From the pics it looks like ice pick scarring/large pores (although can't really tell from the pics).

I would look into retin a + tca cross.

From the pics it looks like ice pick scarring/large pores (although can't really tell from the pics).

I would look into retin a + tca cross.

what do u mean large pores? (sorry if i sound so ignorant) and why cant u tell?

retin a+tca cross is like doing lots of chemical peels right? but isnt laser / radio better and less risky? also less demanding..

I would lean more towards large pores with minimal actual scarring. I find little evidence to recommend anything other than ablative fractionalized CO2.

I would lean more towards large pores with minimal actual scarring. I find little evidence to recommend anything other than ablative fractionalized CO2.

well sadly ur wrong. i looked how large pores looks, and its way to big to be "large pores"..

these are holes which happened to me from extremly deep whiteheads mostly.

u can also compare the skin near the eye to the skin on the cheeks.. see the insane difference?

it seems people here just dont take seriously scars that isnt similar to thier own..

Your scarring isn't too bad. I think tca cross would be recommended for the type of scarring you have. You might also look into fractional co2 like mixto, fraxel repair, total fx, etc as this should help the texture issues. Stay away from the non-ablative lasers in my opinion.

I would lean more towards large pores with minimal actual scarring. I find little evidence to recommend anything other than ablative fractionalized CO2.

well sadly ur wrong. i looked how large pores looks, and its way to big to be "large pores"..

these are holes which happened to me from extremly deep whiteheads mostly.

u can also compare the skin near the eye to the skin on the cheeks.. see the insane difference?

it seems people here just dont take seriously scars that isnt similar to thier own..

With your atitude I don't give a hoot what you do.

I would lean more towards large pores with minimal actual scarring. I find little evidence to recommend anything other than ablative fractionalized CO2.

I think tca cross is worth trying before laser (for icepick scars) imo:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2956965/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21332915

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16918559

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12460296

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21031068

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19076629

Of course stuff like subcision is better for rolling scars and co2 laser is better for boxcar type scars/general scarring - but you can't deny the results of tca cross on icepick scars. I've yet to see a laser study that has produced 70%+ improvement on 50-70% of patients with ice pick scarring.

From the pics it looks like ice pick scarring/large pores (although can't really tell from the pics).

I would look into retin a + tca cross.

what do u mean large pores? (sorry if i sound so ignorant) and why cant u tell?

retin a+tca cross is like doing lots of chemical peels right? but isnt laser / radio better and less risky? also less demanding..

Retin a is a cream/gel that increases cell turnover which causes the pores to close overtime since there is less stuff getting in them (supposedly). Tca cross is 100% acid on a tooth pick put right into the little holes and over a few sessions that should help close them up with new skin.

I would lean more towards large pores with minimal actual scarring. I find little evidence to recommend anything other than ablative fractionalized CO2.

I think tca cross is worth trying before laser (for icepick scars) imo:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2956965/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21332915

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16918559

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12460296

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21031068

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19076629

Of course stuff like subcision is better for rolling scars and co2 laser is better for boxcar type scars/general scarring - but you can't deny the results of tca cross on icepick scars. I've yet to see a laser study that has produced 70%+ improvement on 50-70% of patients with ice pick scarring.

>>

From the pics it looks like ice pick scarring/large pores (although can't really tell from the pics).

I would look into retin a + tca cross.

what do u mean large pores? (sorry if i sound so ignorant) and why cant u tell?

retin a+tca cross is like doing lots of chemical peels right? but isnt laser / radio better and less risky? also less demanding..

Retin a is a cream/gel that increases cell turnover which causes the pores to close overtime since there is less stuff getting in them (supposedly). Tca cross is 100% acid on a tooth pick put right into the little holes and over a few sessions that should help close them up with new skin.

thank u, u are very helpful..

the thing is at the moment im on accutane (actually its a different drug but its the same as accutane different manifacture and cheaper) and im most likely finishing taking it in like 1 month or so.. and i know ill have to wait like 6 month or so but still planning ahead getting some info can always do just good..

is it true that retin a does stuff like accutane does but only works as a cream? cuz if so i dont think its gonna help in fact i think accutane only made it worse..

also before that i used for like 7 years with creams and i wish to be free from putting creams every day that mess with my skin..

now about the tca, i remember reading how chemical peels (using strong acids) r much more risky than a laser for example.. so is it also true about the tca? can u tell me how risky is it? i really fear the worst in these things..

also, one more thing if u can tell me it would be great, like u said that laser is good for box, sub for rollin , do u know about radio treatmeant? what its good for?? cuz if it can be good for icepicks or in general and carry much less risk wouldnt it be better for me?

thanks.