Laboratory test
Hair regrowth in the various treatment areas is assessed and photographed: Photo: Tobias Meyer
Smooth legs without shaving, pain or sticky creams? With IPL technology, light is used to remove the hair. But does the technology work and which device is best? Testfakta has tested six devices and compared the results.
Unwanted hair growth is a problem for many women – and men. No matter what one thinks of beauty ideals, abundant hair growth can be both bothersome and frustrating. For those who want to get rid of the hair, there are many methods available: shaving, waxing, and epilation. The last two are associated with a lot of pain since the hairs are pulled out. The IPL devices, on the other hand, remove the hair with the help of light. In appearance, they resemble electric shavers, but instead of a shaving head at the front, there is a surface for light impulses. A bit like the grocery stores’ self-scanners.
On behalf of Procter & Gamble, Testfakta has tested six hair-removal devices that use so-called IPL technology. Put simply, the technique involves the light being absorbed by the pigment in the hair shaft. The light is converted to heat and causes the hair follicle to go into a dormant state, whereupon the hair falls out. Regrowth is also inhibited, leading to a reduction in the amount of hair that grows out. The technique should not be confused with laser treatments that are only performed in a salon.
— The light from IPL technology is normally completely harmless to the skin, provided that the manufacturer’s instructions on how to use the product are followed, says Dr. Bettina König, project manager at SGS Fresenius, the independent testing laboratory in Austria that conducted the test.
You can also get IPL treatment at a salon. Then the result is more permanent because the light impulses are stronger than they are on the products for home use.
20 women had five treatments over seven weeks. The legs were divided into 12 fields – six on each leg – to be able to compare the results. One of the legs was also left untreated for reference. The panel also had to assess how effective the devices were, how easy they were to use and how the skin felt after the treatment. In addition, ten specialists also got to test the equipment and contribute their views on how well it worked.
After seven weeks of treatment, the results varied widely for the different devices. Aylima produced almost no effect at all, while Braun Silk Expert Pro 5 and Philips Lumea reduced hair growth by almost 55 percent.
Bettina König thinks that you can make a qualified evaluation after seven weeks and five treatments.
— How many treatments are done and how often varies between the different products, but five occasions are enough to see results and draw conclusions from.
However, it should be pointed out that the technique does not work on light, red or gray hair. Nor if you have dark or tanned skin.
— The IPL technology has the best effect on dark hair, because it absorbs the light the most, Bettina König explains.
Both the regular consumers and the professionals had to like both ease of use and practicality and the result was unanimous: both groups preferred the Braun Silk Expert Pro 5.
“The instructions were easy to understand and the device easy to use,” says Bettina König.
However, be aware that this type of treatment does not work equally well for all types of people. Several of the users felt burning and the skin reddened after the treatment with Braun Silk Expert Pro 5.
Testfakta Research has carried out a test of IPL devices (Intense Pulsed Light) in the premium segment on behalf of Procter & Gamble. The aim was to compare Braun Silk Expert Pro 5 quality with comparable IPL products from leading manufacturers.
A total of six devices available on the Nordic market were tested.
Test method
The test was conducted by a panel consisting of 20 women and ten professional experts.
The test was conducted in two parts. One where the 20 test subjects over seven weeks underwent five treatments with the various devices. At each treatment occasion, the test subjects assessed comfort and feeling during and immediately after treatment. One week after treatment, the laboratory’s experts measured and assessed the effect on hair regrowth.
In the second part, the experts assessed the experience of the treatment, the design and how the various products were handled. All devices had masked product names during the tests.
Hair reduction
How much hair growth decreased was measured every week and after a total of five treatments. The test was carried out on the subjects’ legs, which were divided into three fields on each leg. One area was left untreated as a comparison area. Hair growth was assessed by the laboratory’s experts, both visually and based on high-resolution images of the various test fields. When it came to the hair reduction effects, the greatest importance was placed on the result after five treatments.
User experience
All 20 panelists had to rate all six products after each treatment and indicate how the skin felt, how pleasant the treatment was, how easy it was to perform and how they experienced the product’s design.
Specialist assessment
The separate expert panel consisting of ten people with professional experience in the use of IPL devices tested each product under the supervision of laboratory personnel. Here, the design, ease of use and how the skin felt both during and after the treatment were assessed. The test was performed on the inside and outside of the calves, the forearms and the armpits.
Selection principles for panel members:
Exclusion criteria:
Test result
Hair reduction
The result varied between 0.4 and 54.4 percent. The most effective were Philips Lumea and Braun Silk Expert Pro 5 and the worst was Aylima.
The experiences of the panels
Grading
The results of the test have been evaluated and graded in consultation with the laboratory. The rating has been made on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is very bad and 10 very good. In the overall result, the results from the various sub-moments have been given the following weight:
Treatment with one of the tested IPL devices. Photo: Tobias Meyer
The laboratory measures the placement of the six treatment surfaces on each leg. Photo: Tobias Meyer
The laboratory marks the six treatment surfaces on each leg. Photo: Tobias Meyer
Assessment of hair regrowth and count of the number of hairs in the different treatment areas. Photo: Tobias Meyer
Testfakta Research has carried out a test of IPL devices (Intense Pulsed Light) in the premium segment on behalf of Procter & Gamble. The aim was to compare Braun Silk Expert Pro 5 quality with comparable IPL products from leading manufacturers.
A total of six devices available on the Nordic market were tested.
Test method
The test was conducted by a panel consisting of 20 women and ten professional experts.
The test was conducted in two parts. One where the 20 test subjects over seven weeks underwent five treatments with the various devices. At each treatment occasion, the test subjects assessed comfort and feeling during and immediately after treatment. One week after treatment, the laboratory’s experts measured and assessed the effect on hair regrowth.
In the second part, the experts assessed the experience of the treatment, the design and how the various products were handled. All devices had masked product names during the tests.
Hair reduction
How much hair growth decreased was measured every week and after a total of five treatments. The test was carried out on the subjects’ legs, which were divided into three fields on each leg. One area was left untreated as a comparison area. Hair growth was assessed by the laboratory’s experts, both visually and based on high-resolution images of the various test fields. When it came to the hair reduction effects, the greatest importance was placed on the result after five treatments.
User experience
All 20 panelists had to rate all six products after each treatment and indicate how the skin felt, how pleasant the treatment was, how easy it was to perform and how they experienced the product’s design.
Specialist assessment
The separate expert panel consisting of ten people with professional experience in the use of IPL devices tested each product under the supervision of laboratory personnel. Here, the design, ease of use and how the skin felt both during and after the treatment were assessed. The test was performed on the inside and outside of the calves, the forearms and the armpits.
Selection principles for panel members:
Exclusion criteria:
Test result
Hair reduction
The result varied between 0.4 and 54.4 percent. The most effective were Philips Lumea and Braun Silk Expert Pro 5 and the worst was Aylima.
The experiences of the panels
Grading
The results of the test have been evaluated and graded in consultation with the laboratory. The rating has been made on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is very bad and 10 very good. In the overall result, the results from the various sub-moments have been given the following weight:
Treatment with one of the tested IPL devices. Photo: Tobias Meyer
The laboratory measures the placement of the six treatment surfaces on each leg. Photo: Tobias Meyer
The laboratory marks the six treatment surfaces on each leg. Photo: Tobias Meyer
Assessment of hair regrowth and count of the number of hairs in the different treatment areas. Photo: Tobias Meyer
