Jenna the Denver hair removal specialist here to talk about protecting your skin in this very hot month of July! One thing that people aren’t really aware of is the fact that sunscreen should be the last resort of skin protection. Wearing clothing reduces your burn risk by 27% and staying in the shade reduces that risk by 30%. You can also try to go outside during the early morning or late afternoon as the sun is lower in the sky and less likely to cause burns. These are all primary prevention methods, as it reduces exposure to sun. Wearing sunscreen is a secondary prevention method, as you are already exposed to the sun and sunscreen seeks to minimize potential damage.
Other things to note are that a super high SPF isn’t that helpful. If you are wearing a sunscreen with SPF 50+, what may end up happening is you spend too much time in the sun, thinking you are fully protected. The truth is that you won’t get burned necessarily, but you may end up with other skin damage instead. Sunscreen that contains Vitamin A, also known as retinyl palmitate or retinol, should be avoided as it can contribute to tumor or lesion development. Also avoid sunscreen with oxybenzone in it; this is a synthetic estrogen that can mess with your hormone system. Don’t buy a combo sunscreen/insect repellant; rather, apply them separately, and the repellant should go first. Jenna the Aurora electrolysis specialist signing off, stay tuned for more helpful tips in the upcoming months!
Jenna the Cherry Creek electrolysis expert here to talk about taking care of yourself in the sun! When you’re outside, don’t forget to wear sunglasses! Even if you’re wearing sunscreen, it’s not exactly like you can slather that on your eyeballs. A good pair of sunglasses will protect your eyes against UV radiation. UV radiation does not affect eyes the same way it affects skin; it causes cataracts. This week I want to go over protecting your eyes from the sun, and the best way to do so is to get good sunglasses. How do you choose the best sunglasses?
The best sunglasses are those marked with 100% UV protection. Big, oversized sunglasses aren’t just a fashion statement; they protect your eyes better by cutting down on the amount of UV that can penetrate your eyes from the sides. Keep in mind that the darkness of the lenses doesn’t offer additional protection; you’re not any safer just because your shades are super dark. It doesn’t actually matter what color your sunglasses are, but if you’re interested in something that increases contrast consider amber, green or gray lenses. Polarized is not a synonym for protection; polarized sunglasses reduce glare that comes from reflective surfaces. Polarized sunglasses are not a requirement for protection against the sun, but they can make certain activities, such as driving, safer. You don’t have to buy super expensive sunglasses to get good protection; less expensive sunglasses can be just as good as very pricey ones. I hope this has been helpful! Stay tuned for more safety tips in the sun from this Lone Tree permanent hair removal specialist next week!
Jenna the Parker electrologist here to continue reviewing the article “Complications related to pubic hair removal.” White women were more likely to experience a complication from hair removal than Hispanic or black women. Women who were obese or overweight were more likely to report complications from hair removal than women who were underweight or of normal weight.
One interesting question is why Hispanic or black women suffered from less complications than white women. In this survey, they did not ask participants how often they removed the hair. It could be that they simply removed that hair far less often than white participants, which would explain the fewer complications. Another question is why overweight and obese women had more complications than under or normal weight women. The answer to that could be that the heavier women have a harder time seeing the region where they are removing the hair.
The main takeaway from this study is that women should receive advice on how to groom this hair from physicians as if done incorrectly, hair removal can cause serious problems. This would be an especially appropriate subject for gynecologists or a women’s health specialists to broach with their patients. Doctors should ask their patients while taking a history if they remove that hair, and if so, provide guidelines and suggestions.
I learned a lot reading the article, and I’m very glad that I’m a certified and licensed hair removal provider, because someone who doesn’t know what they’re doing in hair removal can do a lot of damage. Jenna the permanent hair removal specialist signing off for the rest of the day!
Jenna the Denver hair removal specialist here to talk to you today about an article called “Complications related to pubic hair removal.” I admit, I never suspected to read a scholarly work with the words “pubic hair” in it but it exists. Apparently, 50% of women between the ages of 18 and 24 remove this hair. They do it for sexual or aesthetic reasons. What many people don’t realize is that using a hair removal method like waxing, if not done correctly, can result in burns, severe skin irritation, infection, and even spread of STDs! There’s also your typical ingrown hairs and contact dermatitis. This study was designed to look at “hair removal practices, complications, and characteristics associated with complications” and the population being analyzed was low income, racially diverse women.
