Reviews you can trust, from real people like you.
How it works
- Our highly-trained Review Moderation team evaluates all reviews before they're published to ensure they're written by people like you and not a member of a doctor's office.
- This multi-step process takes up to 24 hours from review submission to publication.
- Doctors can't pay to have reviews removed or hidden.
- Reviews are only removed at the reviewer's request or if they violate our Terms of Service.
If you have questions or believe we should re-evaluate a published review, let us know.
Sort by:
*Treatment results may vary
You might have heard that Fraxel has recently...
You might have heard that Fraxel has recently launched together with Philips a fractional laser device that can be used at home. It is called ReAura and currently is not available in the US. It is only sold in the UK and Netherlands. However, I am sure it will be soon be in the US, unless the FDA does not stop them. I hope they will.
I won't go into what the machine does or does not (it mimics in-office Fraxel procedures, but less powerful).
Needless to say, the machine ruined my skin. BIG hyper-pigmentation patches formed on both my cheeks.
Philips offers a telephone skin care consultant, who I contacted when I developed those patches. After sending the consultant (who is not a dermatologist but a aesthetic therapist) pictures of my skin, they told me over email not to worry about the pigmentation, as that was normal as an initial 'spurge'. They advised to carry on to treat my face twice a week as recommended and that at week 6 those marks should fade.
I followed Philips' advice for one more treatment, during which those pigmentation got even darker and bigger. After contacting Philips again, they agreed to pay for a dermatologist to asses my skin. The dermatologist diagnosed me with melasma, and reported that: 'The melasma might possibly have been triggered by a combination of the home laser treatment plus sun exposure and individual susceptibility".
Philips replied that nowhere in the report: "It does state that the laser has caused the skin condition and given that Miss ????'s responses to the skin assessment would not have revealed any contraindication to purchasing the product, we could not have known or predicted that she was susceptible to melasma. Therefore, Philips will not be funding any additional treatment."
I now find myself with a horrible skin condition to treat, and with a hefty bill to pick up (hydroquinone/tretinoin topical prescription treatment + other lotions and potions), which from what I read on here, I might have to use for a long long time.
I am disappointed and not satisfied by Philips response. It is certainly the case that there is a connection between my use of the Fraxel ReAura and the appearance of the melasma. The fact that the dermatologist could not establish direct causality because she didn't physically see me using the machine does not mean that this is not the cause.
I've witnesses it with my own eyes on my own skin, and that is a good enough reason for me to prove my rights. If necessary I am prepared to perform a ReAura Fraxel treatment under medical examination, which I am sure will only prove that the device causes the formation of melasma on my skin.
Can anybody offer any legal advice? I'd really appreciate it.
Many thanks.
Laura
I won't go into what the machine does or does not (it mimics in-office Fraxel procedures, but less powerful).
Needless to say, the machine ruined my skin. BIG hyper-pigmentation patches formed on both my cheeks.
Philips offers a telephone skin care consultant, who I contacted when I developed those patches. After sending the consultant (who is not a dermatologist but a aesthetic therapist) pictures of my skin, they told me over email not to worry about the pigmentation, as that was normal as an initial 'spurge'. They advised to carry on to treat my face twice a week as recommended and that at week 6 those marks should fade.
I followed Philips' advice for one more treatment, during which those pigmentation got even darker and bigger. After contacting Philips again, they agreed to pay for a dermatologist to asses my skin. The dermatologist diagnosed me with melasma, and reported that: 'The melasma might possibly have been triggered by a combination of the home laser treatment plus sun exposure and individual susceptibility".
Philips replied that nowhere in the report: "It does state that the laser has caused the skin condition and given that Miss ????'s responses to the skin assessment would not have revealed any contraindication to purchasing the product, we could not have known or predicted that she was susceptible to melasma. Therefore, Philips will not be funding any additional treatment."
I now find myself with a horrible skin condition to treat, and with a hefty bill to pick up (hydroquinone/tretinoin topical prescription treatment + other lotions and potions), which from what I read on here, I might have to use for a long long time.
I am disappointed and not satisfied by Philips response. It is certainly the case that there is a connection between my use of the Fraxel ReAura and the appearance of the melasma. The fact that the dermatologist could not establish direct causality because she didn't physically see me using the machine does not mean that this is not the cause.
I've witnesses it with my own eyes on my own skin, and that is a good enough reason for me to prove my rights. If necessary I am prepared to perform a ReAura Fraxel treatment under medical examination, which I am sure will only prove that the device causes the formation of melasma on my skin.
Can anybody offer any legal advice? I'd really appreciate it.
Many thanks.
Laura