Showing posts with label hair removal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hair removal. Show all posts
This product was sent to us free of charge to review.If there is one thing that truly infuriates me (and there's more than one, trust me) it's paying through the nose for razors and razor cartridges. I'm looking at you, Gilette Venus.
I mean seriously, what are they, made of gold and forged in a secret smithy in the mist of some sacred mountain by monks? Why does it cost me the best part of a tenner to buy four blades with which to shave my hairy calves? Why?
Owing to this long-standing resentment/bafflement, I was glad to get the chance to try out some razors from the more reasonable end of the pricing scale. Four Soleil disposable razors cost £2.95 - less than half the price of four Venus cartridges.
The variety I received was Soleil "Scent", one of several variants available. The handles of the razors in the packet are various shades of pink purple, each one slightly darker than its neighbour. It's a nice design touch. The "scent" is lavender, and it's included to make the shaving experience more luxurious, apparently.
In practice the scent of the handles was mostly eclipsed by the pleasant scent of the shaving gel I was also sent to try - a light floral fragrance that I found surprisingly nice for a product from a "budget" range (it costs roughly £3, depending on where you shop). The Soleil shaving gel is called "Lady Gel" (and please excuse me for a moment while I crosscheck that in my Profanisaurus). It proved pleasant to use and definitely allowed for superb razor glide without that strange "tacky" post-soap-like sensation that some shaving foams cause.
However, I discovered midway through shaving that the Soleil razor itself is not a serious contender for the throne of dastardly Venus - I nicked the back of my leg quite painfully with it. And over the next couple of days the regrowth of hair on my legs generally was unfortunately noticeably quicker than with the Venus.
Verdict - Lady Gel, great. Soleil Scent, not a match for the cruelly expensive market leader.
I have now completed my eight-week trial of Philips Lumea. I have had four sessions, each two weeks apart, which took place under brand supervision at the Lumea "pop-up spa" in London.
The fact that it was a supervised trial meant that the timing was regular and my technique for using the device was exactly as intended by the manufacturer. I hope these reviews will be quite representative of the results you can expect if you follow the directions thoroughly.
In the interest of speed and convenience, I was testing the device on my armpits (which I photographed for you last time - no more pics though, it was just too terrifying).
After my first session, I noticed a real difference in the amount of regrowth (you have to shave before using IPL devices like Lumea, so this was shaving re-growth rather than regrowth from IPL-removed hairs). After that I saw slow but steady reduction in the amount of remaining hair patches over the subsequent weeks.
Now at 8 weeks, I'm seeing about 70% less hair on one side and 60% less on the other. I have also seen a difference in the skin around the remaining hairs - I don't see the dark shadow of new hairs lurking underneath the skin anymore - just clear skin, as if hairs had never grown there.
Sadly my time with Lumea has now come to an end, and since I already have a Boots iPulse Smooth Skin that I'm testing, I doubt I will buy a Lumea to continue my trial with (one IPL machine is enough, even for me). However in the 8 weeks I used it, I definitely saw a noticeable reduction in hair and I'm confident that if I kept going with it I could reach a more or less hair-free state given time.
In terms of useability and comfort, Lumea is superb. It is well designed, easy to handle and requires minimal prepping of the skin (no gel!). Its only shortcoming when compared to the Boots iPulse Smooth Skin (in my eyes its main competitor on the UK market) is that it only claims to provide a temporary result. If the power were increased to offer a permanent effect, I'd be recommending it wholeheartedly. However, I think most people will expect a permanent result for something at this price point (Lumea is £399), and would be disappointed that they'd have to keep using this every two weeks to keep their hair-free results. Don't get me wrong, it's a vast improvement on shaving and waxing. But ideally we want something we can stop using after a while, and Lumea makes no promises of that. I learned at the sessions that there has been anecdotal evidence of long-term users being able to space out their sessions to 4 weeks, but this isn't "official" information and shouldn't be taken as an indicator of performance.
Verdict - great design, great results, but the lack of a permanent outcome lets this product down.
Disclosure - this unit is a PR sample, we did not pay for it
My first treatment session with the Boots Smooth Skin iPulse unit was completed yesterday afternoon.
The Boots Smooth Skin will be a familiar sight to many. It has been on sale at Boots since last year, and has set in train plenty of speculation and curiosity owing to its promise of permanent, painless hair reduction. It originally cost £299.99 and was offered at £249.99 during promotional offers. The full price has since gone up to £324.99.
Needless to say I was more than happy to avoid the £325 outlay in order to give the system a try - I'd been wanting one since they came out, although on my budget it wasn't going to happen any time soon.
As regular readers will know, I am also currently trialling Philips Lumea, a rival home IPL device, so there is a comparison element to my reviews here.
I want to point out that comparing my Smooth Skin experience with the Philips Lumea trial is not really a fair test. I use the Lumea on my armpits (small and straightforward) and the Smooth Skin on my bikini line (more contortions needed, more sensitive area).
However, I must say that so far the user experience of the Lumea is definitely my preferred option. The reasons for this are a) no need for conductive gel, which is messy and awkward and b) a larger window on the headset, meaning that the Lumea covers more ground more quickly.
Another notable factor is discomfort. As mentioned, I'm not sure is a fair comparison, because of the difference in treatment areas. Lumea didn't hurt at all when I used it, though I had it on a fairly powerful setting. However the Smooth Skin did actually really STING, especially on the areas where the hair was thickest. I started out on the most powerful setting ("fair") in accordance with my skintone, and then switched down to "medium", though it still smarted quite a bit. Next time I will use "dark" and hope that alleviates the problem, but as there are only three settings, if it doesn't I'm a bit stuck.
So as far as user experience goes, the Lumea is ahead of the game, though admittedly under biased conditions.
