Hi, I am trying to understand what settings there are with fraxel treatment and what they mean. Am I right, that the mJ expresses the depth -and thus possibly efficacy- of the treatment? How is that associated with the levels (8,9,10 up to 20, 25 etc.) that I see people writing about? And how important are the passes and how many are usually done? I will have my first fraxel treatment next Friday and have no idea so far about all this and if I can/should ask the doctor to do a certain level/energy/passes. What if he just will not do high levels? I have fair to slightly olive skin with lots of brown and red marks from acne, not too bad though, and scars. None of them deep, but there are just so many. Also I have big pores and oily skin in general. I hope that my acne -which I only have during about 1 week in a month, it's hormonal- will get better, too, as I have seen other people write in this thread. If not I might get smoothbeam, too, to help with the breakouts.

mJ is depth. Treatment level is density (how many pinpoint wounds are created). Coverage will vary depending on mJ and density, since higher mJs create larger wounds. Treatment levels do not go up to 20 or 25. I think it goes up to 12, then R-1 and R-2. Efficacy will depend on both.

You should trust your doctor to adjust your treatment to the right levels, but somewhere in the 35-40 mJ and 6-8 treatment level should be a good start.

 

at 35-40 mj and 6-8 level how much downtime are we looking at, or should I say how long before you are 'presentable to the public without looking like you tried to have something done?

 

My first treatment @ 40/6, I probably could've gone out the next day. At 35/8, I went to work looking weirder than the next day at 40/6. Everyone just thought I was sunburned and peeling, so no big deal.

 

At 70 mjs, I am STILL raw after almost 2 weeks! It still looks like I tried to have something done there. Though I'd readlly hate to waste my time at lower settings because to me the deeper the wound created, the better the chance of good results. It just looks like the 35-40 mjs, level 6-8 did not produce adequate results on the pitting for several posters. Yet noone has tried 70 mjs (at some level, not sure mine), for 3 to four rounds. I am SOOOO curious as to whether or not this makes a difference on the results for acne pitting/depressed scarring pockmarks.

Since I am one of the only people to venture into this category I will say it is very comparable to a dermabrasion in terms of downtime.

hi

i had my first session of fraxel laser about 10 days ago (saturday, 19 may). my skin still has a reddish tinge --- i think this might be because i had itchy hands and i rubbed off the dry skin flakes.

but what i'm really worried about is my scars. they are dark red in color and actually seem worse than before

is this normal? will they get better? can someone who has done this before please let me know what to expect?

i've tried all sorts of other treatments for my scars: needle abrasion, TCA cross, dermabrasion. none of them worked. i'm trying fraxel as a last resort.

Had my 1st session today. 40mJ full face, 60mJ on some spots. They said I have a high pain threshold. Red now but little discomfort. Maybe more swelling tomorrow. The doc said to use ice if needed for comfort but it's good to let the swelling happen.

i think from what i've heard, the darkening/reddening of the scars you're experiencing is are the damaged cells migrating to the surface -- this is the bronzing effect that should happen 4-5 days after treatment...

For anyone here who's currently doing Fraxel -- did the doctor recommend using Retin-A prior to starting Fraxel? That's what my doctor prescribed.

My PS told me to NOT to use any kind of retinoids on my face 2 weeks prior to treatment. He made me sign a paper stating that I was aware that I shouldn't be using them with Fraxel. It's been a while since I spoke with him about it and I can't remember exactly why they shouldn't be used together but, I think it had to do with excessive peeling. Not sure though.

 

For anyone here who's currently doing Fraxel -- did the doctor recommend using Retin-A prior to starting Fraxel? That's what my doctor prescribed.

My PS told me to NOT to use any kind of retinoids on my face 2 weeks prior to treatment. He made me sign a paper stating that I was aware that I shouldn't be using them with Fraxel. It's been a while since I spoke with him about it and I can't remember exactly why they shouldn't be used together but, I think it had to do with excessive peeling. Not sure though.

