New Dermapen/needling unit from Owndoc?? DermaJet!
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » Skincare Tools & Do-It-Yourself Skincare

free skin care · Thu May 02, 2013 12:16 pm

The Dermapen people say the roller creates more tearing in the skin and Sarah Vaughter says it's the other way around (that the pen creates more tearing than rolling). Both can't be right, right? LOL

http://dermapen.com/derma-roller/

I just went back to read her website again and something else she said doesn't sit well with me. She claims her company can resell any equipment it wants and if she wanted to, she could sell the Dermapen.

I am not sure that's true. From what I can tell, Dermapen is only offering it's product through the wholesale market - to dermatology professionals and I understand their reasons for doing so. Sarah Vaugher's website is a retail website, not a wholesale website, so it seems like she may be dishonest there? Somebody check me on this if I am wrong.

BFG

free skin care · Tue May 21, 2013 5:34 pm

CookieD wrote:

When I did my first treatment I did more of a gliding motion at first on slower speeds. I now do more of a stamping motion almost exclusively. I takes more time but it does a better job for me.

On a different note, why is microtearing so bad in this instance. It is not like when you use a scrub on your face with beads or whatnot. For dermarolling you want to injure the skin. You don't want it fully intact. Now I'm not talking about ripping your face to shreds. A microtear should be barely if at all visible. It will cause inflammation but you want inflammation in this case on a short term basis. Thoughts?

injury/hole produced by needling is very smooth and results in healing with apparently no scar tissue but micro tearing is not smooth and can end it up in scar tissue formation, that's my take...

free skin care · Sun Jun 02, 2013 2:48 pm

SVaughter wrote:

They claimed that 10 Hz would be the maximum safe speed for an inexperienced operator because of the fact that the DermaJet actually works, compared to the "pen"-sized devices that do not go the full depth. We never tested the actual DermaPen because they did not sell to anyone but vetted clinics at that time, but we tested a similar knockoff and the needles barely broke my skin. For the same reason, the manufacturer was very reluctant to sell us a version that goes to 2 mm. The machine is very powerful - as it should be.

I'm glad to see you here to address some of the issues that have been raised. However, I find the statement in bold above rather difficult to believe. After years of using your dermarollers I recently purchased a DermaPen knockoff and find it much more effective in terms of penetration. Mainly because the device does all the work for you. I'm using the pen with a needle setting of around 1mm and find that I bleed profusely (something that I never achieved with a dermaroller). Because I am bleeding significantly, it is obvious that the device is penetrating the skin very efficiently and I therefore don't understand how you can claim that the device barely breaks the skin.

I have never used the branded DermaPen, but given that they are the standard equipment used by doctors for professional treatments, I would presume that they do the job very effectively.

free skin care · Sun Jun 02, 2013 6:51 pm

Keliu wrote:

SVaughter wrote:

They claimed that 10 Hz would be the maximum safe speed for an inexperienced operator because of the fact that the DermaJet actually works, compared to the "pen"-sized devices that do not go the full depth. We never tested the actual DermaPen because they did not sell to anyone but vetted clinics at that time, but we tested a similar knockoff and the needles barely broke my skin. For the same reason, the manufacturer was very reluctant to sell us a version that goes to 2 mm. The machine is very powerful - as it should be.

I'm glad to see you here to address some of the issues that have been raised. However, I find the statement in bold above rather difficult to believe. After years of using your dermarollers I recently purchased a DermaPen knockoff and find it much more effective in terms of penetration. Mainly because the device does all the work for you. I'm using the pen with a needle setting of around 1mm and find that I bleed profusely (something that I never achieved with a dermaroller). Because I am bleeding significantly, it is obvious that the device is penetrating the skin very efficiently and I therefore don't understand how you can claim that the device barely breaks the skin.

I have never used the branded DermaPen, but given that they are the standard equipment used by doctors for professional treatments, I would presume that they do the job very effectively.

This is also my experience exactly...much better penetration of needles with the My M (dermapen knockoff).

free skin care · Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:44 pm

I really like the My-m and think it has worked very well for me. I have bought and used Owndoc rollers in the past. I have had no problems with them but I think the My-m is less painful to use and really like that I can change the needle depth and speed with out using an additional roller.

SVaughter-

I don't agree that there have been any inaccuracies about the DermaJet product. Some of the information on the website has changed like the expected sell date but even that was changed on this thread when a new date was posted.

When I talked about the math issue there was no mention of a one needle cartridge at that time. In a later post I did mention a 1 and 5 needle cartridge and said that that might appeal to someone.

On the needle depth adjustment I still think it will be easier to just twist on the wheel to change this depth. I assume the mechanism is just 2 gear wheels with teeth that rotate the needles up or down depending on which direction you turn the wheel. This mechanism has been around hundreds if not thousand of years. I don't think it will wear out or loss its accuracy by using it 6 or 7 treatments a year. I never said that the DermaJet plastic thing would not work (I think it will) I just think the MY-m wheel is easier.

I also don't see where anyone has said that the DermaJet will not work. How could we. It is not even for sale yet.

