Permanent hair removal defined
Most consumers think "permanent" means lasting forever.
Unfortunately, that's not always the case as it's used in
advertising. For instance, a permanent wave in your hair is not
really permanent, and a permanent marker is not necessarily
permanent.
It's difficult to assess a new hair removal method that claims to
be permanent. Most people figure that after a certain amount of
time, it's unlikely that a hair will ever return. That's why several
people, myself included, have suggested a specific definition of
"permanent." Some of these definitions seem inadequate to me. One
manufacturer claims their device is permanent based on results after
9 weeks. That's ridiculous. Waxing can last that long, and it's been
clinically proven temporary.
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 vs. 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.
Click the following link for more on lasers and
permanent hair reduction
"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
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** |
OTC* hair
inhibitors
|
NONE |
-- |
-- |
"Transdermal
|
NONE |
-- |
-- |
"Transcutaneous
|
NONE |
-- |
-- |
Photoepilators
|
NONE |
-- |
-- |
Microwave
|
NONE |
-- |
-- |
Electric
tweezers
|
Verdich (1984) |
8 |
0 (0%) |
Vaniqa
|
FDA data (2000)*** |
393 |
228 (58%) |
Electrolysis
|
Verdich (1979) |
56 |
50 (90%) |
Electrolysis
|
Richards (1986) |
281 |
261 (93%) |
Flashlamp
|
Sadick (1999) |
67 |
28 (41%) |
Laser
(alexandrite)
|
Eremia (2001) |
89 |
89? (?) |
Laser
(diode)
|
Alster (2001) |
20 |
20? (?) |
Laser
(diode)
|
Baumler (2002) |
16 |
4 (25%) |
Laser
(ruby)
|
Liew (1999) |
48 |
17 (35%) |
Laser
(Nd:YAG)
|
Nanni (1997) |
12 |
0 (0%) |
*** OTC = over the counter topical
products sold on the web and on infomercials *** defined in this table as significant change
in amount of hair at more than 6 months after last treatment ***
unpublishedFor more on this, see my section on clinical data.
See also hair
removal definitions for more about vague terms used by this
industry.
For more on this, see my section on clinical
data.
|