 

Retinoids inhibit heat shock protein 70, which is involved in wound healing/collagen formation.

 

Apologies for quoting older posts. I was browsing through this thread when I stumbled upon the above. My doctor prescribed me with depigmenting lotion - consiting of 2.5% Hydroquinone and incindentally, 0.05% Retinoic Acid. Albeit the considerable small percentage of the latter, should this be of concern? I was told to apply it ever second night within 7 days of getting fraxel done, and then every night thereafter for a maximum six weeks. I'm due for my second treatment Friday week, which, according to the instructions, means I should be applying the lotion on my treated areas right up to the day of treatment.

Should I be worried?

Hello Everyone,

I had my second fraxel today at 45/7 (my first was 40/7). The pain was almost intolerable. I seriosly had tears coming out of my eyes it hurt so bad. I dont see how anyone could tolerate anything higher! I am red and itchy but otherwise not visibly swollen. With the first one, I had almost no down time and could go out that very same day... this time its about the same except the redness is a little worse.. it looks kinda weird but I am okay going out. The doc said I am having good results.... I looked at the before pictures they took before the first treatment and there is visible improvement. The doc said I was responding surpsingly well! I am so excited about fraxel! If I can stick it out with the pain during the procedure, I am sure it will be worth it.

For those who had a treatment higher than 45mj... how bad was it as far as pain???

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

Odd to hear a doctor say this.... So does your doctor have both machines? I am asking this as usually Fraxel 2 is just a software upgrade not a whole new machine so it would be odd if your doctor had two different machines. Just curious.

 

My doctor said exactly the same thing. She has no reason to lie or suggest otherwise - her practice was the first in Australia to pursue fraxel and she herself is extremely knowledgeable and experienced, having received extensive training (both nationally and overseas) on this subject since fraxel's inception.

I really don't understand it.

^^ Dr-Skin >>

http://www.iacd2006.com/abstract/23.htm

Excuse my ignorance but can anybody please inform if the 1550nm Fraxel SR laser denotes the SR750 or SR1500.

I haven't been on for a while. I've had a couple of fraxel treatments with the old fraxel. Can anyone recommend a doctor in the L.A. area who has the new one (SR1500)? What exactly is the difference?

Hi all

I just had a consult with Dr Walter (Sydney) about having my scars treated with the Fraxel 1500 (theirs apparently goes up to 70mj). The doctor who does the treatments said that she'd start at 35mj level nine. After reading this thread I am a little concerned that that might be a bit high to start with and wonder what others think. She showed me where a chicken pox scar had been on her nose. It was barely noticeable, and certainly not noticeable before she pointed it to me, but obviously had been very big. She told me that she had used the highest setting on that (I can't remember how many times). She also told me that on her patients she likes to be up to the highest setting by the third session (they recommend five). I assume that by the highest setting she means 70mj which is a kind of a scary level after reading these threads. I was wondering if anyone on this board has had ANY experience with levels up around this mark and especially with this derm - Neutral Bay Laser & Dermatology Clinic.

Thanks! Caesar 2

Had my 1st session today. 40mJ full face, 60mJ on some spots. They said I have a high pain threshold. :eh: Red now but little discomfort. Maybe more swelling tomorrow. The doc said to use ice if needed for comfort but it's good to let the swelling happen.

Hi tabula rasa

Just realised that you are going to the Neutral Bay Laser & Dermatology Clinic which is where I had a consult today. Would be VERY interested in finding out how you go with it. I have my first fraxel appointment there in early July. Which Doc did you? There seem to be quite aggressive in comparison to the earlier fraxel treatments.

Thanks! Caesar 2

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

 

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

Odd to hear a doctor say this.... So does your doctor have both machines? I am asking this as usually Fraxel 2 is just a software upgrade not a whole new machine so it would be odd if your doctor had two different machines. Just curious.

