As someone who has had 8 dermaroller treatments between April 2009-September 2010, all I can say is it the biggest load of rubbish I have ever come across.
There are obviously people profiting from this - a dermaroller should not cost more than A2 to produce, yet it sells for A250.
It angers me the NHS are offering this sham of a treatment, as it clearly doesn't work.
Don't fall for it. Take it from someone who knows.
I concur. I've been saying all along that dermal rollers aren't effective as to why it's always combined with topical agents like Retin-A, CP, etc. This is coming from someone who dermal rolled for over a year. The results seen is either because of micro swelling (temporary) and/or topical agents.
I concur. I've been saying all along that dermal rollers aren't effective as to why it's always combined with topical agents like Retin-A, CP, etc. This is coming from someone who dermal rolled for over a year. The results seen is either because of micro swelling (temporary) and/or topical agents.
Same. I've dermarolled and needled over 30 times over the past 2 years and my face looks much much worse, I have more scars than when I started, they are in crazier and more dramatic looking shapes (which makes them more noticeable, and more unnatural looking), and in a way the texture of my skin has degraded down to the level of a burn victim. Though I did several laser treatments in the past that may have contributed to this as texture as well.
One of my scars has morphed into a huge line across my face, from what was just a small indent. Wasn't like that at all untill dermarolling. It literally became inches across straight line scar. I don't know how it happened or why, just that I have been breakout free for years now and that it's really unnatural looking compared to what it was.
As someone who has had 8 dermaroller treatments between April 2009-September 2010, all I can say is it the biggest load of rubbish I have ever come across.
There are obviously people profiting from this - a dermaroller should not cost more than 2 to produce, yet it sells for 250.
It angers me the NHS are offering this sham of a treatment, as it clearly doesn't work.
Don't fall for it. Take it from someone who knows.
Who would pay 250?
You should've just bought one yourself and do it yourself. These "professionals" a lot of times miss the scars completely or don't needle them well enough.
I concur. I've been saying all along that dermal rollers aren't effective as to why it's always combined with topical agents like Retin-A, CP, etc. This is coming from someone who dermal rolled for over a year. The results seen is either because of micro swelling (temporary) and/or topical agents.
Same. I've dermarolled and needled over 30 times over the past 2 years and my face looks much much worse, I have more scars than when I started, they are in crazier and more dramatic looking shapes (which makes them more noticeable, and more unnatural looking), and in a way the texture of my skin has degraded down to the level of a burn victim. Though I did several laser treatments in the past that may have contributed to this as texture as well.
One of my scars has morphed into a huge line across my face, from what was just a small indent. Wasn't like that at all untill dermarolling. It literally became inches across straight line scar. I don't know how it happened or why, just that I have been breakout free for years now and that it's really unnatural looking compared to what it was.
I agree with you completely, particularly your point about the texture of your skin. I too feel my skin has become much worse under dermaroller.
When you really think about it, the concept of repeatably jabbing your face with needles surely can't be a good thing.
This thread needs a representative from the other side
I spent $20 on a dermastamp which I used for about five treatments over the course of half a year. I use Retin-A regularly, but I took a week break from it every time I stamped myself so I can hardly call it a complementary topical.
About a 30-40% improvement in my scars. They were moderately severe... now they're moderate at worst.
To put things in perspective -- just remember that the ones that are most discontent are the ones that yell the loudest.
This thread needs a representative from the other side
I spent $20 on a dermastamp which I used for about five treatments over the course of half a year. I use Retin-A regularly, but I took a week break from it every time I stamped myself so I can hardly call it a complementary topical.
About a 30-40% improvement in my scars. They were moderately severe... now they're moderate at worst.
To put things in perspective -- just remember that the ones that are most discontent are the ones that yell the loudest.
You made some valid points but even though you think it's one-sided...you have to account for sellers promoting it by posing as members, falsifying photos/results, and other factors mentioned here.
Retin-A misuses aren't uncommon. I'm not implying that you are doing such but generally speaking because one could be using too strong of a strength (various strengths, version such as micro)...so if you have to take a week break than you might want to look into another strength or dilute the strength with a moisturizer. Also, the amount of usage should be as small as a flat dime which should suffice the entire face. Lastly, buffer usage as you demonstrated by using it less but a week might be too far apart thus to change strength.
You fail to realize this thread was concerning dermal rollers and not dermal stamps so refrain from being on the defensive.
To put things in perspective - If one wants to see what actually works they must use that one thing exclusively and factor out the rest example use your dermal stamp alone without any topical agents such as Retin-A thus you can gauge the results. Most here are anxious to tell their results later realizing its due to micro-swelling and temporary topical effects...stop use and it'll go back to the way it was in most cases.
