OK so whilst Apple’s new 5S and 5C have set some tongues wagging, there is a gadget out there that is making some claims that might just get your beauty brain on high tech alert.
When a brand has gone to great lengths and great cost to have their product thoroughly tested by real women, you can be pretty sure, they have enough conviction in their product to make you delve a little deeper.
Similar to this
Then when you see
1/3 wrinkle depth reduced
38% skin elasticity improved
83% skin improved
80% skin looked more toned
80% Lifted facial contours
77% Fine Lines Softened
77% Firmer Skin
73% Skin more Suppler
You just can’t ignore it.
I know, I know there are dozens of gadgets out there, and it’s hard to know which is the best one for you. In fact I’m a firm believer that the first UK beauty hall to employ BEAU-TECHNICIANS, who, like Apple Geniuses can debunk the junk and let us know what works and what it does, will really clean up in the beauty tech market.
Anyway, back to these results. They’re impressive, right? 93% of women who trialled the gadget said they’d continue using it and there are some very impressive before and afters too.
I almost feel like keeping this a secret, but as Jane told me ‘get something juicy and let my readers know about it’, or words to that effect, I suppose I’ll have to share…
It’s the Caci Microlift.
It is available HERE for £349 .95 and Selfridges now it will be available nationwide from Boots stores from October, if they can keep it on the shelves.
(This is my one dedicated client post as per #bbbtakeover rules)
Transparency Disclosure
All products are sent to me as samples from brands and agencies unless otherwise stated. Affiliate links may be used. Posts are not affiliate driven.
7 comments
Notice how the light source on the “before” pictures is above the person and casting shadows under the eyes and wrinkles? Then notice how the light source on the “after” image is directly on the face, evening out shadows… This is a simple method (trick) used to give a positive impression of the supposed effect, while maintaining an “honest” looking photograph.
THIS
Maybe Frida is right about the second photo, but you just can’t ignore the improvements on the first photo! Absolutely amazing xx
That’s what I thought too, but then again the improvements are actually there.
Hi
I got the Caci in May this year for my birthday. I am a sceptic at heart. I love my little machine- I am not nearly as ‘old’ as the lady in the before and after pics- but my skin looks lifted and refreshed- I can believe that If I had deeper wrinkles I would visually see better results – this is really good!
I see no mention of real clinical testing on this. You can design user trials to say things like “75% saw an improvement in…………” quite easily and its pretty meaningless.
I find this sort of photography and these sort of claims annoying.
( PS. What sort of English is “Skin more Suppler”?)
The colour tone and angle of the lighting in these photographs is incredibly misleading. I could take two sets of photos two minutes apart right now in my own home that would replicate these results.
As for those ‘statistics’ – what are their provenance? If they are from a clinical study, I would like to see the actual report. If they are self-reported, well self-reported ‘statistics’ like these – particularly if they are gathered specifically for use in marketing – are notoriously unreliable.
This device may well have some beneficial effects, but if this is the best evidence they can offer as proof I would argue that a new smartphone is a better investment. Hell, a cupcake is probably a better investment.