 

My doctor said exactly the same thing. She has no reason to lie or suggest otherwise - her practice was the first in Australia to pursue fraxel and she herself is extremely knowledgeable and experienced, having received extensive training (both nationally and overseas) on this subject since fraxel's inception.

I really don't understand it.

 

Neither do I. But it's amusing to discover most of the more positive posts on these boards were from those receiving aggressive treatment with the SR750, when a select few are preaching the SR1500 a much more superior, better upgrade, even suggesting to avoid the SR750 like a plague. To one person in particular, advising to travel to another country merely to be treated with the SR1500, is ridiculous. There is only so much we can assume from webinars and such. To be advocating (not advising - and there's a difference) which is better, when you've never tried one or the other, or worse still, neither, isn't right.

This thread has been very interesting and fullfilling to read to say the least, but like the 'nutrition & holistic thread' elsewhere, nowadays I take most of the suggestions and advice here with a grain of salt. Hell, chocolate and pizza never gave me acne :rolleyes:

All that said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I have four, yes four, consults with different clinics to get different opinions. It should be interesting. Whatever the verdict - from now on - I'll listen to the professionals and decide for myself.

Had my 1st session today. 40mJ full face, 60mJ on some spots. They said I have a high pain threshold. :eh: Red now but little discomfort. Maybe more swelling tomorrow. The doc said to use ice if needed for comfort but it's good to let the swelling happen.

Hi tabula rasa

Just realised that you are going to the Neutral Bay Laser & Dermatology Clinic which is where I had a consult today. Would be VERY interested in finding out how you go with it. I have my first fraxel appointment there in early July. Which Doc did you? There seem to be quite aggressive in comparison to the earlier fraxel treatments.

Thanks! Caesar 2

 

Hi Caesar. They only just got the 70mJ upgrade the day of my treatment so I suspect your Doc was referring to the previous 'maximum' of 40mJ. I'm with Dr Nolan. I had 40mJ/L8 and 60mJ on some spots with no significant pain or dramas and looking pretty normal after only 2 days. The complication rate from Fraxel appears very low and results, if achieved at all, seem dependent on intensity and depth. Acne scars are deep. To me there seems little point in wasting time with ineffective low settings*. I want to progress to higher settings over my next sessions. The posts here show that pain tolerance and swelling varies greatly from person to person, but 35mJ/Level 8 seems a normal or even conservative starting point. See how you go with that and take it from there. That is the nice thing about fractional resurfacing - You can test and adjust progressive treatments, unlike full ablative resurfacing.

* note though - darker skin types have increased risk of hyperpigmentation indicating lower energy and more spacing between treatments.

..........it's amusing to discover most of the more positive posts on these boards were from those receiving aggressive treatment with the SR750, when a select few are preaching the SR1500 a much more superior, better upgrade, even suggesting to avoid the SR750 like a plague. To one person in particular, advising to travel to another country merely to be treated with the SR1500, is ridiculous. There is only so much we can assume from webinars and such. To be advocating (not advising - and there's a difference) which is better, when you've never tried one or the other, or worse still, neither, isn't right.

This thread has been very interesting and fullfilling to read to say the least, but like the 'nutrition & holistic thread' elsewhere, nowadays I take most of the suggestions and advice here with a grain of salt. Hell, chocolate and pizza never gave me acne :rolleyes:

All that said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I have four, yes four, consults with different clinics to get different opinions. It should be interesting. Whatever the verdict - from now on - I'll listen to the professionals and decide for myself.

I may be wrong but the understanding I had from reading this post (ok, ok I admit I skipped 50 pages in the middle :wacko: ) was that the 1500 hardware was able to deliver greater energy (ie increased MTZ depth) with precision and safety over the 750 model, which suffered distortion of the MTZ column shape at high energy levels. I also got the impression that the level of pain being reported seemed to drop when the 1500 arrived too, but perhaps this was due to different settings or anaesthesia. My derm said Fraxel results for scarring are very much dependent on higher depths and densities of treatment. My understanding is the 1500 is superior to the 750 in being able to provide this.

