BX3.4 Hair Helmet
Hi Dr Rassman
I have read your blog for some time and find it an oasis of sensible, factual information in the desert of hair loss websites.
I am writing to you to ask about the BX 3.4 helmet. I know you have mentioned it before but I wanted to draw your attention to a paper written by Dr Tony Chu, a consultant dermatologist in the UK. I have seen Dr Chu for years for my acne and he has managed it amazingly well, and he pioneered a laser therapy for acne which he proved with rigorous studies and research.
When I mentioned my (minimal) hair loss to him, he alerted me to the BX 3.4 helmet, and I did some research. I found a paper he wrote somewhere on the internet, to the UK Advertising Standards Authority, pulling together all the various studies and research on the subject of electromagnetic treatment of hair loss. IT looked very persuasive to me as a layman, and suggested room for further studies. I can’t find the paper now, which is annoying, but know it exists.
What are your thoughts? Have you seen the paper he wrote? If not, do you have some way of getting it and looking at it? If not, are you aware of all the studies he cited concerning this subject, and what are your thoughts on them?
I did buy the helmet from ebay at greatly reduced cost (Â£750 is a lot of money) and it does *seem* an insane idea to me, but then so did laser therapy for my long standing acne problem, and that worked, so I never like to say never.
I’ve received a few emails over the past year and a half about this BX 3.4 helmet, and as I wrote before, there is no science that I can see behind claims that electromagnetic waves can have a positive impact on hair regrowth. I was just reading on their website that this helmet requires a monthly purchase of “essential oils” from the helmet maker, although the prices aren’t listed. What are these magic hair-regrowing oils, you wonder? The site lists Bay Saint-Thomas, Laurel leaf, Rosemary, Patchouli, Thyme Borneol, Cedar, Sage, Clary Sage, Myrtle, and Ylang-Ylang. So there’s extra costs on top of the nearly $1500 hair helmet.
A number of years ago, a professor from one of the local universities had developed electromagnetic treatments for diabetic ulcers of the legs and suggested that there was some data indicating an application for bringing back hair in a situation where hair loss occurred. The work to find out if it would work would’ve been an enormous task (and one which I just didn’t have time for), so I decided to pass on an opportunity to get involved to determine the value of this treatment modality.
As many regular readers of this site will probably know, I am a skeptic of most of the new treatments for hair loss, as most of them are not based on science, but motivated by commercial and monetary gain. I have not read Dr. Chu’s paper (I looked for it online and was unsuccessful), but since you’ve purchased one of these helmets, I’m guessing that you believe in it. Please keep us informed of your progress.
Consumers spend collectively millions, if not billions, of dollars on products for that allusive hair loss cure and as long as we are willing to spend the money simply to “give it a shot”, these products (including this electromagnetic helmet) will continue to entice people. I suppose the reasoning is that if the price is right, it may be worth the gamble, and to many people, the price of hair has no limit. On the other hand, the savvy entrepreneurs will keep selling these products for the “right” price and make their fortune.
Note: Image is for illustrative (and humor) purposes only. This is not the actual BX3.4 helmet.
Hi. Thanks for answering my question.
I ought to add that I do not use the oils they recommend. Dr Chu told me he believed that these were pointless. I agree with him on that, and with you. IT was clear to me that they were simply there to make more money for the company selling them.
And while I do agree that some companies will simply see hairloss as a way to make money from those of us worried about it, I wonder if the electromagnetic helmet might have some science behind it, regardless of the way one company or another might choose to cash in on it in an overly commercial way.
I will try to find that paper again, though have had no luck so far. I will carry on though! I wish I could remember where I saw it.
And by the way, it’s not so much that I believe in the claims outright, but I do trust Dr Chu and his advice, thanks to his success in the past. So I figured it might be worth a try…