logo

Help SUPPORT Miss J's Forum by shopping through: Miss J's AMAZON PORTAL

Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login.
Registrations are CLOSED. Please see this topic for more information.

Notification

Icon
Error

4 Pages<1234>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline MissJ  
#31 Posted : Tuesday, October 12, 2010 2:47:25 PM(UTC)
Rank: Administration

Joined: 5/14/2008(UTC)
Posts: 26,528
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I see where you are coming from. I totally agree that a lot of these devices are a waste of money and in the wrong hands can be damaging and that one only knows they were in wrong hands after the damage is done (I'll add).


kosmeds wrote:


You misinterpreted my intent. I'm baffled at how blithely people take sun protection. The paper cited states one IPL session is about twice as damaging as one MED. But a lot of people here get more than one MED on a regular basis: far more often than they get IPL. Where I live, a lot of people get more than that ever day for six to nine months out of the year, year after year.

I do not see any real danger outlined in this particular paper. Many people here go swimming in the summer, and expose themselves to more damage than a single IPL session as outlined in the paper, and they are not up in arms about it. They do it repeatedly.

Also, as I previously stated: all skin rejuvenation methods that are not regular use topicals are damaging. One has to destroy and remove the damaged skin to make any significant change in the appearance. This is not possible without some adverse effect. Whether it's a device or a peel, long-term problems remain unknown. But people think the potential for problems is worth the trade-off regarding potential for improvement.

I think the entire device industry is a waste of money, because in almost every case the same effect can be had for an appropriate peel or series of peels for less money. But both alternatives require experienced, gifted operators and one does not always get that. In fact, it's pretty rare.

I also think it's difficult to find papers that show exactly how damaging procedures can be in the wrong hands, and patients are rarely if ever shown such pictures. I've never found any papers outlining the type of damage I experienced myself, and of course was not given one iota of info about potential problems by the doctor, but I have seen horrific outcomes from CO2 laser.

Maybe in the future, there will be papers stating that IPL is incredibly damaging, but this paper most certainly does not.
Miss J. Seeing eye companion to the aesthetically blind since 1998.


If reading these posts has been helpful to you, consider helping out the board by purchasing via my AMAZON PORTAL seen at the top of each page.

Sales DIRECTLY from here help defray costs of this board. (Works for US residents only.)
Offline MissJ  
#32 Posted : Tuesday, October 12, 2010 2:57:32 PM(UTC)
Rank: Administration

Joined: 5/14/2008(UTC)
Posts: 26,528
I'd say a lot of the problem with the lasers (and this is a big PROFIT industry), could be attributed to the CEO's. It's the CEO who is behind MAXIMIZING SALES and minimizing tech back up for the doctors who buy them and not to mention building false confidence about them to both doctors and patients. So, what you get is this big UNCERTAINTY GAP between the laser itself and the end point; the patient. The CEOs don't close the information gap nor do they limit sales to a select number of laser experts. A doctor being sold a laser could be in the LURCH as to how to use it. You've read the complaints by some doctors on that medspa board that the company did not provide backup as to how to use the lasers. Then you get the problem of doctors paying some 'operator' like $15/hour to use them where the operator might not know anything about lasers. The industry and how it's set up on a corporate level is RIFE with problems. Problems antagonistic to patients getting results touted by the industry. CEO's are the MIDDLE MEN for that.

Wonder if it's possible to have a class action suit aimed at one of their CEOs.



DCNGA wrote:
To be fair to Sorg (author of this paper), when he wrote to me he said that using IPL in an iterative way is what holds the most potential for harm and that the repeated use of these devices (mechanism of action) long-term is not well enough understood to use them long term. He is from Switzerland and he spoke with derms who use IPL in their practices and NONE of them are using it in an iterative mode due to the unknown long-term deleterious effects IPL could have. He feels IPL has a place, but only when used for a specific condition and in a specific area.

Personally, I think the 'poster' by Kimmig is more damaging to the reputation of IPL.

The problem with these devices is not just the operators, albeit that is the most important aspect if you have them to lessen your chances of bad outcomes but it won't eliminate bad outcomes completely. Their mechanism of action is not fully (100%) understood. Most doctors using them will admit this but they feel they know enough to declare them safe?! The main problem with these devices is how they are marketed, how they are promoted as "safe" with no side effects (other than burns and hypo/hyperpigmentation), and that none of them have long term studies to back up their efficacy. The FDA 501K process is the blame, along with medical device makers making good deals with laser gurus to become laser luminaries and push these devices at all of the major medical conferences and funding 'research' into the efficacy/safety of these devices. This is like the wolf guarding the hen house. ALL OF THIS is what people need to realize and own, all of the papers in the world speaking of possible bad outcomes or side-effects won't change any of that. Only we, as consumers, and doctors who know the truth and are brave enough to stand up to the device makers/FDA can change the first and most important problem: THE COSMETIC MEDICAL DEVICE APPROVAL PROCESS IS FLAWED.