Hello Everyone,

I had my second fraxel today at 45/7 (my first was 40/7). The pain was almost intolerable. I seriosly had tears coming out of my eyes it hurt so bad. I dont see how anyone could tolerate anything higher! .......For those who had a treatment higher than 45mj... how bad was it as far as pain???

Hi Jaimelyn. What anaesthetic did you have? I had Emla (topical anaesthetic) cream applied two hours before and Paracetamol, which worked fine. The pain built a bit with each pass but was never bad.

I'm currently being treated with the SR750. My skin is still flaking/exfoliating in some areas, almost 3 weeks post fraxel. I noticed the one thing the SR750 has over the SR1500 (purely from observation in this thread) is the significant peeling (hence longer downtime) after the prodecure. Especially at aggressive settings. Is this necessarily a bad or good thing? While I recall a handfull of recipients treated with the SR1500 did in fact peel significantly within days following treatment, it seems the majority here never did. If anything (touch wood) the texture of my skin has slightly improved, and only after one session. I feel alot more comfortable having peeled significantly (and suffer the consequence of longer downtime) than not experience it much at all.

Without searching furiously through this thread, can anybody determine the SR1500 equivalent to the SR750. Ie., I believe I was treated (full face) at 25mj x 125 density x 14 passes.

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

 

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

Odd to hear a doctor say this.... So does your doctor have both machines? I am asking this as usually Fraxel 2 is just a software upgrade not a whole new machine so it would be odd if your doctor had two different machines. Just curious.

 

My doctor said exactly the same thing. She has no reason to lie or suggest otherwise - her practice was the first in Australia to pursue fraxel and she herself is extremely knowledgeable and experienced, having received extensive training (both nationally and overseas) on this subject since fraxel's inception.

I really don't understand it.

 

Neither do I. But it's amusing to discover most of the more positive posts on these boards were from those receiving aggressive treatment with the SR750, when a select few are preaching the SR1500 a much more superior, better upgrade, even suggesting to avoid the SR750 like a plague. To one person in particular, advising to travel to another country merely to be treated with the SR1500, is ridiculous. There is only so much we can assume from webinars and such. To be advocating (not advising - and there's a difference) which is better, when you've never tried one or the other, or worse still, neither, isn't right.

This thread has been very interesting and fullfilling to read to say the least, but like the 'nutrition & holistic thread' elsewhere, nowadays I take most of the suggestions and advice here with a grain of salt. Hell, chocolate and pizza never gave me acne :rolleyes:

All that said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I have four, yes four, consults with different clinics to get different opinions. It should be interesting. Whatever the verdict - from now on - I'll listen to the professionals and decide for myself.

 

I have been advocating 1500 over 750, and I feel it's perfectly justified.

Your reasoning that more people have reported positive results w/ the 750 doesn't hold any water, because the 1500 sample size is so much smaller. I don't know anyone on here that has completed their course of treatments with the 1500, so of course there would be less positive reports with the new version.

Tabula Rasa says it above, but the efficacy of Fraxel in general is based on depth of MTZ and density of treatment. This was discussed well before the 1500 came out. The 1500 was designed specifically to allow much deeper depth of penetration while maintaining the same or greater density levels of the 750.

The key, of course, is that the 1500 is better in theory, which is why everyone is on here asking about it. Since very few people on here have tried the 1500 so far, one can only rely on the clinical studies that have been released that say the 1500 is clearly more efficacious than the 750.

I'm currently being treated with the SR750. My skin is still flaking/exfoliating in some areas, almost 3 weeks post fraxel. I noticed the one thing the SR750 has over the SR1500 (purely from observation in this thread) is the significant peeling (hence longer downtime) after the prodecure. Especially at aggressive settings. Is this necessarily a bad or good thing? While I recall a handfull of recipients treated with the SR1500 did in fact peel significantly within days following treatment, it seems the majority here never did. If anything (touch wood) the texture of my skin has slightly improved, and only after one session. I feel alot more comfortable having peeled significantly (and suffer the consequence of longer downtime) than not experience it much at all.

