into being, the precursor to the “magic lantern.” To see images
appear, from a basic light source or lantern, was “magical” in those early days.
The development of photography in the mid-1800s made it possible to produce
black-and-white images on glass in great numbers, and after that came color
tints. Now we use digital cameras, laptop computers and power-point
presentations with laser pointers — and we call it technology, not magic.
It seems that the only solution to the challenges of today is more and newer
technology. My teenage children have the same philosophy with schoolwork. Always
looking for the quick fix, they hop on the internet, cut and paste an essay
together from various websites, and presto, assignment done. Time to play! How a
school assignment was completed used to be part of the learning process, but you
have to wonder how much our children benefit from today’s fast-track solutions.
Modern high-speed technology has also radically changed the way teachers teach.
Gone is the time when they were able to read students’ work and detect what is
plagiarized and what is original. But not to be outdone, teachers are now
sending students home with notes warning parents of web services like
www.plagiarism.org that are being used
by the school to provide “Document Source Analysis.” This is a program that uses
a set of powerful algorithms to create a ‘digital fingerprint’ of any text
document submitted, cross-references it with local databases containing hundreds
of thousands of papers, at the same time scouring the entire internet for all
possible matches. A custom, color-coded “originality report,” complete with
source links for each paper is then sent back to the teacher. The cycle
continues: cheaters beware.
In the hair removal business, it seems the hair never comes out quick enough to
meet modern expectations, and there appears to be no end to the number of
high-technology solutions to this problem. In the last seven years or so
electrologists have seen the introduction of countless new light-based hair
reduction devices come on the scene, all designed to speed up the epilation
process and elevate the electrology profession. However, being “new,” it has
taken us some time to learn which of these devices, if any, have lasting value
for our industry.
Before we can evaluate photoepilation devices, it is necessary that we
understand the principles they work on — i.e. we have to understand light
itself, and move on from there to laser light. In this issue of Hair Route, we
present the first of a two-part article on “Light and Lasers in Hair Removal,”
in which Linda Edsell examines radiant energy and the currently popular
flashlamp hair reduction systems. Then in our December issue, Ms. Edsell will
take an in-depth look at the other, more powerful method of hair removal, the
laser.
Now, just when we thought we were ahead of the game, a news release promoting
the latest hi-tech marvel lands on our editorial desk; it’s the SpaTouch
PhotoEpilation System. This is the so-called “unique Light and Heat Energy (LHE)
device,” that has just been cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for
marketing as a non-laser, flashlamp machine for the removal of unwanted hair
at-home by the patient [see page 19].
Radiancy, Inc., the maker of the SpaTouch says, “Hair growth is reduced with
heat generated at its light source, at low-light-energy fluences, thus avoiding
the risks associated with high energy lasers.” And this is followed up with
clichés such as “High-tech hair removal is a multi-billion dollar business,”
“fastest-growing cosmetic procedure,” “ease of use,” and now, “ideal for
patients to use at home.” Strangely, the promotional material says nothing about
the system’s efficacy in the removal of hair.
Yes, generally speaking, technology is a wonderful thing. But the line that
separates the modern high-tech do-it-yourself-at-home flashlamp device from the
old magic lantern is getting very faint indeed. And sometimes you have to ask
yourself; “Are we really making things better?
-- Anthony D. Copperthwaite
home
subscribe
advertise
about us