333 women were both willing to and eligible to participate. The study found that the mean age of participants was 24.7, and a greater number of women reported removing all hair rather than some of their hair. Most participants currently were removing this hair, and almost everyone, at least at some point, had shaved their hair with a razor blade. Among women who had ceased removing the hair, reasons given were disliking side effects, too much of a hassle, not having sex, liking their hair, being pregnant, or their partner wanted them to stop removing the hair. I’ll continue reviewing this article next week, but until then, Jenna the Lone Tree electrologist wishes you a great rest of the week.
Jenna the Aurora permanent hair removal specialist here to continue discussing the Mouzon v. Radiancy, Inc. lawsuit.
One of the studies in question mentioned in the lawsuit is titled “Clinical Evaluation of Handheld Self-Treatment Device for Hair Removal” by James M. Spencer. This study was funded by Radiancy, Inc., and Dr. Spencer was a member of Radiancy, Inc.’s scientific advisory board. This doesn’t exactly impart confidence as to the non-biased nature of this study.
Another reason the study didn’t hold up so well was because Dr. Spencer only used twelve participants. There was no control group, which is a huge problem in scientific studies. You can’t prove much without a control group! The study only ran for 12 weeks, which isn’t nearly enough time to make any statements about permanent hair removal.
The lawsuit is still ongoing as of August 2016. The last filing I was able to find was an order allowing the case to be dismissed against the CEO, but refusing to allow the case to be dismissed against the company. I’m very curious to see how this lawsuit will end; who knows how long it will go on for? Jenna the Parker hair removal specialist signing out, taking off my legal hat and putting my beauty hat back on instead.
Jenna the Cherry Creek permanent hair removal specialist here to continue talking about the lawsuit Mouzon v. Radiancy, Inc. You can catch up on the case by reading the complaint here.
Another accusation made by the lawsuit is that Radiancy, Inc. paid employees and endorsers to write online reviews for their devices. This was in response to all the negative online reviews they were receiving.
Many of the online complaints centered on the device not removing hair and not leaving smooth skin behind, as well as the fact that the device singed the hair and created the smell of burning. Some claimed that the device burned them as well.
Radiancy, Inc. made a lot of claims about no!no! devices being extremely similar to laser hair removal. They also claimed that a person using the device at home, who is not a hair removal specialist, can do as good as a job as a professional.
Another claim they made is that no!no! devices were clinically tested and proven. Radiancy, Inc. claimed to have all these studies verifying the effects of the devices, but oddly enough, they never submitted these studies to the FDA in order to get approval for the device. That’s absolutely ridiculous that they were selling a hair removal device that wasn’t FDA approved. Electrolysis is the only FDA approved method of permanent hair removal, so come to this Greenwood Village electrolysis specialist before resorting to such non-FDA approved methods.
Hi, Jenna the Englewood permanent hair removal specialist here. My daughter sent me an interesting email the other day; apparently, there are lawsuits going on around hair removal! This particular lawsuit is a class action, which means that one or several people got together with a lawyer and decided to sue on behalf of an entire class of people. The few people who helped start the lawsuit are named plaintiffs. These plaintiffs represent the class. The class is simply a group of people who share something in common. In this case, the class is anyone who purchased hair removal devices from a company called Radiancy, Inc. Radiancy, Inc. is the defendant, along with the CEO of the company. This lawsuit was filed April 2014. If you want to read the complaint, you can find it here.
The defendants are being accused of making lots of false statements about their hair removal devices under the no!no! brand. These statements were put forth in the advertising material of the devices. Making false statements about a product is illegal.
The product in question is a hair removal device that uses heat to destroy hair follicles. It can be used on all skin and hair colors because, unlike laser, the amount of melanin is irrelevant. However, one of the things that the lawsuit alleges is that the heat technology (called Thermicon) doesn’t work!
According to the company, Thermicon works by a filament in the device coming into contact with a hair. When it touches the hair, it heats up and sends that heat down the hair shaft into the hair follicle. However, according to the lawsuit, Thermicon doesn’t work; it only affects the part of the hair above the skin.
Stay tuned for my next post where I will continue to discuss this lawsuit! Until then, don’t try doing hair removal on yourself with “laser-like” devices! Come to me, the Denver electrologist, instead.
Jenna the Cherry Creek hair removal specialist back to finish summarizing the article “Idiopathic hirsutism: excessive bodily and facial hair in women” by Ebtisam Elghblawi. The next part of the article discusses treatment for idiopathic hirsutism. There are a variety of different treatments, which are often used in combination. The first category of treatment is hormonal suppression; this consists of drugs such as oral contraceptives and insulin sensitizers. An example of an insulin sensitizer is metformin. A side effect of metformin is that it reduces levels of androgens, which should reduce hirsutism. The first line of attack of hirsutism is usually administering oral contraceptives. There is no one right choice of oral contraceptives; the dose and type of contraceptive may differ for each person.