For general build-quality and customer support, there isn't much to choose between the two units. Both are solid, pleasant to handle and thoroughly backed up with instructions, multimedia guides, precautionary caveats, etc. As you'd expect from the large corporations that produce them, both seem to have been researched to the back teeth and made pretty much foolproof for the consumer market.
Aesthetically, I do prefer the Lumea. It has a familiar "hairdryer" feeling in the hand, and I like the reassurance of knowing that the power-adjust button is right there under my thumb if I need it (Smooth Skin's controls are on the base unit). Also the lack of a cord makes it much more portable and easy to store (although the Smooth Skin was supplied with a natty faux-leather vanity case for discreet storage, which I like a lot).
The most important thing to remember if you're trying to choose between these two is that the claims for the two products are not the same. Lumea offers an easy hair-free result ONLY if you repeat the treatment every fortnight. If you stop, the hair comes back. This is because the light energy is only powerful enough to put the follicles into a dormant state, not to disable them altogether. Smooth Skin is strong enough to damage follicles enough for permanent hair reduction - i.e. you should be able to stop using it for good at the end of the treatment period and the hair won't grow back.
There have been some criticisms of the Smooth Skin's 10,000 flash lifespan (after that, you have to pay out again to replace the head unit). But (if it does what it says) there will come a point where you never need to use the thing again, and hopefully that'll be well within 10,000 flashes. Lumea contains 40,000 flashes, which should buy you 5-7 hair-free years. (Still not bad!)
Lumea has not been safety tested for use on the face, and is so far only suitable for use by women. Smooth Skin can be used on the face, and by men on their backs and shoulders (though not face), so if you're considering home IPL for those purposes, Smooth Skin is your product.
I haven't seen any results yet from Smooth Skin (it should take a few more sessions to see visible hair loss). Lumea has produced definite bald patches on my armpits after two sessions.
Stay tuned for more results, and as before, please do ask me any questions and I will do my best to find the answers for you.
As mentioned earlier in the week, I'm currently trying out Philips' new home-use IPL device, Lumea. Yesterday I had my first session, and came face to face with the Lumea handset for the first time.
My first impressions are very good - the Lumea is about the same shape and weight as a travel blowdryer, and feels very solid, smooth and well-made. It's cordless and has an intutive control system - there's a trigger button, an on-off switch and a range of intensity settings (1-5) which can be adjusted according to skin and hair type.
The window at the head of the device is quite large - it took me about 15 "flashes" to do each armpit and I'd done the whole of both sides in under 3 minutes. Much much quicker than expected.
Lumea has a few advantages over its competitors - it doesn't need a contact gel, it's a cordless all-in-one unit, and needs no bulb replacement within its 40,000-flash lifespan (estimated to last about 5-7 years with normal use). However it's not a "permanent" solution. Instead, it's something you need to use every 2 weeks to prevent hair growth. If you stop, the hair comes back. Unlike more intensive treatments, Lumea doesn't claim to kill the hair root - rather it forces the follicle into a resting phase so that it doesn't produce hair.
Lumea has the same limitations as all IPL devices - it can't be used by women with very dark skin, or by those with blond, red or grey hair. For Anglo-Irish types like me, it's great news, but its potential user base is demographically pretty narrow, especially as it's only recommended for women.
Using it is fairly simple. The only bit I found tricky was angling the head correctly; In order to work, the window bit needs to be in full contact with the skin. When it's ready to flash, a green light on the back of the "head" comes on. I needed a few contortions to get it properly aligned at first, although it's something that I think gets easier with practice.
Did it hurt? No - and it shouldn't if you're using it at the correct intensity for your skin and hair type. The flash sensation is warm, but not unpleasantly so. It's like a very quick exposure to bright sunlight. If it does sting, you can turn the intensity down a notch using the buttons on the handle.
I haven't seen any results yet, and probably won't for the next couple of sessions, but I will let you know how it performs in future posts. Again, feel free to ask any questions in the comments and I'll field them to the experts at my next session.
In summary - so far so good, and I'm feeling very positive about the product after the first session.
IPL stands for "Intense Pulsed Light". It's a progression from traditional laser hair removal, and it started out in salons. Basically the little "window" in the head of the device shoots out a burst of incredibly bright light which is absorbed by the dark hair shaft. It is transmitted to the root of the hair which is then frazzled out of operation. The treatment needs to be repeated because hair follicles have different phases of growth and dormancy, so you need periodical re-treatment to catch them all.
IPL is now coming to the home-use market via brands like Tria, Philips, Boots and Remington, all of who offer a hand-held unit costing roughly £300 - £400. The Lumea retails at £399.99.
Because of the way IPL works, the method is restricted to those with a good contrast in tone between hair and skin - if you have black hair and pale skin you're ideal, but it's not any use for most black and Asian skintones or those with pale blond, red or grey hair. A frustrating limitation to an otherwise amazing-sounding method.
Unlike Boots' version which proffers "permanent hair reduction", Lumea provides no claim of permanent absence of hair. Instead the marketing blurb says that you can use it every 2 to 4 weeks and stay entirely hair free in perpetuity without any regrowth, ingrown hairs, shaving rashes or painful/expensive salon visits. Interesting contrast - I'm not sure whether it reflects a difference in the way the two machines work, or whether it's just two marketing gambits, but in either case, the prospect is exciting - a single payout for permanent, easy to maintain results.
I'll be attending 4 sessions over the next couple of months as part of Lumea's "spa sessions", which I think are restricted to reviewers (although there was a competition run in Glamour magazine to win places on the trial too). I'll be posting as I go to give you the detail of the experience and the results.
If there's anything you want to know or any questions I can ask about this unit on your behalf, please let me know in the comments.
Posts
