Ingrown pubic hair (IPH) is a common problem among women. It causes discomfort, pain and embarrassment. There are various treatments available for IPH. Some of them include shaving, electrolysis, laser therapy and chemical peels. All these methods have their pros and cons.
But which one works best? Which method will work best for your situation? How much time do you need to complete it? What kind of results can you expect from each method? What are the risks involved with any of these methods? Is there anything else you could try first before making a decision?
In this post we’ll take a look at some of the pros and cons of each method and what’s known about them so far. We’ll also share our own experience in getting rid of ingrown hairs using different methods.
Shaving Methods: Pros & Cons
Pros: Shaving is relatively easy to perform, quick, cheap and effective. You don’t need to spend a fortune either.
Cons: Shaving can cause irritation, cuts and burns. Also, it can leave scars if done incorrectly or not properly. If you’re prone to ingrown hairs then shaves may even lead to infection.
Laser Therapy Methods: Pros & Cons
Pros: Laser therapy is relatively easy to perform, quick and effective. It doesn’t require expensive equipment nor does it require special training.
Cons: Laser therapy can be expensive to have regularly done. It also may or may not work. In some cases it can worsen the condition and leave nasty scars.
Electrolysis: Pros & Cons
Pros: This is a very effective method that permanently gets rid of hairs. It’s relatively cheap and doesn’t require much maintenance.
Cons: It’s painful, expensive, requires a lot of time, and not everyone is a suitable candidate for it.
What’s Your Experience?
We have tried most of the above methods and our opinion is that laser therapy works best for us. It’s relatively cheap, doesn’t require much maintenance, and it’s effective. For us the cons are that it takes a long time for your treatment to be done. However this is not a problem for us since we don’t mind travelling to the laser center and we don’t mind waiting for some time before we get our desired results.
If you don’t have the time or money to go to a laser center then we recommend trying the shaving method. It’s cheap and very effective. However, make sure to use proper tools such as a sharp razor, shaving balm or oil, and aftershave balm. Be careful when shaving, too, it can cause cuts and burns if you’re not careful. Do not stretch your skin when you do it as well since this could cause injury as well.
If you need a quicker solution then try one of the other methods above. Laser therapy and electrolysis are very effective and you don’t need to do them too regularly. If you’re thinking about getting laser therapy done at a professional laser center then be sure to inquire first if they have any special promotions or packages. Some places actually offer special discounts if you book yourself in for several sessions. Electrolysis, on the other hand, is pretty cheap to do.
You can have it done at your local beauty salon!
Whatever you do, just remember to take care of your skin and make sure to rid yourself of any ingrown hairs as soon as possible. Don’t let ingrown hairs turn into something worse such as an infection. Be sure to keep your tools clean as well. If you take good care of your skin then it should look great and healthy without too many problems.
Sources & references used in this article:
Consolidated guidelines on the use of antiretroviral drugs for treating and preventing HIV infection: recommendations for a public health approach by World Health Organization – 2016 – apps.who.int
Genital herpes by R Gupta, T Warren, A Wald – The Lancet, 2007 – Elsevier
Guidelines for the prevention and treatment of opportunistic infections among HIV-exposed and HIV-infected children: recommendations from CDC, the … by LM Mofenson, MT Brady, SP Danner… – … and reports: Morbidity …, 2009 – ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
External genital warts: diagnosis, treatment, and prevention by DJ Wiley, J Douglas, K Beutner, T Cox… – Clinical Infectious …, 2002 – academic.oup.com