Without searching furiously through this thread, can anybody determine the SR1500 equivalent to the SR750. Ie., I believe I was treated (full face) at 25mj x 125 density x 14 passes.

I peeled heavily after my second treatment w/ the 1500.

How long does post accutane users have to wait until they can get fraxel?

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

 

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

Odd to hear a doctor say this.... So does your doctor have both machines? I am asking this as usually Fraxel 2 is just a software upgrade not a whole new machine so it would be odd if your doctor had two different machines. Just curious.

 

My doctor said exactly the same thing. She has no reason to lie or suggest otherwise - her practice was the first in Australia to pursue fraxel and she herself is extremely knowledgeable and experienced, having received extensive training (both nationally and overseas) on this subject since fraxel's inception.

I really don't understand it.

 

Neither do I. But it's amusing to discover most of the more positive posts on these boards were from those receiving aggressive treatment with the SR750, when a select few are preaching the SR1500 a much more superior, better upgrade, even suggesting to avoid the SR750 like a plague. To one person in particular, advising to travel to another country merely to be treated with the SR1500, is ridiculous. There is only so much we can assume from webinars and such. To be advocating (not advising - and there's a difference) which is better, when you've never tried one or the other, or worse still, neither, isn't right.

This thread has been very interesting and fullfilling to read to say the least, but like the 'nutrition & holistic thread' elsewhere, nowadays I take most of the suggestions and advice here with a grain of salt. Hell, chocolate and pizza never gave me acne :rolleyes:

All that said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I have four, yes four, consults with different clinics to get different opinions. It should be interesting. Whatever the verdict - from now on - I'll listen to the professionals and decide for myself.

 

I have been advocating 1500 over 750, and I feel it's perfectly justified.

Your reasoning that more people have reported positive results w/ the 750 doesn't hold any water, because the 1500 sample size is so much smaller. I don't know anyone on here that has completed their course of treatments with the 1500, so of course there would be less positive reports with the new version.

Tabula Rasa says it above, but the efficacy of Fraxel in general is based on depth of MTZ and density of treatment. This was discussed well before the 1500 came out. The 1500 was designed specifically to allow much deeper depth of penetration while maintaining the same or greater density levels of the 750.

The key, of course, is that the 1500 is better in theory, which is why everyone is on here asking about it. Since very few people on here have tried the 1500 so far, one can only rely on the clinical studies that have been released that say the 1500 is clearly more efficacious than the 750.

 

I'm currently being treated with the SR750. My skin is still flaking/exfoliating in some areas, almost 3 weeks post fraxel. I noticed the one thing the SR750 has over the SR1500 (purely from observation in this thread) is the significant peeling (hence longer downtime) after the prodecure. Especially at aggressive settings. Is this necessarily a bad or good thing? While I recall a handfull of recipients treated with the SR1500 did in fact peel significantly within days following treatment, it seems the majority here never did. If anything (touch wood) the texture of my skin has slightly improved, and only after one session. I feel alot more comfortable having peeled significantly (and suffer the consequence of longer downtime) than not experience it much at all.

Without searching furiously through this thread, can anybody determine the SR1500 equivalent to the SR750. Ie., I believe I was treated (full face) at 25mj x 125 density x 14 passes.

I peeled heavily after my second treatment w/ the 1500.

 

I also have peeled pretty heavily after my treatments with 1500 you can chk some pics posted on earlier.

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

 

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

Odd to hear a doctor say this.... So does your doctor have both machines? I am asking this as usually Fraxel 2 is just a software upgrade not a whole new machine so it would be odd if your doctor had two different machines. Just curious.

