Dysport: Is it Better than Botox?
Posted September 26, 2012 in Uncategorized
Everyone has heard of the term “Botox”. It’s just one of those things that has been a new age craze for quite sometime. So many people are turning to Botox as their savior in the aging game. Botox has transformed the process of getting old. No longer do you have to accept wrinkles and under eye circles, and there is more than just Botox out there to fix your facial features. Depending on what kind of wrinkles and fine lines you desire to get rid of, there are a couple of treatments that can replace the usage of Botox.
The Difference between Botox and Dysport
Dysport is FDA approved and is one of the latest methods for treating facial wrinkles. Dysport is derived from the same substance as Botox, yet its formula is a little different. The Dysport formula is different because it uses the main toxin in a more concentrated amount, as opposed Botox’s smaller botullinim toxin type A amount. Dysport tends to work faster than Botox does, taking affect in three to four days, rather than Botox’s seven or more days. Dysport’s formula is also known to last up to a month longer than traditional Botox. There are many benefits to using this injection. Dysport’s formula takes a wider area of effect which means that the injections can be spaced farther apart and in turn, may require fewer injections.
Is Dysport Better than Botox?
With technology increasing in the plastic surgery industry, Botox may just become a staple name for getting rid of fine lines and wrinkles. It will have little to no benefits as it makes way for other injections and fillers. But, are new fillers such as Dysport really better than Botox at the current moment? That question is hard to answer. For more information on Botox alternatives or stem cell therapy in Los Angeles call Rejuvalife at 310.695.1051.