My problem is that you have lumped all the Derampen knock offs into one pile and said that they don't pierce the skin. I can tell you for a fact that is not true. By testing I believe only ONE device. (Some places in your response you say them. Other times you just mention one) You have made a negative assumption on all Dermapen knockoffs. That is like me using one anti-age cream and saying none of them work. You have also never tested the real Dermapen so I'm not sure how you can make a determination good or bad about that product when you have never tried it.

You say that the device you tested uses similar components to the Derampen. If you have never bought a Dermapen I not sure how you can make that determination. I can't tell you how many times I look on sites like eBay and see knock off products like laser, RF machines etc. but I don't think they have the same components that the machines the doctors pay big bucks for have, even though on the outside they look the same.

You may have a point about micro tearing if you try to slide the My-m across the skin while on the highest speed and depth but I use it more like a stamp and have no problems with this technique.

You new machine sounds interesting and I hope it works as well as you expect. I do think the electric "Dermapens" are the new thing and they work better because it forces the user to make a lot of holes in their skin. So they get better results.

free skin care · Mon Jun 03, 2013 2:33 pm

CookieD wrote:

I really like the My-m and think it has worked very well for me. I have bought and used Owndoc rollers in the past. I have had no problems with them but I think the My-m is less painful to use and really like that I can change the needle depth and speed with out using an additional roller.

SVaughter-

I don't agree that there have been any inaccuracies about the DermaJet product. Some of the information on the website has changed like the expected sell date but even that was changed on this thread when a new date was posted.

When I talked about the math issue there was no mention of a one needle cartridge at that time. In a later post I did mention a 1 and 5 needle cartridge and said that that might appeal to someone.

On the needle depth adjustment I still think it will be easier to just twist on the wheel to change this depth. I assume the mechanism is just 2 gear wheels with teeth that rotate the needles up or down depending on which direction you turn the wheel. This mechanism has been around hundreds if not thousand of years. I don't think it will wear out or loss its accuracy by using it 6 or 7 treatments a year. I never said that the DermaJet plastic thing would not work (I think it will) I just think the MY-m wheel is easier.

I also don't see where anyone has said that the DermaJet will not work. How could we. It is not even for sale yet.

My problem is that you have lumped all the Derampen knock offs into one pile and said that they don't pierce the skin. I can tell you for a fact that is not true. By testing I believe only ONE device. (Some places in your response you say them. Other times you just mention one) You have made a negative assumption on all Dermapen knockoffs. That is like me using one anti-age cream and saying none of them work. You have also never tested the real Dermapen so I'm not sure how you can make a determination good or bad about that product when you have never tried it.

You say that the device you tested uses similar components to the Derampen. If you have never bought a Dermapen I not sure how you can make that determination. I can't tell you how many times I look on sites like eBay and see knock off products like laser, RF machines etc. but I don't think they have the same components that the machines the doctors pay big bucks for have, even though on the outside they look the same.

You may have a point about micro tearing if you try to slide the My-m across the skin while on the highest speed and depth but I use it more like a stamp and have no problems with this technique.

You new machine sounds interesting and I hope it works as well as you expect. I do think the electric "Dermapens" are the new thing and they work better because it forces the user to make a lot of holes in their skin. So they get better results.

I agree with everything that Cookie has said above.

I have also purchased rollers from Owndoc, and was very pleased with the products and service. However, I do not feel that the frequency and needle length recommendations from Owndoc are in line with what professionals recommend, and that makes me skeptical of many of the claims Owndoc makes regarding their products.

FYI that when I say professionals, I am referring to medical doctors who have needled thousands of patients and published clinical studies...I have read (and posted here) many of those studies, as well as evolving findings/recommendations from some of those same professionals and they don't mesh with the Owndoc recommendations.

If Owndoc is truly "a multi-million dollar business without one ad or a YouTube video glorifying our expertise," I would really like to see them invest some of that $$$ in some independent clinical studies, or at least pictorial proof of which rollers penetrate better without microtearing, etc. It is very easy to talk about microtearing and lack of penetration, but it is another thing to actually prove it.

It's also another thing to receive feedback/criticism on a forum like this, so I hope that SVaughter takes everything here in the collaborative spirit that it is intended.

free skin care · Mon Jun 03, 2013 6:22 pm

SVaughter, I am a huge fan of Dr. F and personally use many of his products.

As far as me personally, I definitely have no horse in the game other than my own skin. And I haven't really seen any hostility here...just informed/concerned consumers with questions that want the best for themselves.

This discussion can be a win-win for both sides as long as everyone remains open minded and doesn't make it personal. As I said before, everything we discuss on EDS is in a collaborative spirit so that we all learn and grow together. We do appreciate you sharing your input here, as well as your honest approach. But please know that we do and will ask some tough questions from time to time. But it is definitely not personal. Every vendor with a new product goes through the same thing here.

free skin care · Tue Jun 04, 2013 1:48 am

SVaughter

I would like to hear more from you regarding your recommended frequency for dermarolling. None of us here have a vested financial interest in either rollers or dermapens - we are merely skin care addicts trying to do the best for our skin. If you have a look at the thread Cookie directed you to, you will see that Bethany is a long standing member here who has put allot of effort in to finding reputable clinical studies and advice on needling. If we debate advice or opinions it is not coming from an argumentative standpoint - it is because we want to be armed with the best possible knowledge.