I concur. I've been saying all along that dermal rollers aren't effective as to why it's always combined with topical agents like Retin-A, CP, etc. This is coming from someone who dermal rolled for over a year. The results seen is either because of micro swelling (temporary) and/or topical agents.
Same. I've dermarolled and needled over 30 times over the past 2 years and my face looks much much worse, I have more scars than when I started, they are in crazier and more dramatic looking shapes (which makes them more noticeable, and more unnatural looking), and in a way the texture of my skin has degraded down to the level of a burn victim. Though I did several laser treatments in the past that may have contributed to this as texture as well.
One of my scars has morphed into a huge line across my face, from what was just a small indent. Wasn't like that at all untill dermarolling. It literally became inches across straight line scar. I don't know how it happened or why, just that I have been breakout free for years now and that it's really unnatural looking compared to what it was.
I've experience the burn victim texture too and I didn't have laser done to my face.
i can't help but notice that every single person with strong negative views on needling did it with the once every 6 weeks method, meaning they did a relatively aggressive treatment.
Several websites state that doing it a few times a week but lightly is a less risky and potentially more affective way. I know those of us who have severe scarring will think light rolling wont help us but, in the light of all these nagative reviews, i'm going to stamp 3 times a week for the next few months. If positive outcome i'll keep doing it if not, i'll be excising a bunch of my scars in winter.
i can't help but notice that every single person with strong negative views on needling did it with the once every 6 weeks method, meaning they did a relatively aggressive treatment.
Several websites state that doing it a few times a week but lightly is a less risky and potentially more affective way. I know those of us who have severe scarring will think light rolling wont help us but, in the light of all these nagative reviews, i'm going to stamp 3 times a week for the next few months. If positive outcome i'll keep doing it if not, i'll be excising a bunch of my scars in winter.
I find it curious that your name is Dermal Stamp since September 08, and here you are saying youre just about to start using a dermal stamp?
Do you sell them or what?
And yeah I have done frequent but less invasive treatments with rolling.
Hahaha my name hasnt been dermal stamp since 2008, I changed it to that probably 4 days ago. It was Buddy Franklin for over 2 years. I changed it to this name because after so many laser treatments and subcision, i'm trying needling and am trying to be positive about it. Why would i put my name as dermal stamp if i wanted to secretly sell the idea..
i can't help but notice that every single person with strong negative views on needling did it with the once every 6 weeks method, meaning they did a relatively aggressive treatment.
Several websites state that doing it a few times a week but lightly is a less risky and potentially more affective way. I know those of us who have severe scarring will think light rolling wont help us but, in the light of all these nagative reviews, i'm going to stamp 3 times a week for the next few months. If positive outcome i'll keep doing it if not, i'll be excising a bunch of my scars in winter.
I find it curious that your name is Dermal Stamp since September 08, and here you are saying youre just about to start using a dermal stamp?
Do you sell them or what?
And yeah I have done frequent but less invasive treatments with rolling.
Derma stamping and rolling are almost identical-- the only difference being that derma stamping is easier to use and control. With the rollers, it is easy to accidently go over healthy skin.
In fact, starting next month I'm going to abandon the stamp and just do individual needling. That should give me the best control out of all the options.
Often at times you can't tell how deep needles have gone with derma rollers but derma stamping you likely can. derma stamping is best utilized in small area as derma roller would be best for larger areas. I have gauged the pressures with derma rollers and done it to many degrees thus being aggressive at times with no real results.
In fact, I've done individual needling which made my rolling scars and scratch marks, which were superficial and even in color/texture from the start, worst..they're deeper, pigmented, and other all texture looks bad...trying to resolve that. Others on here had the same experience. IMO Individual needling is worst than derma rollers and probably derma stamping...just the whole needling is bad.
Hahaha my name hasnt been dermal stamp since 2008, I changed it to that probably 4 days ago. It was Buddy Franklin for over 2 years. I changed it to this name because after so many laser treatments and subcision, i'm trying needling and am trying to be positive about it. Why would i put my name as dermal stamp if i wanted to secretly sell the idea..
i can't help but notice that every single person with strong negative views on needling did it with the once every 6 weeks method, meaning they did a relatively aggressive treatment.
Several websites state that doing it a few times a week but lightly is a less risky and potentially more affective way. I know those of us who have severe scarring will think light rolling wont help us but, in the light of all these nagative reviews, i'm going to stamp 3 times a week for the next few months. If positive outcome i'll keep doing it if not, i'll be excising a bunch of my scars in winter.
