Great for Hyperpigmentation if a Bit Pricey - San Francisco

I'm rather shocked to see so many negative...

I'm rather shocked to see so many negative experiences with Fraxel described here. I wonder if the problem is with the practitioners, not with the technology. I have had several Fraxel treatments over the past 2 years and the results have been very good. I also haven't expected any miracles. Basically I wanted to get rid of spots and tighten up my face a bit. Fraxel has been very effective for the spots.

The claim to stimulate collagen production in the long term, well... I don't know. Still it has helped my skin a lot. I'm 52 now and have fair, delicate skin which spots easily from the sun and Fraxel really evens up the skin tone. As far as the procedure goes, it is a bit painful but not so bad. The first time I did it I had a lot more swelling and brown spots. I had big red puffs under my eyes for the first two mornings. After that the brown spots came out and eventually peeled away. I think everyone should be prepared to look worse before they look better, and the timing may depend on the individual. For me it took about 10 days before I could see the real results.

Tip: make sure that your practitioner has a lot of training and experience. Mine is the person who trains all the doctors in my area and she has been working with Fraxel since it first came out. I've always been happy with her work.

The way you say its a little painful leads me to believe that you were treated on lower settings because as you progress into more intense and comprehensive settings, it will literally feel like a blade is slicing through your face. Some doctors prefer lower settings as it can give you convincing results, yet keep you at the point that you keep coming back for more treatments. And that can be good because it reduces the risk of complication but your stimulation of collagen and results are much less prominent. On the other hand intense settings are probably used where people have severe complications and the skin reacts in a way it is not supposed to , but assuming all goes well the results can be great. So with such contradictory statements, what is the best option for doctors and patients? Doctors should charge based on the settings used, why? because people wont feel greedy trying to go riskier settings to get more bang for the buck you get apropriate amounts of treamtments. The level of complications are reduced. The results are great and the doctor is ideally compensated. that way you TRULY get what you pay for . Unlike scenarios where people are paying thousands and the laser is barely turned on.
I agree that laser treatments are very expensive. The results are generally subtle and that comes with the territory of choosing non-invasive treatments over surgery. To suggest that the patient should be able to pay more for a higher setting sounds dangerous to me. The decision about how strong or deep to go should be in the hands of the doctor or nurse, who can judge how my individual skin type will react. Safety must be top priority. As far as pain levels, pain is a subjective experience. I am aware that what I consider slightly or somewhat painful may be very painful for someone else. I am a dancer. I live in my body and I know how to relax and breathe through pain. Fear only makes it worse.
Eileen uses the Fraxel Restore, which is very safe. I just asked her about it and she says that the Repair is a CO2 laser which ablates the skin and, while this isn't necessarily a bad thing, ablation can have complications.
Eileen Jordan at Intelligent Beauty

Eileen is highly trained in Fraxel and other work as well. She used to work as a cosmetic surgery nurse. She is the person who trained all the other doctors in SF how to use Fraxel, and has been doing it since it first came out. She is excellent.

Was this review helpful?