home
subscribe
advertise
about us
Electrolysis, the only permanent hair removal method |
|
|
|
|
In my endeavors to provide prospective hair removal consumers with reliable, relevant information to their particular situation, I am in contact with scores of people who search tirelessly for the ‘magic bullet’ that will solve their superfluous hair problem. Common among these potential clients are those that know just enough to get it all wrong, and argue vehemently. I am sure every electrologist has had consultations with these types – misinformed and confused, but stubborn enough to give you the devil’s own time trying to persuade them of the truth. While ‘laser-wielders’ do all they can to convince people that what they do is ‘electrolysis,’ I have uncovered the sad fact that it is the electrolysis industry itself, through neglect and individualism, that contributes to the misinformation and confusion. Until we find a way to get all our voices in tune with some basic messages, I fear we will be prey to gross misunderstanding time and again. In my dealings with prospective clients, I come across two types – the person who looks for a professional and grills them with questions; and the person who looks for a professional who is (they believe) as knowledgeable as they are. It is the latter type that poses the greatest challenge to contemporary electrology. I think the biggest problem we have is our text books, which were all written decades ago and contain information that was applicable to the equipment and techniques of the late 1940s but has no relevance in the practice of electrology today. Though we hear about the latest scientific studies on skin and hair, and learn in Hair Route and other electrology publications about the latest technology for removing hair, no one is updating our textbooks! Other than Fino Gior’s textbook, Modern Electrolysis, all the electrolysis textbooks a person might buy to read up on our trade say that thermolysis has “an unacceptable regrowth rate.” None of these books have ever been modernized to reflect the fact that with proper insertions and treatment settings one can approach 100% accuracy (in any modality). The old rules of treatment are important to a practitioner who still uses an old Kree epilator (company defunct), but tell us nothing about getting the best results out of this century’s Apilus Platinum. Many of us know of electrologists who still select a treatment setting based on the old adage: “Find what hurts, and then turn it up a little.” However, where higher settings on old-time equipment more often than not equated with pain, scabs, or even scars, today’s equipment is so powerful, and so fast at delivering the currents, the correct (perhaps even higher settings) pass without notice. The age of treating to the strength of the hair is here in a big way, and one simply cannot use the old philosophy on the newer equipment without needless damage. When I was in my apprenticeship (and later, school), I was told to read all the books I could and take note of how they all disagreed. I was advised to make my own judgments based on my experience using the techniques and equipment I had at my disposal. It was the best advice I could have been given. Because of this, I am not afraid to use modern equipment past the limits of the ancients. I also get my clients clear faster than I would otherwise, utilizing any outdated paradigm. Unfortunately, every now and then I come across someone who has read a textbook or two, and we have a spirited argument about how thermologists “are crooks, milking people of their money,” and “multiple-needle galvanic is the only legitimate form of electrolysis.” In these debates I usually end up sounding like a real fathead when my challenger says, “Who do you think you are, to contradict the people who literally wrote the books on electrolysis?” The staff of O magazine come across this problem in preparing their May issue and the result was that Electrolysis took it on the chin again. Although they interviewed Patsy Kirby and others in their research for the article, they went so far as to accuse the professionals of lying about the sensation of treatment based on both a review of OUR TEXT BOOKS and past and present experience of those who had treatment utilizing outdated techniques and equipment. Their article reads, “Needles. Electricity. Needles. Is it as bad as it sounds? “All you should feel is a warm sensation from the current,” says the executive director of the American Electrology Association, Patsy Kirby.(an understatement? Topical anesthetics are available.)...Doctors who favor LASER hair removal...recommend it only to friends possessing the fortitude, patience and high pain threshold of a Zen master.” This would not happen if the average electrologist took the time to learn the latest techniques, and utilized the best equipment available. When sleeping clients are the norm across the USA and the world, and we can point to a text book talking about horrible pain as an outdated edition, we will be much better off. Alas, electrolysis needs an updated book; one that is based on treatments performed on high-end, state-of-the-art equipment. It is my belief that we will find that faster clearances are now possible, and that we are now in striking distance of making skin damage a thing of the past. Practically speaking, this convergence of information is long overdue. |
|
Home
Subscribe
Calendar
Classified Ads
National
Associations
Consumer Info
|