.
I find it curious that your name is Dermal Stamp since September 08, and here you are saying youre just about to start using a dermal stamp?
Do you sell them or what?
And yeah I have done frequent but less invasive treatments with rolling.
@Illusion I don't think this person is a seller. Most often you can tell someone has agenda when they provide the names and links of a product and promoting all the bs products affiliated with their sites along with their wonderful and positives unrealistic stories to go with the solicitation.
@Dermal Stamp I know that everyone skin is different thus one thing that doesn't work for one person might for another but don't say we didn't warn you it's crap. I like to provide the cons and pros so everyone can make a sound decision whether to purchase these kind of products or not and hopefully to save money.
I think the naysayers should stop making sweeping statements like 'it doesn't work' or 'it will go back to the way it was in most cases'. Most cases? How would you know that? Where are the statistics to back this up. I have no issue with people sharing their personal experience whether positive or negative but let's not generalise a widely used scar treatment based on anecdotal evidence.
Dermarolling/stamping has worked for several of us on this board, myself included, so let's stay objective when we share our thoughts.
I think the naysayers should stop making sweeping statements like 'it doesn't work' or 'it will go back to the way it was in most cases'. Most cases? How would you know that? Where are the statistics to back this up. I have no issue with people sharing their personal experience whether positive or negative but let's not generalise a widely used scar treatment based on anecdotal evidence.
Dermarolling/stamping has worked for several of us on this board, myself included, so let's stay objective when we share our thoughts.
Do not twist the "most case" notion...It's common sense. Many have seen results with lasers and needlings is part due the micro-swelling. I've observed more of those that seen NO results with the derma roller than those who have seen results (some are shady). As I said they are often used with conjunctions to topical...how is one suppose to make a valid conclusion if it actually works without trying it on its own??? Again, common sense states if you stop topical treatment your skin will revert back as so to a certain degree. For example Retin-A, stop use of that then there be no agent to stimulate collagen in the skin and accelerate the skin renewal process...moisturizer, discontinue that skin will be dehydrated as usual thus less plumped. No one here is denouncing all who used it so get off your high horse. If it works for you than more power to you. Everyone has their right to an opinion just as you are now demonstrating.
I think the naysayers should stop making sweeping statements like 'it doesn't work' or 'it will go back to the way it was in most cases'. Most cases? How would you know that? Where are the statistics to back this up. I have no issue with people sharing their personal experience whether positive or negative but let's not generalise a widely used scar treatment based on anecdotal evidence.
Dermarolling/stamping has worked for several of us on this board, myself included, so let's stay objective when we share our thoughts.
Do not twist the "most case" notion...It's common sense. Many have seen results with lasers and needlings is part due the micro-swelling. I've observed more of those that seen NO results with the derma roller than those who have seen results (some are shady). As I said they are often used with conjunctions to topical...how is one suppose to make a valid conclusion if it actually works without trying it on its own??? Again, common sense states if you stop topical treatment your skin will revert back as so to a certain degree. For example Retin-A, stop use of that then there be no agent to stimulate collagen in the skin and accelerate the skin renewal process...moisturizer, discontinue that skin will be dehydrated as usual thus less plumped. No one here is denouncing all who used it so get off your high horse. If it works for you than more power to you. Everyone has their right to an opinion just as you are now demonstrating.
So? That doesn't translate to 'it will go back to the way it was in most cases'. And your example of people confusing micro-swelling with actual improvement is spurious. People who are needling properly and consistently can tell the difference.
As I said they are often used with conjunctions to topical...
Needling and aftercare go hand in hand, you can't have one without the other. It's the same with pretty much every popular scar procedure, there's always an aftercare topical.
As I said they are often used with conjunctions to topical...how is one suppose to make a valid conclusion if it actually works without trying it on its own???
Maybe 'cos one of the main purposes is to increase topical penetration? Like I said, they go hand in hand. Not using a topical would defeat the purpose of the treatment in the first place, your argument makes no sense.
No one here is denouncing all who used it
I'm sorry but the OP's comments like 'biggest load of crap', 'the NHS are offering this sham of a treatment' and 'it clearly doesn't work' are as good as denouncing the treatment as a whole. It just sounds like the ramblings of a bitter person instead of an objective judgment.
The fact is, everyone has different skin and healing abilities. It's possible that your healing ability is rather poor which is why you suffered additional scarring. On the other hand, this treatment could change someone else's life for the better. We don't need negative threads that contain sweeping statements that aren't backed by anything but emotions.