 

My doctor said exactly the same thing. She has no reason to lie or suggest otherwise - her practice was the first in Australia to pursue fraxel and she herself is extremely knowledgeable and experienced, having received extensive training (both nationally and overseas) on this subject since fraxel's inception.

I really don't understand it.

 

Neither do I. But it's amusing to discover most of the more positive posts on these boards were from those receiving aggressive treatment with the SR750, when a select few are preaching the SR1500 a much more superior, better upgrade, even suggesting to avoid the SR750 like a plague. To one person in particular, advising to travel to another country merely to be treated with the SR1500, is ridiculous. There is only so much we can assume from webinars and such. To be advocating (not advising - and there's a difference) which is better, when you've never tried one or the other, or worse still, neither, isn't right.

This thread has been very interesting and fullfilling to read to say the least, but like the 'nutrition & holistic thread' elsewhere, nowadays I take most of the suggestions and advice here with a grain of salt. Hell, chocolate and pizza never gave me acne :rolleyes:

All that said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I have four, yes four, consults with different clinics to get different opinions. It should be interesting. Whatever the verdict - from now on - I'll listen to the professionals and decide for myself.

 

I have been advocating 1500 over 750, and I feel it's perfectly justified.

Your reasoning that more people have reported positive results w/ the 750 doesn't hold any water, because the 1500 sample size is so much smaller. I don't know anyone on here that has completed their course of treatments with the 1500, so of course there would be less positive reports with the new version.

Tabula Rasa says it above, but the efficacy of Fraxel in general is based on depth of MTZ and density of treatment. This was discussed well before the 1500 came out. The 1500 was designed specifically to allow much deeper depth of penetration while maintaining the same or greater density levels of the 750.

The key, of course, is that the 1500 is better in theory, which is why everyone is on here asking about it. Since very few people on here have tried the 1500 so far, one can only rely on the clinical studies that have been released that say the 1500 is clearly more efficacious than the 750.

 

Yes. But if these earlier posts suggest at least a 30-40% improvement (treating mild to moderate-severe scarring mind you) after three-four sessions of AGGRESSIVE treatment with the SR750, is that not enough indication that it in fact DOES work quite well, when the rest of you who were never treated with the SR750 merely shun it? I have moderate scarring myself; hell, if I could get a mere 30-40% improvement, I'd be over the moon. For the past 6 months, those people treated with the SR1500 since its inception have most likely had no less than three treatments thus far, yet alot of them here have nothing conclusive to indicate ANY or MUCH improvement at all. Or perhaps these people were treated at such lower levels, that a significant number (over six) of Fraxel therapy is needed to justify any satisfactory result? Nevertheless, if three-five AGGRESSIVE sessions of Fraxel 1 is the equivalent of 6+ sessions of Fraxel 2, I know which one I'd opt for. My response to info-blizzard was that, if a top derm with extensive training, experience and expertise has no reason to pursue Fraxel 2 (due to an ovewhelming response and success utilising Fraxel 1), why should we ALL disagree otherwise. That link noise posted immediately after is quite interesting. If it works for them, why not? I guess if "it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

 

I recently had a Fraxel consultation with Dr. Rokshar about getting the proedure done. I asked him about whether or not it would make a difference if I got Fraxel I or Fraxel II done. I was actually surprised to hear from him that he said that there was not much difference at all between the two. He said that he has been working with both and that he really did not see a significant difference between the two with his patients. It was even suggested that I could save money if I got the Fraxel I done instead if I wanted.

I know that he is probably the most experienced Dr. out there right now for fraxel and trains the doctors that do this procedure. So just wanted to ask you guys if there is any truth to this or if anybody else has said this to them during their consultations?

Also wanted to ask what are the suggested settings/passes I should ask for to get the best improvement. My scarring is medium/minor.

Odd to hear a doctor say this.... So does your doctor have both machines? I am asking this as usually Fraxel 2 is just a software upgrade not a whole new machine so it would be odd if your doctor had two different machines. Just curious.