Perhaps you would like to start a new thread providing dermarolling protocols and your reasoning behind same.

free skin care · Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:39 am

@daler: it does take a very long time to stamp the face and other larger skin areas, using a manual needle stamp or an automated needle stamp.

This is what prompted me to come up my own hybrid method. I roll my cheeks, neck and hands and stamp all the other areas: forehead, around the eyes, nose, lips and chin. I think the stamp works better in those areas anyway, where we need to concentrate on static lines. I need to repeat that since beginning the My-M, my forehead lls are fading quite rapidly and consistently. The lips and undereye, not as fast...I suspect it's because those areas are more dependent on underlying tissue volume.

BFG

free skin care · Sat Jul 13, 2013 10:11 am

So, here's my comparison of Dermajet and My-m.

Before getting into the pictures and what not, I'd like to remind everyone that I'm just trying to present a comparison, but maybe it's not exactly unbiased. I'm *trying* to be unbiased, but I freely admit that I hate the My-m. You can draw your own conclusions about the devices from the pictures and/or my comments.

Also, please note that this is the only time I've used Dermajet. I did not practice at all before taking the pictures, nor did I use any lubricant on the area of my wrist that I needled. I am trying to keep this little picture/posting project from taking up my whole day, so have kind of tried to hurry things along. For the needling (wrists and cardboard), I went really fast. I knew I was going to have to spend much more time uploading the pics and composing this post, etc.

Finally, please know that I took these pictures in the same place, in the same light. For the pictures of the needled cardboard and the needles in the devices, I tried as hard as I could to take the pictures from the same distance away, and from the same angle. But if angle or depth doesn't look exactly the same that's because it can't be without markers and a camera tripod, etc. DO NOT pick apart the fact that the pictures are not exactly the same. I don't care what anyone thinks about that. I tried my best, and will not spend my whole day re-taking pics because of minutae like that. I did this little project only because I was interested to see comparisons. I'm posting it because I figured everyone else would be, too. Anyone who doesn't like what I've done or thinks it's not "rigorous" enough to be a real comparison...just go away. Laughing

That said...

Here is the area on my wrist that I used Dermajet on. 1.5mm is on left, 2mm is on right. Please remember that this is the only time I've used Dermajet. I have not practiced at all with this device. Nor did I use any lubricant or try to make it look even and pretty. I used a bit more pressure on the 1.5. This is when I'm still bloody:

and this is wiped with alcohol:

It's a couple hours later, and the places are still quite red. The coverage looks much more even than when I did the My-m on my face. Dermajet bloodied me much more easily, and did not seem to hurt that badly. In fact, right after I wiped it with alcohol, I was wondering about the lack of stinging. But it's stinging now. Dunno if we can extrapolate what that means for doing our faces, but it does seem to indicate that maybe it is true that Dermajet doesn't hurt as badly as other needling methods, at least while it's happening.

Here is a little cardboard square (about 1"x1") needled with the Dermajet. Again, please remember I went fast. But even though I went fast, the device moved smoothly and kept punching. Also, I couldn't see the holes in the cardboard much at all with my naked eyes/reading glasses, so I swirled the device around trying to make holes. I didn't spend much time on it (like maybe 30 seconds) because I couldn't really see what was happening. The cardboard just looked white to my naked eyes and I thought I was wasting my time. It wasn't until I got a magnifying glass out that I saw anything at all, and even then it was faint. It wasn't until I uploaded the picture to my computer that I realized how deep and defined the punctures were. And BTW, I don't think the Dermajet tore the cardboard in those places where the holes are elongated...it looks to me like those are places where there were multiple holes in close proximity. Please also note this picture is cropped but otherwise left full scale for better viewing.

Now here is cardboard with the My-m, also about 1"x1". Again, remember I went fast. I did the same thing with My-mas with Dermajet...tried to use the same pressure with both devices. Worth noting is that the My-m stops working if you use even moderate pressure to keep the lip of the needle mechanism flush with whatever you're needling. Also, I again had to check with a magnifying glass to see anything was happening to the cardboard at all. As you can see, the punctures are not nearly as deep or well defined as they were with Dermajet, despite my best efforts. The cardboard isn't torn, but it just doesn't do that good of a job.

Now here is a picture of the Dermajet needles at 1.5mm when the device is off. It was just laying flat in the middle of a table. (BTW, that's blood on them from my wrist).

Here is My-m needles, device off, also 1.5mm, laying flat on the same table, in the same place. I tried to take pictures of both devices from the same angle. As you can see, the My-m needles don't retract into the housing all the way.

Finally, here is a picture of the Dermajet in my hand, for scale, just to give a sense of the size of the device. My hands aren't very big...definitely on the small side of average as women go. It fits well in my hand.

My impression of the Dermajet is very favorable.

It's a much more powerful device than the My-m, and the construction seems more solid.

It isn't as noisy in person as it may seem in the video on owndoc.com. They must have had an ultra-sensitve mic to make the vid, or maybe it's the sound from our computers when watching it. Whatever, from the computer the sound is annoying as hell. In person, not so much.

The Dermajet is far and away easier to get even coverage of needling on skin. My 1.5mm wrist area is a nice, even, inflamed-looking pink. Laughing

2mm is, too, but I tried a little harder on the 1.5mm section to get the strokes closer together and the coverage even. Also remember I did this really fast. Point being, that no area on my face/neck/décolletage had even coverage like this after using the My-m.