Think of it like this, would you want a pacemaker put in your chest that was approved by the FDA simply because there was a similar device on the market in the 1960s or 1970s and the one being put in your chest in 2010 has had NO true clinical trials to prove it works, no true clinical trials to prove it does what it says, no true clinical trials to prove it is safe, and no true clinical trials that prove the long term side effects from its use? If so, go for it. Personally, I'm not taking anyone's 'word' for it that these things are safe, especially from the people manufacturing them or profiting from using them on the unsuspecting. But, maybe that's just me.
Miss J. Seeing eye companion to the aesthetically blind since 1998.


If reading these posts has been helpful to you, consider helping out the board by purchasing via my AMAZON PORTAL seen at the top of each page.

Sales DIRECTLY from here help defray costs of this board. (Works for US residents only.)
Offline aphrodite  
#33 Posted : Monday, March 14, 2011 2:25:04 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/11/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,091
Woman
Location: LA
SOO TRUE!!! I worked in a Derm office so I saw first hand. Even the doc admitted to one patient that she didnt get good results from the Mixto laser and offered her free botox. At least he would admit when he thought a patient didnt get good results. THE BEST IMPROVEMENTS AND MOST DRAAAMATIC wher from TCA PEELS! We had before and afters of a 70 year old patient who got the TCA the results were stellar! I myself had v beam with levulan for acne and it actually made me break out worse. You are so right about the best laser is what the doc has to pay off lol! These lasers are experimental who wants to be a guinea pig look at those poor victims of thermage :(
Offline mich  
#34 Posted : Monday, March 14, 2011 2:28:25 PM(UTC)
Rank: Unapproved: write to MissJ521@aol.com for approval

Joined: 6/11/2008(UTC)
Posts: 1,085
What about when you get laser hair removal is that also just as bad?
Offline MissJ  
#35 Posted : Monday, March 14, 2011 2:45:00 PM(UTC)
Rank: Administration

Joined: 5/14/2008(UTC)
Posts: 26,528
With laser hair removal (which does work IF it's on a high setting), what they try to do is stretch out the treatments by lowering the settings so you buy more treatments. When I had laser hair removal, I had actually READ the papers the laser researchers submitted to the FDA in which they listed the settings (fluences) of the laser.

Now for an FDA paper where one is wanting to PROVED the treatment works, the settings were OPTIMAL for it working to remove the hair within 3 treatments or so and they listed them.

Now the BITCH (and this was a real bitch) was getting the laser operators to actually USE those settings. They all wanted to use WEAKER ones than the ones cited in the FDA papers. Why? To stretch out the treatments and I had to go through hell trying to get an operator to use the settings I wanted.

So, with laser hair removal, the operators want the settings to be INEFFICIENT so you buy more treatments and a lot of them actually were pissed at me for knowing the right settings, being able to cite the FDA papers for the right settings.

Not to mention that generally speaking I knew more about lasers than did the operators as at MIT, I worked with one of the top guys in lasers helping to build them. A lot of these operators knew NOTHING about general laser theory.

So, from that, I was really soured on lasers--well not lasers themselves because I think lasers are really impressive devices. It's just that none of these people actually using them even know a fraction about how a laser works compared to what your average MIT first year student would know about them. It's like, I did not want a bunch of idiots using lasers on me when they were even unfamiliar with the FDA papers submitted where the efficient settings were cited. Not to mention, these people did not even have a fundamental understanding about laser theory.

Miss J. Seeing eye companion to the aesthetically blind since 1998.


If reading these posts has been helpful to you, consider helping out the board by purchasing via my AMAZON PORTAL seen at the top of each page.

Sales DIRECTLY from here help defray costs of this board. (Works for US residents only.)
Offline tho88  
#36 Posted : Wednesday, May 30, 2012 10:31:17 AM(UTC)
Rank: Member

Joined: 5/1/2012(UTC)
Posts: 621
Man
Location: UK
So there basically saying heres one we just made, we can gurantea its safe, because if it isnt well just wipe the slate clean and make a new one until we get it right!

genius. Pure genius. I was banking on this being a good solution for my scars too, either that or microdermabrasion kit done by myself. Arent they supposed to be good for sundamage? Not drastically but just reverse it a lil?
man theres always a catch...
An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure.

I like to use apostrophe's.

