Thursday, September 6, 2007
Nearly all women and about half of all men have unwanted hair. The problem is, though, that effectively removing hair can be nearly impossible to do. The fact is that hair doesn’t always want to grow in the locations that you want it to grow in. And, it is often re-growing, meaning it will likely grow back even if you do remove it. On top of this, the cost of removing unwanted hair can even be a factor. Nevertheless, the fact is that it is necessary to find the most up to date, the most cost effective and the most effective method of removing hair. Anything else, makes no sense.
CENTURIES OF TRYING
Most don’t realize that unwanted hair has been something that bothers people for centuries. All of this time people have been looking for an effective way to stop hair from growing in the wrong place. There have been all types of hair removal techniques tried. Here’s a look at a few of them.
The Egyptians thought hair removal was so important that they buried their dead with bronze razors. These razors have been found in tombs. There has been evidence that even the Mesopotamian people used methods to remove hair. There have been a number of artifacts found, including tweezers that date well back to 3500BC. Jump through time and we found that during Shakespeare’s time, documents were written that had mention of hair removal in one way or another.
If you skip through time a bit, you’ll find that the first electrolysis device was first used in the early part of the 20th century. In the 1930’s the first electric razor that was made for mass marketing hit store shelves. Forty years later you have waxing becoming a popular trend. In the 1990’s, laser energy was first used as a hair removal tool. In this case, the laser damaged the follicle enough so that it could not re-grow hair. Today, this same type of method is one of the best ways to permanently remove hair.
CONDITIONS OF EXCESS HAIR GROWTH
There are two conditions in which are somewhat rare yet still very much a part of the daily lives of many. In these cases, unwanted hair is just an understatement. Those that suffer from these conditions often are the ones to most seek out a permanent solution to their hair problem.
HIRSUTISM: This condition in one of excessive growth. The hair grows thick and dark. It is located in areas of the body of women that do not have hair or have very lightly colored hair. This includes locations such as the face, on the chest or the areola. This rare condition is more common in those that suffer from polycystic ovary syndrome, hyperprolactinemia, and idiopathic hirsutism. Medications like Danazol and androgenic oral contraceptives can also cause it. This type of excessive hair growth is an androgen induced type.
HYPERTRICHOSIS: In comparison, this type of excessive hair growth is called non androgen type. Both men and women can experience this type of excessive hair growth. In most cases, it is due in part to a genetic syndrome or it can be brought on by a medication.
In any case, hair growth is something that people deal with on a daily basis. Luckily, there are several types of hair removal methods.
DISTINCTIONS OF HAIR REMOVAL METHODS
There are two ways to define the type of hair removal treatment you will use. The first is a temporary solution or depilation. In this case, the hair’s root, called a follicle, is not destroyed or damaged. The hair will be removed in some manner such as by shaving, waxing, plucking or bleaching but will re-grow at a later time.
The second type of hair removal is long term or epilating. In this type of hair removal, the hair’s follicle is destroyed or damaged enough to make hair re-growth nearly impossible to happen. This can be done with a laser or electrolysis.
DEPILATION
Depilation can be done in several different ways and is by far the most common method of hair removal used. Of course, it is temporary and the most cost effective. Here are some of the methods used.
• Shaving: By far the most popular and the fastest, this is the way many people remove hair from their bodies. Shaving is something that needs to be repeated several times per week.
• Depilatories: For those that are using this method, the advantage over shaving is that it lasts a few days longer. It does remove hair a bit below the surface of the skin, yet is still a temporary solution.
• Plucking: Painful is one of the first things that come to mind for many women. Here, the hair is removed in a pluck and is removed rather deeply. Nevertheless, it is time consuming for larger areas.
• Waxing: Like plucking, the advantage is that it lasts for two weeks or longer. Since the hair is removed in large areas at a time, it is much faster than plucking. It can be a bit painful yet is still an affordable, time effective solution.
Are these the right methods for you to use to remove hair? They are mostly easy solutions and they can be inexpensive in most cases. Yet, the largest problem with these hair removal treatments is that the hair does grow back and they must be repeated time and time again. In some cases, there is pain involved. In other cases, such as in waxing, you can’t use them on all areas of your body that you would like to remove hair on such as the bikini area, the underarms or other areas.
PERMANENT SOLUTIONS
There are several other methods that can be used for a more permanent solution. Here, it is most important to consider who is doing the world and the method used to determine just how successful the treatment will be. Cost is another factor that people have to face in this type of hair removal treatment.
• ELECTROLYSIS: Although this was developed over a century ago, it hasn’t been as popular as it could be. This method uses a direct current that will cause a chemical reaction to happen in the follicle that will dissolve the hair root. Electrolysis destroys or damages the papilla as well, which will prevent hair from re-growing at all. This is done with the lye that is created by electrolysis. In most cases, this method of hair removal is effective and it is safe. Those that have deep rooted or very coarse hair may experience pain and discomfort.
• THERMOLYSIS: This method is usually confused with electrolysis, but actually is something different. Here, a shortwave is used. In the same method as a microwave oven works, this method will burn the hair follicle to destroy it. Yet, many find this method too painful and too much of a risk for scar tissue. In addition, it can be something that offers a high rate of re-grown hair.
One of the most important things to consider about these types of hair removal is that they are quite expensive. They can be painful and they can be hard to insure that they will be permanent solutions at all.
ANOTHER SOLUTION: LASER HAIR REMOVAL
In the last decade, laser hair removal has taken the world by storm. This method is fast, much less painful and often is the best overall method for removing unwanted hair in comparison to other techniques. It can be used for both men and women on virtually every area of the body that it is desired to be used. Since lasers can handle large areas at once, it can also be a quick method. Finally, lasers provide the most permanent solution within causing scars.