Dermajet is much easier to move across the skin than My-m, even with no lube.

Cons of the Dermajet include having to take the needle completely off the device to change the needle lengths. But the numbers on My-m are so small you have to interrupt your needling process to adjust it, too, so I don't consider this much of a drawback. YMMV.

Another con is that the speed dial (what controls the punches per second) is not well marked. You have to fiddle with it a little bit to figure out how to get the right setting. But it's not hard to do, and this is a minor con.

All in all, I think I'm going to really like the Dermajet. Still a little premature to declare that I'm in love with it, but I'm absolutely glad I bought it, esp. for the price. I'm looking foward to using it on my face/neck/décolletage in a few weeks.

free skin care · Sun Jul 14, 2013 2:03 pm

Here are the pictures from my experiment on using the My-m at the highest speed and 1.5mm needle setting for 30 seconds each on a 1.5x1.5 inch piece of corrugated white cardboard. I used a flap of a USPS medium priority shipping box. All photos are taken by an IPhone 5 camera, in the same light. I'm giving all this information in case someone else wants to do their own experiment to compare.

This is my wrist at 12:30 PM today. I needled sometime around 7 or 8 PM last night. My pictures of my wrist right after the treatment are on the last page. I was able to draw blood easily and this is the first time I have needled my wrist.

This is a picture of the needles extended to 1.5mm with a piece of paper on top. It was a way to show that the needles didnt stick out of my housing.

This is a picture of the stamping method I would normally use on my face. It is stamped with fairly hard pressure. I do not stamp hard enough to make the needles stop their motion.

This image is using very light pressure. I personally don't think using this method would be worth my time needling. I don't think you would get a lot of results from this and I wouldn't think you would draw much blood, if any.

I used light pressure and a gliding motion for this picture. I clearly see scape type of marks on this cardboard. I have had these type of marks on my skin using a regular roller also when I forgot to pick it up and move it to another area.
I personally would not recommend using the My-m at the highest setting and 1.5 mm needles with this gliding motion. I think the main problem is when you are gliding you have to lighten the pressure at which you needle. This is what causes the scape marks. I do think using HA would help some. I have been able to glide without scratches
on a lower speed and shorter needles.

After doing this experiment I think I will continue only using the My-m with a stamping motion. It is what I was doing already. If indeed the DermaJet can be used at the quickest speed and the 1.5mm setting in the gliding motion it may very well be a plus. I will consider buying it in the future. I would like to hear from someone who has already used it on their face to verify that it draws blood and glides. I do like my MY-m and do think it works in the stamping motion I use. I have no problem drawing blood but I'm always open to new products when they come along.

free skin care · Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:32 pm

Well, I broke down and used the Dermajet last night.

Funny story: I haven't been feeling all that well since about mid-week, so as of last night I hadn't talked to my mother in a few days. Apparently she called me a few times yesterday but my voicemail wasn't working properly. So when I didn't call her back all day, she decided to come on over to see if everything was okay.

She arrived right in the middle of my Dermajet session.

Needless to say I was scantily clad, so was very startled when someone started pounding on my door (didn't have my hearing aids in). Dogs were baying, cats were scattering; chaos ensued. I threw a towel around myself and totally forgot about wiping my face, etc. I ascertained by peeping around the windowshade that it was my mother, and was very relieved it was only her. I threw the door open.

Me: Hi Mom!

Mom [screaming softly and jumping back a bit]: Ahhhhhhhhhh!

Me [perplexed]: What's the matter with you?

Mom [voice rising]: OH MY GOD!!! Are you all right???!! *What on earth is wrong with your face*??!!

I then realized how I must look, and started cracking up laughing. We got it sorted very quickly. The upshot was that when she first saw me she thought I had some sort of horrible, exotic, communicable skin disease and that's why I hadn't called her all week.

That story in itself can be a testament to the power of the Dermajet. It's quite the little powerhouse, packing quite a punch.

I am very happy with the intensity of the session I got yesterday. It will be a good six weeks before I do another session.

However, before I proceed with pics, everyone please keep in mind that I am NOT an experienced needler. I've rolled probably 3 times in five years, and done one My-m session. So am pretty much a neophyte. All I've learned is from reading the people on this board who are more experienced than me. This machine is very powerful, far more powerful than the My-m I had, and I consider that I made some mistakes. For one, I gave myself a nice little bruise under my right eye because my hand slipped when pulling the skin tight and the thing got stuck for a minute. It's not bad, but it's a bruise. I'll show that pic below.

I also think that I should have used 1.0 instead of 1.5 on my neck and decolletage. I have some pretty fierce petechaie there. That is typically a thin-skinned and sensitive area for me...it's taken a lot of abuse over the years as far as sun damage. When I first started hydroxy acids I accidentally scorched hell out of myself there several times before the area finally started to even out and show improvement. I also had some petechiae there when I used the stamping motion of the My-m, but nothing like what I got with Dermajet.