Offline ari  
#37 Posted : Wednesday, February 3, 2016 10:35:39 AM(UTC)
Rank: Unapproved: write to MissJ521@aol.com for approval

Joined: 6/17/2008(UTC)
Posts: 292
Woman
Location: europe
does anybody have info on Ultherapy? Apparently that is the latest device, it is preferred treatment because it is done with ultrasound equipment, or so they say so.
Offline MissJ  
#38 Posted : Wednesday, February 3, 2016 12:49:17 PM(UTC)
Rank: Administration

Joined: 5/14/2008(UTC)
Posts: 26,528
My advice would be to look for doctors who post photos of their own patients who had it. A lot of the photos for UT are company stock photos.


Originally Posted by: ari Go to Quoted Post
does anybody have info on Ultherapy? Apparently that is the latest device, it is preferred treatment because it is done with ultrasound equipment, or so they say so.


Miss J. Seeing eye companion to the aesthetically blind since 1998.


If reading these posts has been helpful to you, consider helping out the board by purchasing via my AMAZON PORTAL seen at the top of each page.

Sales DIRECTLY from here help defray costs of this board. (Works for US residents only.)
Offline Robin  
#39 Posted : Wednesday, February 3, 2016 3:23:11 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/7/2008(UTC)
Posts: 3,012
Location: No PMs
Originally Posted by: ari Go to Quoted Post
does anybody have info on Ultherapy? Apparently that is the latest device, it is preferred treatment because it is done with ultrasound equipment, or so they say so.


It has been around for several years. Miss Js advice is good. As with any modality it often gets used for things it's not really meant for, so look for a provider with lots of experience who can assess whether it is appropriate for you and what results are reasonable to expect.
Offline Sarah W  
#40 Posted : Thursday, February 4, 2016 12:19:16 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/4/2008(UTC)
Posts: 9,089
Woman
Originally Posted by: ari Go to Quoted Post
does anybody have info on Ultherapy? Apparently that is the latest device, it is preferred treatment because it is done with ultrasound equipment, or so they say so.


Hi Ari:) Where are you planning to have it?

Offline Chris K  
#41 Posted : Thursday, February 4, 2016 1:13:07 AM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/17/2008(UTC)
Posts: 8,594
Woman
Location: miss j's board
I think in 10 years ultherapy will be seen as very outdated.

I think anything that heats up the face is a bad idea. I've heard firsthand it's very painful.

Imo, some of the ppl that look the strangest are those who do everything to avoid surgery but inject and do all sorts of lasers.

Offline ari  
#42 Posted : Thursday, February 4, 2016 4:28:40 AM(UTC)
Rank: Unapproved: write to MissJ521@aol.com for approval

Joined: 6/17/2008(UTC)
Posts: 292
Woman
Location: europe
Originally Posted by: Sarah W Go to Quoted Post
Hi Ari:) Where are you planning to have it?



Originally Posted by: Chris K Go to Quoted Post
I think in 10 years ultherapy will be seen as very outdated.

I think anything that heats up the face is a bad idea. I've heard firsthand it's very painful.

Imo, some of the ppl that look the strangest are those who do everything to avoid surgery but inject and do all sorts of lasers.



Hi Sarah!
Actually my PS in Switzerland recommended. It is done by somebody else, not him. My concern is that under bad lighting I have lots of hill and valleys on my face. Under good light I look OK. But this bothers me a lot! He said that fillers won’t do the trick, just tightening the skin by laser could eventually do it. I’m very hesitant.
I had FG in the past, maybe it was worn off at some places, but I definitely do not need volume. In 2010 I had upper FL and in 2014 lower FL. Maybe I need another FL? I really don’t know how to tackle this.

Thank you Kris for your input.
I have some pictures, but don't know how to post them.
Offline MissJ  
#43 Posted : Thursday, February 4, 2016 11:53:18 AM(UTC)
Rank: Administration

Joined: 5/14/2008(UTC)
Posts: 26,528
How to post a photo:

1: Make a post as you normally would.
2: Post it.
3: Go back to the post you just made and hit 'attach' button. That will allow you to enter a photo from your files onto the board.




Originally Posted by: ari Go to Quoted Post
.....
I have some pictures, but don't know how to post them.


Miss J. Seeing eye companion to the aesthetically blind since 1998.


If reading these posts has been helpful to you, consider helping out the board by purchasing via my AMAZON PORTAL seen at the top of each page.

Sales DIRECTLY from here help defray costs of this board. (Works for US residents only.)
Offline Sarah W  
#44 Posted : Thursday, February 4, 2016 9:13:38 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/4/2008(UTC)
Posts: 9,089
Woman
Ari if you can post the pics like MissJ suggested, you will probably get some good suggestions. Its hard to say unless you can show what you are talking about.
Offline ari  
#45 Posted : Friday, February 5, 2016 9:56:32 AM(UTC)
Rank: Unapproved: write to MissJ521@aol.com for approval

Joined: 6/17/2008(UTC)
Posts: 292
Woman
Location: europe
let me try
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Previous Topic Next Topic
4 Pages<1234>
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.