Smart Lipo Studies Don't Show Better Results, says Wall Street Journal

There I was on the airplane this morning reading a copy of the Wall Street Journal that had been donated to me by the guy next to me, who probably did not read the first article that drew my attention: "Body of Evidence: Popular Laser Treatment to Remove Fat Draws Skepticism." I can't give you the link to the article, because you have to be a subscriber to read it online, but I will summarize it for you:  SmartLipo is merely a marketing ploy to get people interested in liposuction again. This from the editor of the monthly Journal of the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery.

Apparently, patients have been avoiding liposuction in droves for less invasive treatments, especially since traditional liposuction involved general anaesthesia. So some surgeons have thus invested in a Cynosure laser, which melts the fat and allows it to be sucked out through smaller tubes. However, yet another form of lipo, tumescent lipo, can also be done with a local anaesthetic and -- because it's on closeout because it's not this year's model (just a joke)--can be thousands of dollars cheaper. 100% of our readers thought tumescent liposuction was worth it, too.  In contrast, 74% of our community members thought SmartLipo was worth it.

So bottom line, if your favorite cosmetic or dermatologic surgeon doesn't do SmartLipo but he does do tumescent liposuction, I'd choose on the basis of faith in the physician, not faith in the tool.

And the caveat: this health reporter may not have had either procedure, and the Wall Street journal focuses on coverage of public companies, so it is perhaps trying to figure out whether Cynosure stock is a good buy as much as on whether you will have a good medical experience :-)

Email to friend

Return to RealSelf blog