Guest guest Posted June 28, 2002 Report Share Posted June 28, 2002 May I ask who did your photoderm treatments? What city is he/she in? I recall 2 yrs ago, when I joined this message board, the numerous posts on the great results from photoderm. I no longer see messages from those folks who had success with the treatment, so I just assume they are doing well and no longer have a need to participate here. That's what encouraged me to finally take the leap and try photoderm. I find it very strange how this current " generation " of photoderm patients aren't doing as well. What gives??? I have gone to Dr. Bitter, who has successfully treated many other members here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 28, 2002 Report Share Posted June 28, 2002 May I ask who did your photoderm treatments? What city is he/she in? I recall 2 yrs ago, when I joined this message board, the numerous posts on the great results from photoderm. I no longer see messages from those folks who had success with the treatment, so I just assume they are doing well and no longer have a need to participate here. That's what encouraged me to finally take the leap and try photoderm. I find it very strange how this current " generation " of photoderm patients aren't doing as well. What gives??? I have gone to Dr. Bitter, who has successfully treated many other members here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2002 Report Share Posted June 29, 2002 Tracey, not knowing anything about photoderm, what you describe certainly sounds logical to me. But if your photodermatologist's technique and results are so good, then why isn't every photodermatologist approaching patients the same way? Do you know if he has published anything about his technique or results? Did he come up with the technique himself, or did he learn/read it from elsewhere? But my ignorance is showing regarding laser therapy. <g> I see that over a year ago, Rick (rdl000) made similiar observations to mine and some interesting proposed research in #28705, and Dr. Nase replied to him in #28707. Dr. Nase is right, private physicians may be loathe to publish, but they also know it's the best way to both contribute to the medical community and market one's work with the highest credibility. That's why so many have already published, as his references demonstrate. That's the appropriate first step. Now, what's needed now is corroberation with independent studies, on individual methods or comparing different techniques. Two common reasons grants are refused: the quality of the submitted study, and concern that the study has a secondary agenda such as benefitting a person or company. It would be wonderful for the NRS to fund a study on laser therapy, but it would probably need to be an independent research project, not one designed and conducted by a private practitioner biased to the technology, even one in conjunction with a post-doc researcher. Thanks, Tom, I'll look for your post with information on laser therapy. There's certainly theoretical reasons to be enthusiastic, and real reasons to be hopeful for future laser treatments. Marjorie Marjorie Lazoff, MD > Hi all, > > I was sorry to read all the posts from people who have not had much > success with Photoderm. I just wanted to present myself as a > positive case of photoderm success for those who are considering this > option. > > Let me make a comment first. It seems that many people use this > board when things are going badly, when they need support, help or > encouragement - which is fantastic, however, my experience is that > many people also leave the board or only check in every few months > once they have their rosacea under control (obviously there are > exceptions - myself included). Why I say this is that I have been a > member of this board since its beginning, during that time I have > read countless posts from people undergoing photoderm. Who could > forget Jim and his relentless search for photoderm success - and his > final great results, and there have been countless others. My belief > is that many of these people benefit so much from photoderm that they > initially report their positive results (as I did myself, as did Jim > and many others about 1-2 years ago) then go about their lives. As > such, sometimes we end up with a very biased (for lack of a better > work) presentation of an issue like photoderm and success. If you go > back in these messages over the past 3 years you will find many many > people who have benefited from this procedure, who have reported > their treatments in detail, their ups and downs and their successes > through their posts. My observation is that many of these people are > no longer active " posters " on this board. > > So in my experience on this board, I know of many many success > stories concerning photoderm. I am one of those. It has changed my > life to the point where most times I forget that I actually have > rosacea. My derm is amazed - he said there is no way he could > diagnose me as having rosacea anymore - but we both know I do! for > those trying photoderm it is an up and down experince I had 13 + > treatments and some I saw great improvement, some moderate and some > nothing at all. It is such an imprecise procedure...that is part of > the problem. There are literally thousands of possible combinations > of settings, moreover our skin types, textures, and progression of > rosacea vary so greatly that this adds to the complex issue of > finding the perfect frequency for an individuals treatment. My Dr > has never heard of Dr Bitner, moreover he is against the concept of > using standardised filters and joules for each patient. Instead he > alternates the filters, joules for each patient during the treatment > to find the most desirable setting. For example, I have met a girl > having treatment by my doctor - she has had great results just like > me (I saw here before and now after 10 tx's and it is amazing). > However, my