Quote from: SadieBlake on February 20, 2018, 10:39:48 AM
I can make a fairly solid logical argument that any time spent under anesthesia doing things that could be accomplished beforehand is a bad idea. Time under GA is extremely hard on the body. This was my choice, however as you say other choices are certainly valid.

I would think that argument only stands up when considering single stage surgeries.

A counter argument might be that there is a much better chance of removing all hairs when the skin has been resected, and a surgical team spends a week scrapping and preparing the skin graft in a lab during a two stage surgical approach. This isn't time spent under GA.

Personally, I think the risk of hair growth remains no matter which approach is followed. I wouldn't consider electro to be a flawless approach to removing all hairs either.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Claire, sure and there is not a one size fits all solution.

Now as it happens, I've only heard of vaginal hair growth post-op in women who didn't do electrolysis but you could be right, our data is imperfect at best.

Too often discussion of technique come down to a sense of advocating, I think I said above, what we're looking at are really good choices among amazingly skilled surgeons. At least in the US every surgeon I know of doing these procedures is already a top notch practitioner.

Quote from: SadieBlake on February 21, 2018, 07:43:41 PM
Claire, sure and there is not a one size fits all solution.

Too often discussion of technique come down to a sense of advocating.

Yes, I agree with you. It makes it tough for anyone trying to make a fully informed decision.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote from: SadieBlake on February 21, 2018, 07:43:41 PM
Too often discussion of technique come down to a sense of advocating, I think I said above, what we're looking at are really good choices among amazingly skilled surgeons. At least in the US every surgeon I know of doing these procedures is already a top notch practitioner.

That's why photo's are so valuable.

Quote from: AnonyMs on February 25, 2018, 04:53:59 AM
That's why photo's are so valuable.

I don't think that photos alone (even if they are fairly balanced and not photoshopped) are a reliable indicator of what you're likely to end up with.

A surgeon usually provides their best photos, but may still have an incredibly high rate of necrosis/debridement, aesthetic complications, or assymetry.

Worse, their usual outcomes from an uncomplicating surgery might still look nothing like the photos.

Just my ten cents worth..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I prefer photos that people post on internet independently. There's quite a few around.

Quote from: Claire_Sydney on February 21, 2018, 06:52:43 PM

A counter argument might be that there is a much better chance of removing all hairs when the skin has been resected, and a surgical team spends a week scrapping and preparing the skin graft in a lab during a two stage surgical approach. This isn't time spent under GA.

Which surgeons do this? As far as I know, only one surgeon in Thailand (cannot remember his name now)

Two stage surgeries are done by Dr Sanguan Kunaporn, Dr Meltzer in the USA, and (I think) one surgeon in Europe.