Finally, I think I used some pressure that wasn't needed. I kept catching myself throughout the whole session. You really should just lightly GLIDE this thing along the surface of your skin. As long as you keep a lubricant under it (as most of us, I used hyaluronic acid), and keep your skin taut, it will glide easily at whatever speed you choose. But it was hard for me to keep from sort of pushing with downward pressure the device into my skin as I covered larger areas. I wasn't bearing down hard, but hindsight tells me I could or should have lightened up a bit, especially on my neck and decolletage.

So anyway, here are the pictures.

This was the first pic I took, about three minutes in. I was on slow speed, and had only completed that cheek once doing downward strokes. I went back and covered it again both vertically and horizontally.

Here's one side of my mouth. Wasn't done with that yet, either, but simply took the pic as I was taking a break to wipe away the drool. A friend who's an esthetician gave me some of the custom-compounded numbing cream they use at her medspa, and it was basically like using novacaine. I couldn't feel my lips. Rolling Eyes

Worth noting is that the Dermajet *does* hurt, hence the breaks in needling. Can't really speak to the intensity of the pain relative to other auto-needlers, since my My-m was such a POS, but while in my opinion Dermajet does hurt less than using a roller, I wouldn't want to use it with no numbing cream any more than I would want to do any other needling device (manual or auto) with no numbing cream.

Also worth noting is that I did get used to the sensation towards the end, so on second thought, maybe that does mean it hurts less. I was using a higher speed by that time as I was a bit more comfy with the device in general.

Anyway, half my forehead and my 11's (please excuse skanky eyebrows):

And finally, my neck with some blood and petechaie marks emerging. This was the end of this area, and I had aggressively hit the places where the rings are. And again, please remember this area is pretty sensitive on me so tends to exaggerate the effects of whatever topical or modality I use on it.

Those are all pics from the session yesterday, 7/21/2013.

Now here are some pics from the day after (today).

Worth noting is that the lighting in my bathroom where I usually do my pics isn't picking up the rosy color of my skin for some reason. It's picking up some petechiae and what looks like sundamage, but the overall rosiness isn't showing. It mostly just looks like I have sun damage. Which I do. Badly. Neutral

Anyway, here is the bruise I gave myself under my eye when the thing got stuck on my eyebag or whatever. I had needled a couple of rows in that area right before this pick, so it's pretty swollen.

And here's one where I'm trying to show the rosiness, but it just looks like some random petechaie and sundamage. It's the lighting. But still posting for whatever it's worth.

To sum it up:

The pictures aren't great. I believe they reflect my lack of sophistication in needling technique more than any flaw in the device.

I do wonder if they could have cut the power a bit and still had a very effective device. I also think some care needs to be used with it. It is VERY powerful...

I like the Dermajet. I am glad I bought it. I think it's a very effective device, and I definitely recommend it, especially to experienced needlers. It's easy to use and fits well in the hand. It glides well on the skin. It performs as Vaughter Wellness advertised it to perform.

Cons include the shortness of the cord for self use. But that's a minor thing, and may even be related to the fact that I was standing not sitting when I used it. I'm going to change that in future sessions so that I'm sitting, to see if that helps me in any way.

I rate Dermajet 4 out of 5 stars. Especially for the price it is now, it's a great device.

Edited to add: I took my rating down a little bit because I just remembered something. Vaughter Wellness says the needle cartridges can be re-used, but there is blood in mine that I can't get out, as it's in the casing and up under the plastic pad that holds the needles. I can see no way to get this blood out. While there is apparently no blood on the needles or on anything that would come into contact with the skin, the blood that is still stuck up under the needle pad looks bad and gives me pause, especially since these needles are relatively expensive ($9 a pop). Sarah, if you're reading this, can you give some advice on how you can clean the needle cartridges effectively?

free skin care · Thu Jul 25, 2013 8:35 am

Yubs - you are free to buy from whomever you like and you are free to read whatever you want and say whatever you like - so am I.

However, I substantiate everything I say with facts and arguments and verifyable evidence, such as the evidence we posted that White Lotus falsified their before-and-after-pictures and claimed that dermarolling increases breast size (with fake pictures).

Instead of calling me a liar, an egomaniac and paranoid, I suggest you come with evidence that absolves the companies I just mentioned. Evidence that offer counter-evidence to the evidence I just offered.

free skin care · Tue Jul 30, 2013 1:50 pm

Russian, BTW, re: your post about quelling inflammation a couple days back.

I was reading the needling manual by Setterfield during some downtime today, and came across this:

"At first glance, it may seem prudent to prolong the inflammatory phase to capitalize on the growth factors secreted by the macrophages drawn into the wound to fight infection. However, while these growth factors are known to increase collagen production, it is the type that is poor quality and laid down in excess to form fibrosis. Several studies [not cited in this paragraph] show that blocking these growth factors leads to more optimum healing, as seen in embryo wound healing, with minimal scarring." (p. 60, 2010 ed.).

FWIW. Smile

Hope your zits go away soon. Looking forward to your review!

free skin care · Wed Jul 31, 2013 11:30 am

I think he is somehow affiliated with this site (lots of good info here) and I keep checking to see if they have added the latest book to their recommended reading list. He said his office website is rarely being updated these days.

http://www.beautymagonline.com/

BFG

free skin care · Wed Jul 31, 2013 8:29 pm

Finally, I have tried the DJ. And I have mixed feeling about it. I have used 1 mm needles but I saw no blood Confused

Also, the redness didn't seem to be uniform like on the picture where I manually stamped myself with a 1.5 mm dermastamp (below).

