|
|
|
Home |
Home > Other Hair Removal Methods
Permanent Hair Removal: A Disputed Term
Permanent Hair Removal
Long-term Hair Removal
Semi-permanent Hair Removal
Hair reduction & Hair Removal
"Permanent" Methods
No method is 100% effective in all clients
Permanent
Hair Removal
For the purposes
of hair removal, the hairfacts definition of "permanent" is being
able to go a year after your final hair removal treatment without
having to use another method of hair removal. Keep in mind that a
year might not be long enough to determine true permanence,
but most consumers would be happy to have one treatment a year. The only method of clinically proven permanent hair removal is electrolysis. Some lasers and flash lamps have been able to achieve permanent hair reduction, as discussed below.
Long-term
Hair Removal
|
|
Another undefined term is "long-term" hair removal. Again, it depends on what your definition of "long" is. The hairfacts definition of "long-term" is being able to go 6 months after your final treatment without having to use another method of hair removal. Your definition may vary, but I don't consider 9 weeks to be long-term. I arbitrarily decided on 6 months as a working definition, because most hair growth cycles will have completed in 6 months.
Semi-permanent
Hair Removal
A newer term used by some hair removal marketers is
"semi-permanent hair removal." This is a marketing term used in the
salon industry that some salons have started using to describe laser
results. In the salon industry, it means "lasting a few weeks."
Hair reduction & Hair Removal
Permanent hair removal has been established
as the complete destruction of a hair follicle's
ability to regenerate and grow hair.
Several lasers have demonstrated permanent hair
reduction in clinical studies and are allowed to
make this claim by FDA. The word "reduction" adds
another term that is vaguely defined. FDA has
accepted the definition of reduction as a stable
reduction in the number of coarse dark hairs. Some
lasers have demonstrated in clinical testing that
they can reduce the size of hairs and lighten the
color. In some patients, this reduction appears to
be permanent.
"Permanent"
Methods
If you're seeking permanent hair removal, you have
several imperfect options. A number of methods have
been developed that use chemicals, energy of varying
types, or a combination to target the areas that
regulate hair growth. Permanently destroying these
areas while sparing surrounding tissue is a
difficult challenge. I recommend relying on a body
of published, peer-reviewed scientific evidence to
ensure the effectiveness of a method.
-
Permanent hair removal for most (only if done correctly)
Electrolysis -
Permanent hair reduction for some (primarily consumers with dark hair)
Laser
Flashlamp -
Lasting hair inhibition for many (requires continuous use)
Prescription
oral medications
Prescription
topical preparation (Vaniqa)
-
Restricted methods
X-ray
(banned in the United States)
Photodynamic
therapy (experimental) -
Doubtful methods
Electric
tweezers
"Transdermal
electrolysis"
"Transcutaneous
hair removal"
Photoepilators
Microwaves
Foods
and Dietary supplements
Nonprescription
topical preparations ("hair inhibitors")
No
method is 100% effective in all clients
All methods have some clients who do
not seem to respond to treatment. The reason is
unknown, and the exact percentages are not
established. Below are some examples of published
studies lasting six months or more that report
significant change:
All methods have some clients who do not seem to
respond to treatment. The reason is unknown, and the
exact percentages are not established. Below are
some examples of human clinical studies published in
medical journals or submitted to FDA. Note that some
studies report good results but do not report
non-responders. Laser clinical results are still
widely variable in the published literature, with
long-term response rates from 0% to 100%, depending
on the study.
| Method | Study | In Study | (%) With Significant Change |
| None | -- | -- | |
| None | -- | -- | |
| None | -- | -- | |
| None | -- | -- | |
| None | -- | -- | |
|
Verdich (1984) |
8 | 0 (0%) | |
|
FDA data (2000) |
393 | 228 (58%) | |
|
Verdich (1979) |
56 | 50 (90%) | |
|
Richards (1986) |
281 | 261 (93%) | |
|
Sadick (1999) |
67 | 28 (41%) | |
|
Eremia (2001) |
89 | 89 | |
|
Alster (2001) |
20 | 20 | |
|
Baumler (2002) |
16 | 4 (25%) | |
|
Liew (1999) |
48 | 17 (35%) | |
|
Nanni (1997) |
12 | 0 (0%) |
