Walk into almost any modern aesthetic clinic in Australia and you will find a laser or IPL platform at the centre of the hair-removal offering. It is fast, it is profitable, and for the right client it is genuinely excellent. But there is a quiet problem sitting behind the appointment book that most owners have simply learned to live with: a meaningful share of clients who walk in wanting hair gone, and walk out told there is nothing the clinic can do for them.
They are the clients with white, grey, red, blonde or very fine vellus hair. They are the clients whose skin type or medication makes light-based treatment unsuitable. And every time they are turned away, that is revenue leaving the building — usually for good.
"We have spent fifteen years training the market to think 'hair removal equals laser'. It is a brilliant technology. But it has a blind spot that is built into the physics, not the marketing. The clinics that understand that are the ones quietly capturing a client base their competitors are sending home."
— Hanan Mourad, founder of Aesthetic Equipment Australia and ABIC Electrology Division Committee Member.
The Blind Spot Is Physical, Not Fixable
The reason is straightforward, and it is worth understanding properly because it is the entire commercial case.
Laser and IPL treatments use photothermolysis, where light is absorbed by the melanin in hair, transformed into heat, and this heat then damages the hair follicle. This approach is effective, but it relies on the hair having more pigment than the surrounding skin so the light can focus on it.
Hair with minimal melanin — such as white, grey, most red and blonde hair, as well as fine vellus hair — does not absorb much light. Likewise, skin that has high levels of melanin encounters a similar issue. The energy has no reliable target, which is why results on these hair types are inconsistent at best. Typical reduction results are 75% over 12 months, however some studies report a hair reduction rate as low as 27% at 6 months post treatments.
This is not a limitation of any one device, class of laser or any one operator. It is a limitation of how the technology works. No firmware update or higher-end platform changes it.
Electrolysis: The Method That Doesn't Need Pigment
Electrolysis predates laser by more than a century and works on an entirely different principle. Rather than targeting pigment, a fine probe is introduced into the follicle, and a current destroys the structures responsible for regrowth — regardless of the hair's colour or thickness.
That single difference is why it reaches what light cannot.
It is also why the regulatory language is worth noting carefully. In the United States, the FDA recognises electrolysis as a method of permanent hair removal, while laser and IPL devices are cleared for permanent hair reduction — a deliberate and meaningful distinction in the wording.
"That distinction matters enormously and most consumers have never heard it. We are not asking clinics to choose between laser and electrolysis. We are pointing out that they answer two different questions — and the clinics doing best are the ones offering both."
Not a Competitor to Laser — The Complement That Completes It
The framing that resonates with clinic clients is not laser versus electrolysis. It is laser plus electrolysis.
A typical course of laser hair removal leaves behind a population of finer, lighter, more stubborn hairs that the light increasingly struggles to target as treatment progresses. Electrolysis is the established method for finishing that work — the precision tool that takes a "mostly clear" result to genuinely clear.
For the progressive clinic, the commercial logic is appealing:
A new client base — the people currently being turned away become treatable.
A finishing service — existing laser clients have a reason to keep returning rather than plateauing.
Year-round demand — electrolysis is not subject to the same seasonal and sun-exposure constraints that shape the laser calendar.
A defensible point of difference — a service most local competitors simply do not offer.
The Technology Has Moved On
Part of the reason electrolysis fell out of fashion was an older reputation for being slow and uncomfortable. Modern platforms have changed that conversation considerably.
The current generation of Silhouet-Tone devices distributed in Australia — the flagship EVO X HD and the essential ST350 Evolution — use a proprietary modulation technology that shapes the current delivery to concentrate energy where it is needed while improving comfort during treatment.
Both are manufactured in Canada to ISO 13485 medical-device standards and carry recognised international certifications including CSA, FCC, FDA and CE.
"The devices a clinic can buy today are not the electrolysis units people remember. The fundamentals are the same proven science. The experience for the client, and the speed for the operator, is a different era."
Where to Start
For owners weighing it up, Hanan's advice is to treat it as a category decision rather than a purchase. "Look at your turn-away rate first. Count the clients you couldn't help last quarter. That number is the business case — the device is just how you serve them."
Aesthetic Equipment Australia is exhibiting both platforms at Beauty Expo Australia in Sydney, 15–16 August 2026, with live demonstrations and the option to book a private, in-clinic demonstration of both devices for clinics evaluating the category.
References
1. Anderson, R.R. and Parrish, J.A. (1983) Selective Photothermolysis: Precise Microsurgery by Selective Absorption of Pulsed Radiation. Science, 220, 524-527.
2. Krasniqi A, McClurg DP, Gillespie KJ, Rajpara S. Efficacy of lasers and light sources in long-term hair reduction: a systematic review. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2022 Jul 4;24(1-5):1-8. doi: 10.1080/14764172.2022.2075899. Epub 2022 May 29. PMID: 35634805.
3. Hair Removal: A Summary Of Techniques, PMFA news volume 2 issue 2 dec/jan 2015
4. https://www.drugs.com/fda-consumer/removing-hair-safely-64.html
5. Ullah, Naseem & Naz, Shahida & Aslam, Kalsoom & Suhail, Muhammad & Khan, Sadiq. (2021). Paradoxical Hypertrichosis after Laser Therapy. Journal of Gandhara Medical and Dental Science. 8. 55-60. 10.37762/jgmds.8-4.260.