Dr found her skin favoured the 590 filter with joules > between 45 and 55 for maximum results, for me we have found that the > 570 with joules of 60 to 65 works best. It took a while to find > this, but my dr was dilegent and worked very hard to find this > optimum level for me personally. From what I see Dr Bitner pretty > much perscribes the same procedure/rageme for all patients. We know > rosacea is individual so how could this possible work in all cases? > > Tracey > PS I never had one bruise or blister in all my treatments. I had my > last tx 1 year ago and enjoy great results, actually I honestly > believe my results continue to improve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2002 Report Share Posted June 29, 2002 Tracey, not knowing anything about photoderm, what you describe certainly sounds logical to me. But if your photodermatologist's technique and results are so good, then why isn't every photodermatologist approaching patients the same way? Do you know if he has published anything about his technique or results? Did he come up with the technique himself, or did he learn/read it from elsewhere? But my ignorance is showing regarding laser therapy. <g> I see that over a year ago, Rick (rdl000) made similiar observations to mine and some interesting proposed research in #28705, and Dr. Nase replied to him in #28707. Dr. Nase is right, private physicians may be loathe to publish, but they also know it's the best way to both contribute to the medical community and market one's work with the highest credibility. That's why so many have already published, as his references demonstrate. That's the appropriate first step. Now, what's needed now is corroberation with independent studies, on individual methods or comparing different techniques. Two common reasons grants are refused: the quality of the submitted study, and concern that the study has a secondary agenda such as benefitting a person or company. It would be wonderful for the NRS to fund a study on laser therapy, but it would probably need to be an independent research project, not one designed and conducted by a private practitioner biased to the technology, even one in conjunction with a post-doc researcher. Thanks, Tom, I'll look for your post with information on laser therapy. There's certainly theoretical reasons to be enthusiastic, and real reasons to be hopeful for future laser treatments. Marjorie Marjorie Lazoff, MD > Hi all, > > I was sorry to read all the posts from people who have not had much > success with Photoderm. I just wanted to present myself as a > positive case of photoderm success for those who are considering this > option. > > Let me make a comment first. It seems that many people use this > board when things are going badly, when they need support, help or > encouragement - which is fantastic, however, my experience is that > many people also leave the board or only check in every few months > once they have their rosacea under control (obviously there are > exceptions - myself included). Why I say this is that I have been a > member of this board since its beginning, during that time I have > read countless posts from people undergoing photoderm. Who could > forget Jim and his relentless search for photoderm success - and his > final great results, and there have been countless others. My belief > is that many of these people benefit so much from photoderm that they > initially report their positive results (as I did myself, as did Jim > and many others about 1-2 years ago) then go about their lives. As > such, sometimes we end up with a very biased (for lack of a better > work) presentation of an issue like photoderm and success. If you go > back in these messages over the past 3 years you will find many many > people who have benefited from this procedure, who have reported > their treatments in detail, their ups and downs and their successes > through their posts. My observation is that many of these people are > no longer active " posters " on this board. > > So in my experience on this board, I know of many many success > stories concerning photoderm. I am one of those. It has changed my > life to the point where most times I forget that I actually have > rosacea. My derm is amazed - he said there is no way he could > diagnose me as having rosacea anymore - but we both know I do! for > those trying photoderm it is an up and down experince I had 13 + > treatments and some I saw great improvement, some moderate and some > nothing at all. It is such an imprecise procedure...that is part of > the problem. There are literally thousands of possible combinations > of settings, moreover our skin types, textures, and progression of > rosacea vary so greatly that this adds to the complex issue of > finding the perfect frequency for an individuals treatment. My Dr > has never heard of Dr Bitner, moreover he is against the concept of > using standardised filters and joules for each patient. Instead he > alternates the filters, joules for each patient during the treatment > to find the most desirable setting. For example, I have met a girl > having treatment by my doctor - she has had great results just like > me (I saw here before and now after 10 tx's and it is amazing). > However, my Dr found her skin favoured the 590 filter with joules > between 45 and 55 for maximum results, for me we have found that the > 570 with joules of 60 to 65 works best. It took a while to find > this, but my dr was dilegent and worked very hard to find this > optimum level for me personally. From what I see Dr Bitner pretty > much perscribes the same procedure/rageme for all patients. We know > rosacea is individual so how could this possible work in all cases? > > Tracey > PS I never had one bruise or blister in all my treatments. I had my > last tx 1 year ago and enjoy great results, actually I honestly > believe my results continue to improve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.