Re: eeks

frenchfri wrote:
>I rememebr reading a post here maybe one page or two back. A woman
>was explaining how some hair is due to hormones and another type to
>something else, and how one could be shaved and the other should be
>plucked.
>
>I tried to find but have limited time today and could not find it.
>
>It's worth checking that premise. I think the post said if the wrong
>approach was chosed the hair would get thicker.
>
>Just thought I'd mention it, since it is perinent.

It's indeed pertinent and what you've set down is almost right.
Plucking is OK with fine, weak, colorless hair which is not horomonally-driven growth. It may sometimes, with very fine, very weak hair eventually even weaken or destroy the follicle after several pluckings of hair from the same follicle.

But where the growth is hormonally driven, plucking can have the opposite effect and stimulate growth.

Shaving does not stimulate growth, it merely cuts all the hair in a given area off at skin level ( or with some electric razors, like Norelcos, slightly below skin level, due to the "lift and cut" system which grips the hair, then depresses the skin before cutting ). With shaving, the re growth appears much sooner, but for hormonally-driven growth it is possibly the only method to work satisfactorily. Other methods can also be very destructive of the skin. Tweet