 

My doctor said exactly the same thing. She has no reason to lie or suggest otherwise - her practice was the first in Australia to pursue fraxel and she herself is extremely knowledgeable and experienced, having received extensive training (both nationally and overseas) on this subject since fraxel's inception.

I really don't understand it.

 

Neither do I. But it's amusing to discover most of the more positive posts on these boards were from those receiving aggressive treatment with the SR750, when a select few are preaching the SR1500 a much more superior, better upgrade, even suggesting to avoid the SR750 like a plague. To one person in particular, advising to travel to another country merely to be treated with the SR1500, is ridiculous. There is only so much we can assume from webinars and such. To be advocating (not advising - and there's a difference) which is better, when you've never tried one or the other, or worse still, neither, isn't right.

This thread has been very interesting and fullfilling to read to say the least, but like the 'nutrition & holistic thread' elsewhere, nowadays I take most of the suggestions and advice here with a grain of salt. Hell, chocolate and pizza never gave me acne :rolleyes:

All that said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I have four, yes four, consults with different clinics to get different opinions. It should be interesting. Whatever the verdict - from now on - I'll listen to the professionals and decide for myself.

 

I have been advocating 1500 over 750, and I feel it's perfectly justified.

Your reasoning that more people have reported positive results w/ the 750 doesn't hold any water, because the 1500 sample size is so much smaller. I don't know anyone on here that has completed their course of treatments with the 1500, so of course there would be less positive reports with the new version.

Tabula Rasa says it above, but the efficacy of Fraxel in general is based on depth of MTZ and density of treatment. This was discussed well before the 1500 came out. The 1500 was designed specifically to allow much deeper depth of penetration while maintaining the same or greater density levels of the 750.

The key, of course, is that the 1500 is better in theory, which is why everyone is on here asking about it. Since very few people on here have tried the 1500 so far, one can only rely on the clinical studies that have been released that say the 1500 is clearly more efficacious than the 750.

 

Yes. But if these earlier posts suggest at least a 30-40% improvement (treating mild to moderate-severe scarring mind you) after three-four sessions of AGGRESSIVE treatment with the SR750, is that not enough indication that it in fact DOES work quite well, when the rest of you who were never treated with the SR750 merely shun it? I have moderate scarring myself; hell, if I could get a mere 30-40% improvement, I'd be over the moon. For the past 6 months, those people treated with the SR1500 since its inception have most likely had no less than three treatments thus far, yet alot of them here have nothing conclusive to indicate ANY or MUCH improvement at all. Or perhaps these people were treated at such lower levels, that a significant number (over six) of Fraxel therapy is needed to justify any satisfactory result? Nevertheless, if three-five AGGRESSIVE sessions of Fraxel 1 is the equivalent of 6+ sessions of Fraxel 2, I know which one I'd opt for. My response to info-blizzard was that, if a top derm with extensive training, experience and expertise has no reason to pursue Fraxel 2 (due to an ovewhelming response and success utilising Fraxel 1), why should we ALL disagree otherwise. That link noise posted immediately after is quite interesting. If it works for them, why not? I guess if "it ain't broke, don't fix it."

 

You're free to do what you want, but your post highlights that you don't understand the difference b/w the 750 and 1500. The least aggressive treatments with the 1500 on here is as agreessive or more aggressive than any settings on the 750.

Also, I dunno about you, but 30-40% improvement is still broke. I've definitely gotten clear improvement after 2 treatments on the 1500. Won't estimate how much, because I don't have pics to compare, but one rolling scar is nearly gone.

On top of that, there are a couple people's docs who say the 750. But most of the people on here have docs who had the 750 and chose to upgrade to the 1500. So there a plenty of docs who believe the 1500 is better. And if you say it's for more $$$, my derm upgraded but did not change the price.

at low settings i don't think there is a significant difference between the 750 and 1500, but no one with acne scars is going to get low settings.

so at the moderate settings that you will be getting, yes, there is a significant difference. check out the webinars and info on www.reliant-tech.com.

another difference is the handpiece of the 1500 which rolls and is supposed to deliver more uniform treatment with more comfort. also not dealing with the blue dye saves you time and irritation from washing it off.

