Ask Alice

Yes, too good to be true!  I have tried the Lyma ‘laser’ but I’m not a fan – I used it every night for months on end in spring 2021 (on one side of one wrinkle on my neck, and on the knuckles of my left hand, as advised by the brand founder,) without getting any results.

My laser-manufacturer acquaintances laugh at it when I ask them what they think of its supposed powers of rejuvenation. Why?

‘Look, this isn’t competition to us,’ said one. ‘Laser?’ laughed another. ‘That’s more of a laser pointer.’

The Lyma makes enormous claims, claiming the sort of results that it normally takes several rounds of in-clinic treatment to achieve, and has the flimsiest scientific backup  – and despite making these claims the company hasn’t seen fit to put the product through a single clinical trial or comparison with other devices.

It has been brilliantly and stylishly marketed and it has persuaded a lot of journalists who should have asked a few more questions to repeat its extravagant marketing claims. What should they have asked? How can a device the size of a torch with a rechargeable battery generate enough power to do what it says it does? Or how can any light which is allegedly strong enough to prompt healing deep within the skin be safe to use around the eyes/ shine directly in your eyes without protection?  Why do they suggest using an oil or cream with the product to give it ‘slip’, when any oil or cream will distort the light beam that’s reaching the skin?

For what it’s worth, if you are contemplating spending that much money, and looking for properly effective LED light to tackle skin quality and acne, I know the Dermalux Flex works a treat because I gave it full road testing during lockdown #1 and got brilliant results. Plus it has a medical CE certification which means it can make medical claims to treat, for example, acne and heal wounds. That’s why I have added the Dermalux Flex to the shop on my site, and haven’t added the Lyma. I know which one actually works.

Hi, what a great question but please, let me reassure you, you are never too old to start with toxins or fillers. Many practitioners have patients who are in their eighties or even nineties, who love the treatments and the benefits they see from them.

Toxin and fillers are great for improving a grumpy-looking mouth. The toxin weakens the strength of the muscles that pull the mouth down, and the fillers can prop up the sides of the mouth just a little, or lift the cheeks a fraction which stops the lower face looking so saggy… so hop over to the practitioner section of the website, find someone in your area and have a consultation to see what they can do for you.

Hi yes the Body Ballancer is fab, the treatment is really good for improving lymphatic health (which brings serious health benefits) and also on the aesthetic side brings about volume reduction – by dispersing water retention – and also improves the look of cellulite no end.

There are various videos about the Body Ballancer on the site so take a look to learn more about it.

Hi, I saw Dr Sophie Shotter at her clinic in Kent (and one day I will get round to putting together an edited film to show the treatment). I was curious to try Profound RF because it’s more intense than other types of radiofrequency microneedling so you only need one session.

But meanwhile, there’s a pic on this post showing the difference it made to my jawline three months after treatment.

Yes, radiofrequency microneedling treatments like Morpheus8 are  great (though for saggy neck and jowls, they’re not going to give you anything like the effect of a lower facelift). And yes it’s good for treating those ‘barcode lip lines‘ around the mouth.

Have a chat with your practitioner and get their honest opinion on how much difference the treatment will be able to make for you – it will probably take three or four rounds of treatment.

The other option that’s fab for lip lines (and saggy skin and pigmentation) is laser.

Hi, I haven’t tried it and I don’t think it’s very powerful

Hi, yes you can take collagen tablets alongside Nuchdio Time + every day. I do!

These are all great questions and this is what I struggle with when it comes to HIFU. Focused ultrasound energy absolutely has the ability to tighten and lift the skin which is what has made these treatments popular. But to do that, the focused energy needs to be delivered very precisely onto the collagen within the skin – to heat it, damage it and prompt collagen renewal — and depending on whereabouts you’re looking in the face, that depth can vary.

If the ultrasound energy is focused into a patch of fat, it can heat, damage and melt that fat. Ultrasound is often offered as a treatment to do precisely this.

Some facial ultrasound treatments are offered with a general ‘shrinks fat and tightens skin’ promise which sounds a bit random for my liking. (Are you supposed to be happy with either? Or to get a bit of both? Maybe it’s fine if you’ve got fatty jowls and plenty to lose.)

But if you definitely want the tightening and lifting, then you need an experienced practitioner and preferably one who is using a system like Ultherapy that has an ultrasound visualiser unit, so that the practitioner can see exactly where, within the skin, each zap of energy is landing, to make sure it goes in the right place.

Ah, tricky! They’re all great. Why not start with the Elequra Eye Architecture cream and see what that does for you? If you have the budget, the Medik8 R-Retinoate eye cream is fab. It will give you results, but it’s gentle with it.

Hi, no the Dermalux won’t cause facial fat loss, it is working on treating the skin and the light it emits does not affect fat. We all lose facial volume as we age – the fat-pads in the face flatten and slide south. I have been using my Dermalux for half an hour at a time, as often as I can, for the past two years though just now I have lent it to a colleague who is suffering with psoriasis, so her need is greater.

Take a look at my practitioner finder – you can search by location, and other criteria

Hi, yes technically you’d think all you have to do is clap the machine onto the offending wobbly bits and switch it on…. but strangely enough (as with all aesthetic procedures, even the ones that involve technology) there is always an art to it. Really good technicians know which patients will get good results, exactly how to approach each treatment area, how many sessions may be needed to, say, remodel a spare tyre (from the sides, as well as from the front; each treatment only freezes a chunk of tissue at a time, so areas need to be carefully overlapped to give a smooth result).

So, find a really good practitioner, then you have the best result of a really good outcome rather than an ok one.

And yes, despite the bad press it is still a great treatment.

Well, not as such, but I may write an article on it for the blog. I’ve had a lot of similar questions on it and my feedback isn’t positive. First, it is not a medically-certified device. I tried it for months on end last year without getting any results, and all my laser-manufacturer acquaintances laugh at it when I ask them what they think of its supposed powers of rejuvenation. It makes enormous claims and has the flimsiest scientific backup  – and despite making these claims the company hasn’t risked putting the product through a single clinical trial or comparison with other devices. 

It’s been brilliantly and stylishly marketed and it has persuaded a lot of journalists who should have asked a few more questions to repeat the marketing claims without asking any difficult questions. Or even the basic questions, like, how can a device the size of a torch with a rechargeable battery generate enough power to do what it says it does? Or how can any light which is allegedly strong enough to prompt healing deep within the skin be safe to use around the eyes/ shine directly in your eyes without protection? Please, don’t waste your money. 

Hop onto the practitioner section of my website, put in your postcode and see who comes up