As you can see in the picture above I have a uniformly distributed redness. But the DJ gave me lots of small areas of redness, other small areas remained white.

I have first used a small speed, but then increased to max in order to get some bleeding. But all I got is just a few spots of bleeding ( two-three).

The treatment still takes some time, it is not as fast as I thought. This is probably due to the small circumference of the cartridge.

I will post some pics later.

free skin care · Wed Jul 31, 2013 8:55 pm

Ok, that's how my skin looked 5 minutes after the DJ treatment.

As you can see, redness is almost invisible on my neck, but my chicks are pretty red.

Cookie, no, I never bleed. Gliding on my neck was not easy. One, probably, has to do it while lying. I must say that stamping the neck with the 1.5 mm dermastamp was much easier.

free skin care · Sat Aug 03, 2013 12:22 pm

SVaughter wrote:

General note: Some people are asking me questions in this thread, but others are very abusive. Therefore I will not answer any more questions in this thread. Please ask questions on my own.

SV the only person being abusive on this thread is you. This is the third time you have accused members of EDS of working for or selling electric pen needling device companies. Some of these members have thousands of posting on EDS about all kinds of products/gadgets. They only person selling dermapen type devices is you. The same person that keeps slamming all the other needle pen device.

If you wanted to buy a DermaPen I have no doubt with your connections in the skincare business that you could get your hands on one. Then if you wanted to do a proper comparison you could. Instead of slamming a product you have never used.

free skin care · Sat Aug 03, 2013 1:22 pm

Wow. I am really surprised by how reactionary you are being Sarah. You take absolutely every other needle selling company, nay every company involved in the the skin care business to task by calling them all completely corrupt, yet are unable to listen to the concerns expressed here about what your own business says or does with an even temper. I find this quite astounding as I would have hoped you held yourself to the same high standards you hold others, which would include giving proper evidence for very strong claims made, such as microtearing of the skin. I personally don't feel that technically making suppositions that it could or should cause it, stands in at all for actually trying the devices you claim cause it and finding evidence to show that it does in fact do so. Saying that your dermajet is the only product on the market that won't cause this apparent problem that we have no real evidence for as yet aside from your word saying it should occur with every other device including the world standard (which by the way does not fall part and seems to have solid engineering and good studies behind it), many people would consider a premature claim if you hadn't in fact tried the devices, or any good quality professional devices (of which there are quite a few available now that I am positive you could test if you really tried). It gives the impression that it serves you better to make a blanket statement that you can't really back up with real evidence because sales will go your way as people are caused to be paranoid about their skin being torn by everything else out there. It doesn't seem too much different to what you claim the dermapen companies did in regards to claiming the opposite. I will check if they actually tested on skin, or just did as you seem to have (as far as I can tell from what you are saying) done - claimed without testing skin to see it its true. Remember skin is quite elastic, so it would be hard to make an exact equation on this. It really does need to be tested I believe. I think even you note this when you refute the roller accusation from the dermapen company.

It is absolutely normal on this forum for anyone, not just sellers to be asked to back up their statements with good evidence. Many people read the forum, and the spread of disinformation is best avoided by questioning everything, which you will find all over the place here. To imagine this is all personal or all about you is a problematic way of looking at being involved in a forum that hopes to learn from each other as best we can.

Ps please excuse me if I am wrong about any strong evidence you have shown regarding these devices tearing the skin. I may have missed it. If so, please direct me/us to it. Also when saying "it gives the impression..." I am just letting you know how your company comes across from a consumers point of view when making these kind of (in my view very strong but so far unsubstantiated) claims. Even if you feel this is not the truth regarding your company, perhaps you can take the feedback somehow into account?

free skin care · Sat Aug 03, 2013 1:59 pm

Ok, so what I am gathering from this is that microtearing as it relates to dermal needling is a term used by owndoc and is not an industry wide term.

Unfortunately, this is a pattern we have seen time again here when a seller enters the discussion with the theme of "I am the only honest and truthful seller", then, when posters follow up with diligent questions (which almost always is simple fact finding, nothing personal) the seller becomes offended and flies off in a huff.

It's unfortunate.

BFG

Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:15 am

I tried to post this on her website forum but of course Sarah Vaughtner doesn't allow dissenting comments on there. As a senior employee of the company that produces the Dermapen I have wanted to find a way to dispel some of the misleading claims Miss Vaughtner sprouts. This is what I wrote on her site - but of course it was deleted (I am sorry if some of this does not make sense to some people, but all of it is based on what she has written on her site):

I have seen Sarahs article for a long time now but have waited to say something until she endorsed another automatic needling device. Now that she has, she has shown that her comments regarding the Dermapen are not factual but she will say anything in order to protect her sales. I will say up front, that I am from the actual parent company of Dermapen (not dermapen dot com which is our US distributor). Lets see if my comments actually get published here.