Hi all

I just had a consult with Dr Walter (Sydney) about having my scars treated with the Fraxel 1500 (theirs apparently goes up to 70mj). The doctor who does the treatments said that she'd start at 35mj level nine. After reading this thread I am a little concerned that that might be a bit high to start with and wonder what others think. She showed me where a chicken pox scar had been on her nose. It was barely noticeable, and certainly not noticeable before she pointed it to me, but obviously had been very big. She told me that she had used the highest setting on that (I can't remember how many times). She also told me that on her patients she likes to be up to the highest setting by the third session (they recommend five). I assume that by the highest setting she means 70mj which is a kind of a scary level after reading these threads. I was wondering if anyone on this board has had ANY experience with levels up around this mark and especially with this derm - Neutral Bay Laser & Dermatology Clinic.

Thanks! Caesar 2

hi caesar, 35 seems to be the standard setting to start at with the new laser for scarring -- a doc told me he starts with 35 as well. and i think that's where people are seeing results with this, at 35 and higher. if you go lower than that you're not going to see as much of an effect.

ylem has been doing 70 so you may want to read back through posts and see what ylem had to say.

Neither do I. But it's amusing to discover most of the more positive posts on these boards were from those receiving aggressive treatment with the SR750, when a select few are preaching the SR1500 a much more superior, better upgrade, even suggesting to avoid the SR750 like a plague. To one person in particular, advising to travel to another country merely to be treated with the SR1500, is ridiculous. There is only so much we can assume from webinars and such. To be advocating (not advising - and there's a difference) which is better, when you've never tried one or the other, or worse still, neither, isn't right.

This thread has been very interesting and fullfilling to read to say the least, but like the 'nutrition & holistic thread' elsewhere, nowadays I take most of the suggestions and advice here with a grain of salt. Hell, chocolate and pizza never gave me acne :rolleyes:

All that said, I'm not jumping to any conclusions. I have four, yes four, consults with different clinics to get different opinions. It should be interesting. Whatever the verdict - from now on - I'll listen to the professionals and decide for myself.

hi info-blizzard, perhaps you're not remembering that everyone has different scarring/different skin/different tolerance and ability to heal, and thus there will be a variety of experiences with each machine. it seems to me that as the SR1500 can go to greater depths, it is clearly better at helping scarring. the people who reported good results with the 750 with aggressive treatment had shallow rolling scars -- billyboy, for instance, was very dissatisfied with 6 treatments of the 750 and now with the 1500 has been a lot more satisfied.

also, remember that everyone gets acne for different reasons...hormonal, diet, stress, poor shedding, acne bacteria, etc. i break out when i eat pizza because i have candiasis and eating poorly and feeding sugars to the candida in my digestive tract causes that symptom for me. it's like some people get lung cancer from smoking for 50 years and others never do...our bodies all respond in unique ways to anything that can cause dis-ease in the body. because you yourself don't experience it, that's no reason to "roll eyes" at what you hear other people say about their own experiences.

in all, i don't understand why your tone is like this ("Whatever the verdict - from now on - I'll listen to the professionals and decide for myself"). no need to start fights!

i ALWAYS take what professionals say with a grain of salt...after all, they are trying to sell you THEIR service and not someone else's. deciding what YOU want and what you're comfortable with is most important. for myself, i found a doc who is doing a special promotion of 5 fraxels with the SR15000 for $2500 -- that's cheaper than any doc i asked who had fraxel 1, so with no blue dye and better depth, i am definitely going for the 1500 🙂

If billyboy is out there, can you say specifically why you prefer the SR1500 in terms of actual results? In the meantime, I'm digging though old posts.