Galvanic facials vs. Microcurrent

Electric eels as a healing treatment? Yes – it’s true! If you travel way back in time to 46 AD, a physician by the name of Scribonious Largus would use electrical eels to treat his patients for pain. How did it work? Simple. The patient would place one foot on the eel, and the other on wet sand. This would create an electric circuit that would send electric currents throughout the body in a process known as the ‘Seashore Treatment’. If you want to go back even further in time, there is evidence to suggest that Egyptians discovered an electric fish, which they also used to treat pain. Where are we going with this? Electrotherapy my friends!

Electrotherapy has long been around in the medical field, but has more recently been adopted into the world of cosmetic beauty! Over the years, scientific studies have shown that electrical currents can activate the muscles in the body, and can overtime create long term muscle changes. The benefits of this idea are plentiful and many modern-day beauty technologies are taking full advantage! Let’s compare two of these: galvanic facials and microcurrent therapy.

Why don’t we start by comparing what the treatments themselves have in common, as well as how they differ? Obviously, both forms of treatment are a type of electrotherapy. In other words, they both send low levels of electrical currents into the body as a means of achieving a goal. Where they differ is in the type of goal they are aiming to achieve.

The goal of a galvanic treatment is to penetrate active ingredients into the skin, thereby stimulating cell regeneration and boosting the production of collagen and elastin within our skin. The main goal of microcurrent technology, on the other hand, is to rejuvenate and re-awaken the muscles in the face by mimicking our bodies natural bioelectrical currents and sending them into our muscles. The objective is to restore muscles to their original status, thereby giving the patient an all-natural ‘facelift’ if you will.

In simple terms, Galvanic treatments target our cells, whereas microcurrent treatments target our muscles. The former will help to reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles and slow down the aging process, while the latter will help to give our face a non-surgical “lift”. The result for both is a more youthful appearance.

Another major difference between the two types of treatment comes in form of the number of sessions needed before results are visible. Mircocurrent treatments are said to produce results within 4-5 treatment sessions, whereas many users have reported results from galvanic treatments after just one session. With that said, both achieve maximum results with a long-term commitment to the treatment plan.

Like we said, studies have found galvanic treatments to be successful after just one use. Microcurrent treatments, on the other hand, often come under scrutiny from plastic surgeons as there is no reliable data to show their effectiveness to date. With that being said, there are studies that show that microcurrent technologies do in fact trigger the production of ATP, which is necessary for cellular repair and production. In return, the skin should see changes after several treatments, even if the muscle stimulation is not the reason for it.

Neither of the treatments have any major side effects and both are safe for the majority of users (as long as they are in good health). So, which is the better of the two? Factually, nobody really knows because there is not enough evidence to support either one. But based on our findings, we’d say galvanic treatments are the way to go. Not only do they have more scientific support, but according to many patients they can provide results in as little as one treatment – and who doesn’t want to see immediate results!?