The second category of treatment is peripheral androgen receptor blocks on hair follicles, which includes drugs like spironolactone, flutamide, and finasteride. The second line of attack is usually spironolactone. Sometimes it is most efficient when combined with an oral contraceptive.
The third category of treatment is mechanical removal. Mechanical removal simply means physically removing the hair. This includes things like shaving, waxing, sugaring, bleaching, laser, and (of course, my favorite) electrolysis. One lesser known method is topical application of eflornithine. This is a cream that slows hair growth and thickness. It does it by inhibiting a particular enzyme that is responsible for cell growth and differentiation. Eflornithine is the generic name; the brand name is Vaniqa. This drug may not work for all patients and may include side effects like burning, tingling, and dry skin.
Hirsutism can be psychologically, emotionally, and psychosocially distressing for many women. The good news is that there are ways to deal with it; don’t go through years of pain and suffering when you can start permanent hair removal in Denver immediately.
Jenna the Denver hair removal specialist back with another article from PubMed! This week we will be looking at “Idiopathic hirsutism: excessive bodily and facial hair in women” by Ebtisam Elghblawi. Hirsutism is a condition where women develop body hair in places that normally do not have body hair. The abnormal body hair generally occurs in a male pattern, such as a beard, mustache, or extremely hairy legs. Unfortunately, the hair is thick, dark, and hard to ignore. The hair involved in hirsutism is called terminal hair – it’s the thick hair found on the face, chest, abdomen, legs, arms, and feet. Terminal hair can be contrasted with vellus hair, which is also known as peach fuzz and is more commonly found on women than men.
Many cases of hirsutism are associated with causes such as polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) or androgen-secreting tumors. However, this article discusses idiopathic hirsutism, which is when the cause of the hirsutism cannot be determined. Women with idiopathic hirsutism have normal periods and testosterone levels and do not have hyperandrogenemia. Before diagnosing idiopathic hirsutism, it’s important to rule out other causes such as drugs like oral contraceptives, L-thyroxine, danazol, and diazoxide. Do not confuse hirsutism with other conditions like hypertrichosis or the fact that some ethnic groups just tend to be hairier.
To evaluate hirsutism in women, doctors and researchers use the modified Ferriman-Gallwey scoring system. This system utilizes visual inspection in order to rate terminal hair growth. Nine location are considered: upper lip, chin, chest, upper arms, upper abdomen, lower abdomen, thighs, upper back, and lower back. Each area can be rated from 0 (no growth) to 4 (maximum growth). This means that the maximum score is 36. If a woman receives a score over 8, that means there is an excess of androgens in the body. Androgens are a type of hormone. They are most often known as “male hormones” because men have more of them, but women require androgens as well to be healthy. You’ve heard of one of the main androgens: testosterone.
In the next post, I will continue summarizing this article. Until then, farewell from this Lone Tree electrolysis expert!
Jenna the Denver electrolysis expert here! This is part two for the blog post I started last week on the article “Electrolysis: Observations from 13 years and 140,000 hours of experience” by Robert N. Richards and Gay E. Meharg.
The next part of the article describes the properties of the needles used in electrolysis. The needles should be good electrical conductors (obviously!). Needle diameter needs to be very fine (also obviously!), such as between 0.002 to 0.006 inches, or for those outside of the United States, 0.005 to 0.015 millimeters. It is possible for needles to break off in the skin, but this is very uncommon. Even if a needle does break off, symptoms have not been reported.
The article notes that the type of needle used is less important than “proper electrolysis technique, accurate insertion, and appropriate intensities and duration.” However, the authors prefer to use a flexible two-piece needle over a more rigid one piece needle. It’s important to have flexibility in order to properly insert – not all hair follicles are perfectly straight.
It’s important to note that this article dates back to 1995, so some of the things it says may be out of date by now. I don’t know if this is still true now, but back then, there was very little medical research being done in electrolysis, and a study to determine efficacy of different methods was about to be launched by the American Electrology Association (an organization that I will be looking at in a future blog post).
Richards and Meharg note that plucking can produce side effects, but they vary according to the individual. For example, some women pluck facial hair daily and nothing happens to their skin. However, other women pluck their hair and end up with hyperpigmentation, scarring, ingrown hairs, and distorted hair follicles. The same goes for waxing – some people have side effects and some do not. One reason that you should not pluck or wax hairs is because it can damage the hair shaft and thus produce more negative side effects. If electrolysis is performed correctly, there is no scarring – people who think they were scarred by electrolysis are more likely incorrectly targeting electrolysis as the cause instead of their plucking and picking.