The repair model in skincare began to take form in the early 1980’s when a variety of biological models to describe aging also coalesced.

Tissues that undergo trauma repair themselves through a cascade of enzymatic actions and metabolic changes that were thought at the time to be governed by morphology directives from the immune system, or the like. With that logic it was thought that if you could stimulate a repair function cascade then you would enjoy the benefits of new tissue organization. Good as new.

Bring up new cells to eliminate the old look, in the simplest terms, is the repair model.

Put another way, it is like saying you could fix your drab old car at the body shop and make it all new again. Okay. Now what if you did that all the time? Like every day? The repair model advocates exactly that. It is expensive, too.

The problem with the repair model is that skin is intent on protection of the internal body, and cares little about its own beauty. Skin injury results in an immediate reaction to seal off the area with anything available. As a result, fragments of proteins and cells are thrown at the problem like sand bags to stop a flood. Your brain is told to protect the area with bandages or whatever is available. It is instinctive. Pain is part of the notification process.

Exfoliation of the skin to remove the outer layers of the epidermis activates the repair function. This is the repair model in action. It is by far the dominant method now in use by skincare practitioners and product marketers. It accelerates aging of the skin, interferes with normal metabolism and likely weakens the immune system as well as resulting in, unexpectedly, an uneven skin texture and congestion.

In the early days of the acid exfoliation craze, in the late 1980’s, marketers found themselves saying things like, our products “work almost too well.” The nonsense continues to this day.

Exfoliation can be accomplished by procedures such as LASERS, or by MICRO-DERMABRASION, which is a kind of sand blasting technique, or ULTRASOUND. See these and other INSTRUMENTS / PROCEDURES in the REFERENCE TOPICS for further discussions. However, the exfoliation most commonly is accomplished by chemical means using alpha and beta acids (i.e. glycolic, salicylic, etc.).

Retinoic acid, or Vitamin A, has a similar exfoliating outcome but it is an indirect approach to exfoliation compared to the direct technique using protein dissolving acids. See VITAMIN A, also see the discussion in the TRAINING MODEL.

Chemical exfoliation can vary in its intensity by the concentration of the acids used. See also EXFOLIATION. The immediate biological reaction is to initiate a repair function to the area. The skin is injured by the exfoliation. The injury may be slight or severe visually: redness and sensitivity are most commonly experienced.

However, the exfoliation that occurs from frequent application of low concentration acids, often found in cleansers to treat acne is the most common and the ‘injury’ is not immediately apparent or felt beyond a mild sensitivity. This is the definition of a ‘subclinical response.’ You can’t see it or especially even feel it.

This chronic, low threshold, subclinical injury by low concentration acids is inflammatory, that is, it causes a histology (cell response) that is a repair response: fragmentary protein and incomplete or undesirable cells result. The skin metabolism is also accelerated (which in turn accelerates aging).

The consumer who frequently applies this low level concentration of acids often has an acne, or congested skin problem. He notices that his skin ‘clears up’ quickly using the acid based product. As a result it becomes used more often by this consumer to clean and clear his skin.

Over time, and it may be in a few days or in a few weeks, the frequency of breakouts or severity of congestion is increasing. In addition, his skin has taken on a rash-like look. More frequent application of the acid based product is made to clear this up. The next outcome is more clinically apparent: redness, irritation and sensitivity with a very uneven skin texture.

This is also evidence of topical addiction. Acne and congestion worsen and stronger exfoliation seems to be the solution, or as is often suggested, the reckless use of very toxic BENZOYL PEROXIDE.

The repair model in practice has an inflammatory outcome more often than not. Saturating skin frequently with highly charged molecules like acids or phenols is not skincare, it merely trades one bad condition for another and leads to skin atrophy.

While the majority of problems in the repair model occur with those who have acne or congested skin, it is also true that anti-aging products and techniques rely on the same flawed notion.

Exfoliating skin to bring up a smoother surface may not be harmful a few times per year (note: per year), however the skincare industry thrives on repetitive, frequent application of these acid products, whose visible outcome is now an epidemic of rosacea and skin deterioration.

Weakening, dependency and premature aging of the skin by chronic repair model approaches are all part of a remarkable increase in industry revenues with a correspondingly worse visible outcome in its consumers. The change from soft, resilient skin to the look of hard, sheer and glistening resurfaced texture has now become even a cultural shift in the standard of beauty, or at least the attempt to do so. The result is visibly aged, off-center looking patrons who ironically or not remain obsessive of their former youth.