How does it work? Laser hair removal is a form of photothermolysis. That is, it uses heat. The heat that is generated will destroy the follicle’s ability to grow hair. Both short term and long term, the hair will not be able to re-grow. Because the laser looks for the pigment of the hair to make the distinction of where to go, it does not do any damage to the skin in the area.
The problem with laser hair removal is that it may need to be done more than once. Not because it is ineffective does this need to happen, but because it needs to target the hair’s growing during a specific part of the growth cycle. Another issue that comes to play in the use of laser hair removal is that it only works on those that have the right coloring of pigment in their hair. That is, skin that is pigmented will absorb more of the laser than that which is fair. The good news is that there is new technology, such as the diode laser and the Nd:YAG laser that will do this more precisely and will not interact with the skin.
Most studies have shown that it can take up to three to six laser treatments to actually see real benefits from laser hair removal. Yet, it has been shown to be one of the most successful methods of permanent hair removal as well.
For some patients, there are some side effects to consider. Some complain that the laser is stinging or that it burns. Yet, most of the redness and the sting will retreat within hours of treatment. For those that have a darker colored skin, some discoloration may be found but only for the first few hours. Scaring is very rare.
When you take these things into consideration, you can see that laser hair removal is an effective and safe way to remove unwanted hair. It can be used on larger or small areas, requires no downtime and if the hair does grow back, it will be lighter in color and finer.
What is important to note about any of these types of unwanted hair treatments is that there is not one method that is 100% accurate at removing all hair, every time permanently. Unfortunately, people are still on the search for the method that will guarantee this type of success.
Laser Hair Removal Toronto Clinic and Cosmetic School offering Cellulite reduction programs and variety of esthetic treatments.
New Hope in the Treatment of Wet Macular Degeneration
It was only a couple of years ago that Wet Macular Degeneration resulted in irreversible blindness. Fortunately, there have been new scientific developments that now show great promise in treating this disease.
The compounds known as Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors, or VEGF’s, are found in high concentration inside the eyes of patients with wet macular degeneration, and have been proven to be one of the causes for the formation of abnormal blood vessels below the retina that cause bleeding and sudden loss of vision.
The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has now approved two drugs for injection into the eye that block VEGF’s, one of which has even been shown to improve vision!
The two FDA-approved drugs are Macugen and Lucentis. While Macugen has been shown to stabilize vision in wet macular degeneration patients, some Lucentis patients actually experience visual improvement. Therefore, Macugen usage has become less common for the treatment of wet macular degeneration.
Doctors are now more optimistic than ever with respect to the treatment of wet macular degeneration. However, studies have shown that in most patients, the effect is temporary, and some patients may require monthly injections of Lucentis for continued effect.
Most interesting is that Genentech, the company that manufactures Lucentis, also manufactures a colon cancer anti-VEGF drug known as Avastin that might also prove useful in the treatment of wet macular degeneration. Dr. Philip Rosenfeld of the renowned Bascom Palmer Eye Institute in Miami, Florida was the first to use Avastin in the eyes of wet macular degeneration patients. Like Lucentis, he found vision improvement. And while Lucentis costs $2,000 per injection, Avastin costs only $50.00.
Which of these two Genentech products works better?
No one knows. Many physicians are using the less expensive Avastin “off-label,” because it is not FDA approved. But the National Eye Institute feels that it warrants more investigation, and will fund a study to compare their relative safety and effectiveness of Lucentis and Avastin.
FDA Advisors Found to Have Financial Ties to Product Under Review
In a recent report by Bloomberg, it was found that six doctors set to be on an FDA advisory panel, had financial ties to companies that produce stent heart devices which are currently up for FDA review. Drug coated stents that are used to prop open arteries, have been associated with an increased risk of blood clots that can cause both heart attacks and strokes.
The recent decision allows these doctors to serve on the advisory panel that could ultimately lead to the approval of rules and guidelines that would directly affect the drug coated stents, has lead to a backlash of public scrutiny.
According to Healthday, “ To clear the way for the six doctors to take part in the review, the FDA has waived rules that prohibit experts from involvement in matters that affect companies with which the experts have consulting contracts or in which they own stock.
The fact that the six doctors hold shares in, or receive fees from, companies that make stents is outweighed by their expertise on heart disease, Randall Lutter, the agency's associate commissioner for policy and planning, noted in a posting on the FDA's Web site.”
An extra 2,160 deaths a year could be avoided by not using drug coated stents according to an editorial by U.S. cardiology experts posted online Oct. 11 by the American College of Cardiology.
This would not be the first time the FDA has allowed financial ties with outside corporations to affect their decision process. A good example was Vioxx. When Vioxx along with several other COX-2 inhibitors were found to increase the risk of both heart attacks and strokes, the FDA created two advisory panels to look into the matter. The two panels concluded by a narrow margin that even though there was no doubt that the COX-2 inhibitors increased both heart attacks and strokes, the benefits outweighed the risks and all the inhibitors would be allowed to return to the market just with stronger warning labels.
After the fact, research into the FDA cases revealed that many members of the FDA advisory panels for both the original approval as well as the committees that voted to re-release the drugs back on the market, were paid consultants for the drug companies. When a member has financial ties to a company that is up for approval or review, that member is supposed to excuse themselves from the decision. In the meeting for the approval of Vioxx for of the six members including the chairman, had financial ties to Merck, the maker of Vioxx. Even more conspicuous, according to the New York Times the panel that reviewed the COX-2 inhibitors to determine if they would be placed back on the market, ten members that voted had financial ties to one manufacturer. Oddly enough, the vote was nine to one in favor of Vioxx.
It seems like to me the FDA may be protecting interests instead of our wellbeing. This article was written on behalf of FreebeeForeignPharmacy.com. For more related articles visit our blog: Foreign Pharmacy Tips.
|