I think the naysayers should stop making sweeping statements like 'it doesn't work' or 'it will go back to the way it was in most cases'. Most cases? How would you know that? Where are the statistics to back this up. I have no issue with people sharing their personal experience whether positive or negative but let's not generalise a widely used scar treatment based on anecdotal evidence.
Dermarolling/stamping has worked for several of us on this board, myself included, so let's stay objective when we share our thoughts.
Do not twist the "most case" notion...It's common sense. Many have seen results with lasers and needlings is part due the micro-swelling. I've observed more of those that seen NO results with the derma roller than those who have seen results (some are shady). As I said they are often used with conjunctions to topical...how is one suppose to make a valid conclusion if it actually works without trying it on its own??? Again, common sense states if you stop topical treatment your skin will revert back as so to a certain degree. For example Retin-A, stop use of that then there be no agent to stimulate collagen in the skin and accelerate the skin renewal process...moisturizer, discontinue that skin will be dehydrated as usual thus less plumped. No one here is denouncing all who used it so get off your high horse. If it works for you than more power to you. Everyone has their right to an opinion just as you are now demonstrating.
So? That doesn't translate to 'it will go back to the way it was in most cases'. And your example of people confusing micro-swelling with actual improvement is spurious. People who are needling properly and consistently can tell the difference.
As I said they are often used with conjunctions to topical...
Needling and aftercare go hand in hand, you can't have one without the other. It's the same with pretty much every popular scar procedure, there's always an aftercare topical.
As I said they are often used with conjunctions to topical...how is one suppose to make a valid conclusion if it actually works without trying it on its own???
Maybe 'cos one of the main purposes is to increase topical penetration? Like I said, they go hand in hand. Not using a topical would defeat the purpose of the treatment in the first place, your argument makes no sense.
No one here is denouncing all who used it
I'm sorry but the OP's comments like 'biggest load of crap', 'the NHS are offering this sham of a treatment' and 'it clearly doesn't work' are as good as denouncing the treatment as a whole. It just sounds like the ramblings of a bitter person instead of an objective judgment.
The fact is, everyone has different skin and healing abilities. It's possible that your healing ability is rather poor which is why you suffered additional scarring. On the other hand, this treatment could change someone else's life for the better. We don't need negative threads that contain sweeping statements that aren't backed by anything but emotions.
How is one suppose to respond since you transformed the discussion into so many fragments? We can see what's been said since it's on the very same page thus the quoting is unnecessary. You are misinformed about the derma roller. Derma roller makers claim that it's effective on it's own (stimulate blood flow, opening up pores, increase collagen, and other exaggerations) but can improve with combination of topical agents. From my own personal experience this isn't true as I given in my opinionated points/posts.
I think the naysayers should stop making sweeping statements like 'it doesn't work' or 'it will go back to the way it was in most cases'. Most cases? How would you know that? Where are the statistics to back this up. I have no issue with people sharing their personal experience whether positive or negative but let's not generalise a widely used scar treatment based on anecdotal evidence.
Dermarolling/stamping has worked for several of us on this board, myself included, so let's stay objective when we share our thoughts.
Do not twist the "most case" notion...It's common sense. Many have seen results with lasers and needlings is part due the micro-swelling. I've observed more of those that seen NO results with the derma roller than those who have seen results (some are shady). As I said they are often used with conjunctions to topical...how is one suppose to make a valid conclusion if it actually works without trying it on its own??? Again, common sense states if you stop topical treatment your skin will revert back as so to a certain degree. For example Retin-A, stop use of that then there be no agent to stimulate collagen in the skin and accelerate the skin renewal process...moisturizer, discontinue that skin will be dehydrated as usual thus less plumped. No one here is denouncing all who used it so get off your high horse. If it works for you than more power to you. Everyone has their right to an opinion just as you are now demonstrating.
So? That doesn't translate to 'it will go back to the way it was in most cases'. And your example of people confusing micro-swelling with actual improvement is spurious. People who are needling properly and consistently can tell the difference.
As I said they are often used with conjunctions to topical...
Needling and aftercare go hand in hand, you can't have one without the other. It's the same with pretty much every popular scar procedure, there's always an aftercare topical.
As I said they are often used with conjunctions to topical...how is one suppose to make a valid conclusion if it actually works without trying it on its own???
Maybe 'cos one of the main purposes is to increase topical penetration? Like I said, they go hand in hand. Not using a topical would defeat the purpose of the treatment in the first place, your argument makes no sense.
No one here is denouncing all who used it
I'm sorry but the OP's comments like 'biggest load of crap', 'the NHS are offering this sham of a treatment' and 'it clearly doesn't work' are as good as denouncing the treatment as a whole. It just sounds like the ramblings of a bitter person instead of an objective judgment.
