2 replies to this topic

[michael24]

I have been thinking about something recently that perhaops those with experience can weigh in on.

Lasers, skin needling, subcision, TCA, all these treatments are meant to cause minimal damage to the skin to repair itself and induce collagen. This in turn heals scars either by completely removing them or making them look better over time.

My question is what makes a treatment that is much more expensive like lasers better than skin needling, if they both essentially do the same thing? Is it simply a matter of time? Where as is may take a 3 sessions with say fraxel repair as opposed to many more with needling.

[DRaGZ]

For cost, it basically only comes down to level of expertise required and cost to offer the treatment. Many lasers have "consumables," which are materials that need to be replaced time to time or from procedure to procedure. They also require a fair bit of training to use effectively, and is definitely something you cannot do at home. Needling, on the other hand, can be self-taught and, while it, too, technically has consumables, it is much cheaper to get a needling kit than laser system (though, actually, a professional needling kit with professional-grade needles costs hundreds of dollars).

As for which is better, I couldn't say. Needling, overall, seems to be less well-documented than lasers, subcision, and TCA. Subcision is also a fundamentally different beast than most treatments: it's actually physically unbinding scars (if they are bound down) instead of just inducing collagen growth.

[LZOMG]

Depends on how many Scars you have,
if its just 3-4 scars then get punch excisions, but if you have a good 20 scars on your face then I recommend CO2 lasers, it would be more cost effecient that way.