|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Editor
Joined: 5/17/2008
Posts: 3,973
Points: 9,150
Location: praise jesus!
|
he says the molecules are bigger than botox so antibodies are formed and you become immune to botox and dysport over time.
the bigger molecules allow antibodies to 'get in' or something like that. i'm paraphrasing but you get the jist.
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/8/2009
Posts: 511
Points: 1,533
|
Chris K wrote:he says the molecules are bigger than botox so antibodies are formed and you become immune to botox and dysport over time. Dysport molecules are actually smaller than botox. Botox molecular weight is 900kD, while Dysport is 500kD to 900kD. The smaller size of Dysport would account for greater diffusion/migration that some have reported. About the antibodies thing, there have been some false positives. It's really too early to say. None of the clinical trials have provided definitive answers (in any case it's "said" to be very rare, probably depending on who funded the study) and they aren't even certain about conversion rates. But clinician experience like your derm's is valuable. As the trickle of information becomes a landslide we'll know for sure, regardless of what the papers say.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Editor
Joined: 5/17/2008
Posts: 3,973
Points: 9,150
Location: praise jesus!
|
kosmeds wrote:
Dysport molecules are actually smaller than botox. Botox molecular weight is 900kD, while Dysport is 500kD to 900kD. The smaller size of Dysport would account for greater diffusion/migration that some have reported.
About the antibodies thing, there have been some false positives. It's really too early to say. None of the clinical trials have provided definitive answers (in any case it's "said" to be very rare, probably depending on who funded the study) and they aren't even certain about conversion rates.
But clinician experience like your derm's is valuable. As the trickle of information becomes a landslide we'll know for sure, regardless of what the papers say.
yes, thank you. i have trouble explaining scientific stuff. that's what i meant.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Editor
, Member
Joined: 5/15/2008
Posts: 1,829
Points: 5,403
Location: New York
|
Not to be a bitch but your derm doesn't seem well-versed about Dysport. The main attraction is that it's molecules are smaller and spread out and relax a greater area and provide a more natural look ultimately. It also has a much faster rate of kicking in 1-2 days as opposed to 5-7 days, with continued results over a couple weeks like Botox.I just had it and I like it better because I don't get this weird crinkle above my left eyebrow when I wake up like I did with Botox. Of course the true test will be if it lasts as long as BX. Because of it's greater diffusion, I would only get it from someone who uses Dysport regularly.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Editor
Joined: 5/17/2008
Posts: 3,973
Points: 9,150
Location: praise jesus!
|
he says consistant use of dysport will eventually make you resistant to dysport and botox. that's what he says. here is his website. dr. Foitl http://www.suttonplacedermatology.com/
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 5/14/2008
Posts: 13,349
Points: 33,755
|
I myself, just stick with the status quo and would use BOTOX. Like it's worked for me before and I have no reason to 'explore' Dysport.
Concord MA celebrating freedom from British rule .
|
|
|
Guest |