Sarah - I am sorry to say but your summary of the Dermapen system and how it works clearly shows a biased opinion based on the fact, and I quote your words - "We are in the business of selling dermaneedling products" Thats right you are in the business of selling your dermarollers, and therefore now that something new (Dermapen) has come along you are doing everything to protect your sales.. which is fair enough. However, you say you did your research and chose not to sell Dermapen even though there was more profit. The fact is you were never offered distribution or the chance to sell Dermapen, so your comments there are irrelevant. But lets look at some real facts instead of smoke and mirrors:

1. Micro tearing. The needles on a Dermaroller are always going into the skin on an angle, by the very nature of how it rolls on the skin. They do not go straight into the skin. This is the micro tearing that is shown in our official video which cannot be argued. The testament to this fact is in real world application - When treating, the Dermapen causes far less pain and less immediate bleeding because the needles are going directly into the skin and not on an angle. The fact is Micro tearing isn't even a problem as far as treatment outcomes, what is a problem is that it creates more pain when you enter the skin on an angle.

2. Duty Cycle - Now you want to talk about duty cycles etc. you can make up any figures that you want, which you have done. Figures can be twisted any way you want which you will now see:

Dermajet = 15 stamps per second.

If the system works smoothly then those 15 stamps would be divided equally throughout the 1000ms (1 second duty cycle). 1000/15 = 66.67ms per stamp.

Again, if the system works smoothly than 50% of the time the needles would be inside the sheath and 50% outside the sheath. This means the device is actually spending 33.33ms inside the skin per stamp. If you apply the math that Sarah herself has applied to duty cycles, multiply this by 15 stamps and the device is now spending 500ms out of 1000ms in the skin and now has a duty cycle of 50%. This of course is manipulatable depending on the depth you have a device set at. If set on a shallow depth you could be spending as little as 1% of that time outside the sheath or, vice versa. This is how I think she must get to her unsubstantiated claim of 1ms inside the skin)

What we really see here is that Sarah is misleading innocent people with inaccurate mathematics and statistics. Another quote from Sarah: "We focus on a small niche: People who don’t believe whatever they are told by vendors but who do their own research, research that goes further than watching marketing videos." If this isn't the ultimate example of FUD as she likes to call it, then I dont know what is. This is followed by 2 videos promoting the Dermajet.

So now lets look at figures factually. What really is the key here is how many revolution per second a system is doing. The Dermapen is capable of 90 revolutions per second (more now the Dermapen3 has been released) where the needle goes all the way into the depth you have programmed and all the way back into the sheath. So that means each full revolution is taking 11ms out of 1000ms which equals 1.1% of a second. So if we again estimate 50% in the skin and 50% inside the sheath, then the needles are only exposed 0.55% of a second per stamp. The 50/50 is the only real practical math as the needles are always moving. Of course this is also dependent on the depth being used by the practitioner. At the above mentioned speed the needles are moving in and out much faster than any surface movement the practitioner can make. Therefor any micro tearing is minimal, and certainly does not seem to cause any unwanted side effect. The micro tearing on a roller may not even cause an adverse side effect other than more pain which is the issue being raised.

3. Spring and electromagnetic device - I find it difficult to believe that an electromagnetic device that small would have the strength to pull the needles up consistently with great speed. This could be the reason the Dermajet is only capable of 15 stamps per second. A much better option, that would give the practitioner the ability to work at greater speeds is to have a piston to push the needles down and a very strong spring to push them back up - not some magnet trying to pull the needles back out... This is why the Dermapen can oscillate at much higher speeds, because this is the system it uses.

4. Results - The fact is, and this is backed up by real studies from doctors and clinicians around the world, not just the opinion of someone who is trying to sell rollers, the more micro holes you create the greater the immune response. This ultimately leads to more collagen being created. This holds true for any fractional technology whether its laser, RF or needles. The real facts are Dermapen can create approx. 1000 holes per second (New Dermapen 3 - 1300 holes), whereas a dermal roller (depending on brand) around a quarter of that. Dermapen has many independent doctors that have been long time dermal roller users, who say that 1 treatment with the Dermapen will get much better results than 1 treatment with any dermal roller. For all those that doubt I would challenge you to look past the smokescreens being created here and try one half of your face with a Dermal roller and 1 half with a Dermapen. There is no greater comparison... dont worry about all this back and forth arguing - just try it and you will see and feel the difference.

5. Dermajet - Sarah claims to have found a automatic pen that works - this completely and utterly makes all of her arguments seem ridiculous because if you look at your specifications this Dermajet system does a maximum of 15 revolutions per second. That is slower than the Dermapen on its lowest speed! At a maximum of 15 revolutions per second the Dermajet may catch when using greater depths. Also 12 needles times 15 revolutions is only 180 holes per second.. this is less than a dermal roller making the Dermajet inferior to the dermal rollers Sarah sells.

Also Sarah talks about libellous comments. Quote: "The machine is a lot bulkier than the dermapen and its lookalikes, because as we said, all those thin Chinese devices barely manage to penetrate the skin." - The Dermapen is not a Chinese device and has never been manufactured in China. These are again misleading and false remarks designed to create a negative opinion regarding the Dermapen. I will say, however, made in Turkey (dermajet) certainly does not mean quality.

(Added in just now - 09-08-13) I have seen some comments on here about the My-M device from Korea. Sarah's response was to say that maybe it worked because it was twice as thick as the Dermapen. She is clearly showing her ignorance here as the company that makes the My-M makes a medical version called Tri-M (stronger and better than the My-M) which is even thinner than the Dermapen. So the size of the device clearly has no bearing. It makes me incredulous that there are people like her out there claiming to be reputable.

