Eric I agree it was an upbeat article, but was it a realistic one?
Unfortunately, it was typical of the shoddy journalism that I have
mentioned in some of my posts. Lets take a closer look, and
see if we can separate fact from fiction. The article quotes:
""Lasers may be the most effective form of long-term hair
removal," says Dr. Tina Alster, a dermatologist on the
faculty of Harvard Medical School, founder of the Washington
Institute of Dermatologic Laser Surgery"
First of all, the FDA does not allow any of the laser hair
removal devices to claim "long-term" hair-removal. Here is
the relevant article, as reported by the Wall Street Journal,
on 26 Apr 1995:
"ThermoLase Corp. said it no longer will promote its hair-removal
system as "painless" and having "long-term" effects. The company's
stock soared last week after the Food and Drug Administration
cleared its laser-based hair-removal system for marketing. In
its announcement of the marketing approval, the company reiterated
previous claims that its system gives "painless, long-term"
eradication of unwanted hair."
"But ThermoLase "hasn't been cleared to use the words 'painless'
and 'long-term' in its advertising" of the system, an FDA
spokeswoman said"
For that matter, if you read the Sep'96 article Hair Today,
Gone Tomorrow, published in FDA Consumer magazine:
fda.gov
FDA says Thermolase can claim "that its laser process causes hair
reduction for up to three months after treatment."
Also, the impressive sounding Washington institute named in
the article is just another celebrity cosmetic surgery/
dermatology business. I have visited its web site before at:
skinlaser.com
It's SoftLight page presents the usual mumbo-jumbo, that is
used to try to deceive consumers, but if you read long enough
and carefully enough, you eventually find the disclaimer:
"Everybody is different, but based on our clinical trials you
can expect to enjoy an average of 50 percent reduction in
hair growth for up to 12 weeks after treatment."
That sounds approximately correct - typical of the crappy result
that one can expect from any of the lasers cleared thus far.
Instead, the Tribune article reports falsely:
"And just how prolonged the dormant phase hair follicles experience
after laser treatment is unknown. "It's entirely possible that
with multiple treatments, there will be a permanent reduction of
hair regrowth, but it's still too new to know," says Nanni.
Studies have been promising, but inconclusive"
That old chestnut about multiple treatments has become a staple
of the laser promoters, but they have not presented one shred of
credible supporting evidence. Ultimately, it is the FDA they
must convince, and I doubt that any of them are seriously trying
to do so.
For those investors who derive comfort from misleading journalism,
in the hope of selling more lasers to unscrupulous doctors, who
will sell treatments to gullible consumers, take a look at the
latest TLZ situation:
stockmaster.com
Today, they set new 12 month lows, hitting 10 5/8, and closing
at 10 7/8. This despite the announcement a couple of days ago of
the 13th Spa Thira lease-signing - this time in Chicago.
So two days from the 2nd anniversary of Thermolase's momentus
FDA clearance announcement, all they have to show for is 10 spas
open, perhaps 70 doctors leasing machines, and 3 more spas under
construction. Could it be that consumers are figuring out that
laser hair removal is con job? I presented some TLZ revenue details
in reply #443 & 444.
As I have thoroughly reported in previous messages, Epilaser is
not materialy better than SoftLight, so I suggest another look at
the above TLZ stock graph URL, because its trend may be Palomar's
"ghost of Christmas future".
Ted Molczan |