The fact is, everyone has different skin and healing abilities. It's possible that your healing ability is rather poor which is why you suffered additional scarring. On the other hand, this treatment could change someone else's life for the better. We don't need negative threads that contain sweeping statements that aren't backed by anything but emotions.
How is one suppose to respond since you transformed the discussion into so many fragments? We can see what's been said since it's on the very same page thus the quoting is unnecessary. You are misinformed about the derma roller. Derma roller makers claim that it's effective on it's own (stimulate blood flow, opening up pores, increase collagen, and other exaggerations) but can improve with combination of topical agents. From my own personal experience this isn't true as I given in my opinionated points/posts.
How is one suppose to respond since you transformed the discussion into so many fragments? We can see what's been said since it's on the very same page thus the quoting is unnecessary.
Nice sidestep. If it's all there on the very same page then it doesn't matter whether it's fragmented or not, you can still reply.
You are misinformed about the derma roller. Derma roller makers claim that it's effective on it's own
I'm not talking about what a specific dermaroller company says, i'm talking about how the procedure is generally used and for what purpose.
From my own personal experience this isn't true as I given in my opinionated points/posts.
Well maybe you should've used some aftercare? It's kind of common sense to use some sort of moisturiser to aid healing after an invasive treatment.
You still fail due to your lack of understanding. You can continue to ask the same questions and go in circles but the bottom line is that it's not a specific derma roller company...most state the same exaggeration. The common sense and the scientific approach is the factor out the rest and exclusively use the derma roller in order to gauge a valid conclusion (if it works).
A moisturizer is a daily routine so that doesn't factor in (doesn't apply the aftercare). What needs to be factored out are the potent topical agents such as CP and Retin-A. I'm willing to bet if one was to do a study on two groups (group A using CP/RA/Derma roller and group B using just CP/RA) they both would produce about the same results thus the derma rollers are insignificant.
You still fail due to your lack of understanding. You can continue to ask the same questions and go in circles but the bottom line is that it's not a specific derma roller company...most state the same exaggeration. The common sense and the scientific approach is the factor out the rest and exclusively use the derma roller in order to gauge a valid conclusion (if it works).
A moisturizer is a daily routine so that doesn't factor in (doesn't apply the aftercare). What needs to be factored out are the potent topical agents such as CP and Retin-A. I'm willing to bet if one was to do a study on two groups (group A using CP/RA/Derma roller and group B using just CP/RA) they both would produce about the same results thus the derma rollers are insignificant.
No offense, but i'm not the one sitting here with additional scarring. I can comprehend that dermaroller companies will state anything to make their product look as effective as possible, I would never blindly take their advice. I did my own research and common sense told me to use specialised aftercare topicals. You should've figured this out yourself.
I'm willing to bet if one was to do a study on two groups (group A using CP/RA/Derma roller and group B using just CP/RA) they both would produce about the same results thus the derma rollers are insignificant.
Let's hope you can prove it someday.
You still fail due to your lack of understanding. You can continue to ask the same questions and go in circles but the bottom line is that it's not a specific derma roller company...most state the same exaggeration. The common sense and the scientific approach is the factor out the rest and exclusively use the derma roller in order to gauge a valid conclusion (if it works).
A moisturizer is a daily routine so that doesn't factor in (doesn't apply the aftercare). What needs to be factored out are the potent topical agents such as CP and Retin-A. I'm willing to bet if one was to do a study on two groups (group A using CP/RA/Derma roller and group B using just CP/RA) they both would produce about the same results thus the derma rollers are insignificant.
No offense, but i'm not the one sitting here with additional scarring. I can comprehend that dermaroller companies will state anything to make their product look as effective as possible, I would never blindly take their advice. I did my own research and common sense told me to use specialised aftercare topicals. You should've figured this out yourself.
I'm willing to bet if one was to do a study on two groups (group A using CP/RA/Derma roller and group B using just CP/RA) they both would produce about the same results thus the derma rollers are insignificant.
Let's hope you can prove it someday.
There has been no offense taken. I'm not the one who can't tolerate others for having different views.
I really don't know what to believe, guys. I myself have so far done 5 dermarolling treatments (1,5 mm, one month apart, vitamin C + E) and have seen little to no improvement, but I intent to keep on going, because I think it is a project that only works over time.
I have also searched the web for pro and cons, and I seem to find more positive remarks.
For example this scientific study was conducted on 32 persons and the results were very positive (though, mostly for rolling scars, sigh): www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19486041
(you have to sign up to read...)