The fact that Sarah is endorsing this product shows that her comments regarding the Dermapen are not fact based and she is saying anything she can to protect her sales... I would like to apologize to anyone, and I quote her words again, who are mislead by her "Disinformation techniques" that "compensate for incompetence and greed. (She) wants your money and (she) will say anything to get it."

Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:44 am

@SVaughter

SVaughter wrote:

General note: Some people are asking me questions in this thread, but others are very abusive. Therefore I will not answer any more questions in this thread. Please ask questions on my own forum. Questions about microtearing will not be answered there BTW, because they are off-topic on our forum.

I find it funny that you say that, as I have multiple times tried to post comments/question on your site. However, every time I have done that and come back to see if you have replied, I find my posts have been "deleted by the moderator". And as I read more posts on various forum sites, I come to find out that YOU DO THIS TO PRETTY MUCH ANYONE AND EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT AGREE WITH YOU.

Considering the fact that my posts have been nothing more than simple requests for information backing your claims, I do not see why any moderator would deem that inappropriate.

I do not know what anyone else might consider clinical research, but to me, a video showing a DermaJet treatment being administered is NOT it. Neither is a lengthy mathematically enhanced description of the internal workings of the supposedly superior device that you sell. All I asked of you is to please direct me toward some sort of factual evidence, as opposed to blatant opposition to all mechanical needling devices out there due to their "inferiority".

Please stop deleting comments on your site, ESPECIALLY if you are encouraging people to post their questions and comments on there.

P.S. I get Dermapen treatments every 6 weeks or so and I have seen great results. My skin has not fallen off and I do not look like Freddy Krueger.

I have tried to purchase a Dermapen Medical for at home use, but I have been told by a rep that the devices are only sold to licensed doctors and clinicians due to how deep the needles can go. Many countries actually have regulations in place that deal with that. A quote taken from your site:

Quote:

Please note that we are not medical doctors and that our opinion is not medical advice.

Perhaps this is why you have not been able to obtain a Dermapen? You see it as them preventing you from testing the device..? Well, some others may see it as responsible business practice.

I guess it comes down to difference of opinion, and yours is a lot stronger than mine... But then again, I am not trying to sell anything here.

free skin care · Fri Aug 09, 2013 5:57 am

Yubs wrote:

@kinieloahsas...who *are* you? Your first post sounds suspiciously like everything Sarah has been saying. I don't think it's coincidence you popped up here now and don't think anyone else will believe it either. Will the weirdness stop, please? This forum is not for vendors or their surrogates to come and snake business from one another or take out their frustrations on each other. If you have anything to do with Sarah, please also know this weirdness is hurting her business. I have had at least one person comment to me they're not going to buy from her any more because of the recent weird behavior in other threads. Just please stop for the good of all.

As a legitimate forum user I have a question for James about a consumer Dermapen unit and am afraid it's going to get lost in the weirdness. I am also afraid this thread will get pulled, too, if the weirdness continues.

I thought her post was merely a vent about not receiving any responses from SVaughter on her own forum - so she thought she'd try here. I certainly wasn't offended - and found no indication that kinieloahsas is a vendor or a surrogate of SVaughter. If there has been any weirdness hurting SVaughter's business, it has been of her own making.

free skin care · Fri Aug 09, 2013 6:39 am

panoslydios wrote:

Lets say the truth!!!!

You expect a miracle dermapen but it will be still some needles creating little holes in the skin !!!!

Words and phrases like microtearing,attack of the needles,quick speed that doesnt damage!! etc
is just a marketing trick. So instead of expecting feedback of miracle products i advise everyone to begin searching for how to heal microtrauma from internally. That way even the worst dermapen would be efficient.

Panoslydios - you must realise by now that this forum is dedicated to discussing just about every darn thing we can do to our skin. That includes poking holes in it, frying it with electrical gadgets, peeling it off with acids, burning it with lasers and anything else that we feel can "help"!! There are those who take a more "natural" approach and that includes sniffing lemon juice, drinking 8oz melted butter and applying water to the face that has been "energised" in the hands of small children.

Regardless of what route we take - we are all looking for miracles! Somehow I just don't think any of this is going to add to your internal peace. Very Happy

free skin care · Sun Aug 11, 2013 9:02 am

I have been needling for approximately 4 years, using needles varying in length from .25mm to 1.5mm.

I am careful to clean my hands, including under the nails and face(and some I hear use latex gloves) with a tea tree based soap beforehand. After, I clean my skin with the same soap. I soak the needles (all needles) in different liquids - alcohol, peroxide, etc.
I do not share needles - there is no cross contamination risk. I have never had even the slightest indication of an infection resulting from needling.... For whatever this is worth....
I am completely comfortable at home, needling with these needle lengths, using these procedures.
I would welcome the opportunity to purchase a higher quality automated stamping device.

As far as I know, there are people with allergies and diabetics injecting needles at home and people applying caustic substances such as home hair permanent solutions and hair coloring solutions at home without widespread reports of self-infleced damage. Maybe this is political with the FDA.
BFG

Automatic Message

If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.

Click Here to join our community.

If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site.