Got a Geeky Tattoo You Hate? Here's What The Laser Removal Process Looks Like
Getting a tattoo removed is a process that typically takes years, so you'll need to be prepared to be in it for the long run. If you decide that this is the right option for you, we're breaking down exactly what's involved in the process in this guide. How Laser Tattoo Removal Works
Let's start by looking at the science behind laser tattoo removal.
During your sessions, your skin will be treated with a laser , which targets ink particles and breaks them down so the body can flush them out. There are a few different types of lasers, including Q-switched and picosecond lasers, with different ones being best for targeting different ink colors.
Laser tattoo removal is a gradual process, and it usually takes 6–12 sessions, spaced several weeks or even months apart, for the ink to break down. What Happens During a Session
When you arrive at a laser tattoo removal clinic, the laser technician will get you sitting or lying comfortably on the treatment bed, give you a pair of goggles (to protect your eyes from the laser beam), and count you down to the treatment.
The laser feels a bit like the snap of a rubber band or stinging, like hot oil splashing on your skin. It can be quite an intense feeling, but when you're getting treatment at a reputable laser clinic like Lone Star Tattoo Removal , the process will be as quick and efficient as possible.
The session length depends on your tattoo size, but for most people, it'll be over within just a couple of minutes. Aftercare and Recovery
How you treat your tattoo post-treatment can affect the healing process and your likelihood of scarring, so make sure to follow your laser technician's advice carefully.
You'll need to avoid direct sun exposure for five weeks after the session to prevent it from blistering. You'll probably also be advised to keep the area clean and dry and avoid showering in hot water for the first 24 hours.
In terms of what the healing process looks like, you'll likely see some redness and swelling up to a week after treatment, possibly also bleeding after your later sessions when the laser intensity is increased. Final Word: Alternatives to Full Removal
If getting a tattoo removed sounds a bit scary or like too much commitment for you, you might want to look at other options instead of a full removal.
One option is to get a couple of laser sessions to partially fade your tattoo, so you can then book in a cover-up tattoo . Or, if you don't hate the design, see how you can incorporate new art to make it more suited to your current tastes.
TV Review: NAUTILUS Episode 3, 'What Lies Beneath'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Geek Girl Authority
08-07-2025
- Geek Girl Authority
Got a Geeky Tattoo You Hate? Here's What The Laser Removal Process Looks Like
One of the best ways to show off your love for being part of a certain fandom is with a geeky tattoo. But what happens if your tattoo artist did a poor job, you've grown out of something you used to love, or you just don't like your tattoo anymore? Enter laser tattoo removal. Getting a tattoo removed is a process that typically takes years, so you'll need to be prepared to be in it for the long run. If you decide that this is the right option for you, we're breaking down exactly what's involved in the process in this guide. How Laser Tattoo Removal Works Let's start by looking at the science behind laser tattoo removal. During your sessions, your skin will be treated with a laser , which targets ink particles and breaks them down so the body can flush them out. There are a few different types of lasers, including Q-switched and picosecond lasers, with different ones being best for targeting different ink colors. Laser tattoo removal is a gradual process, and it usually takes 6–12 sessions, spaced several weeks or even months apart, for the ink to break down. What Happens During a Session When you arrive at a laser tattoo removal clinic, the laser technician will get you sitting or lying comfortably on the treatment bed, give you a pair of goggles (to protect your eyes from the laser beam), and count you down to the treatment. The laser feels a bit like the snap of a rubber band or stinging, like hot oil splashing on your skin. It can be quite an intense feeling, but when you're getting treatment at a reputable laser clinic like Lone Star Tattoo Removal , the process will be as quick and efficient as possible. The session length depends on your tattoo size, but for most people, it'll be over within just a couple of minutes. Aftercare and Recovery How you treat your tattoo post-treatment can affect the healing process and your likelihood of scarring, so make sure to follow your laser technician's advice carefully. You'll need to avoid direct sun exposure for five weeks after the session to prevent it from blistering. You'll probably also be advised to keep the area clean and dry and avoid showering in hot water for the first 24 hours. In terms of what the healing process looks like, you'll likely see some redness and swelling up to a week after treatment, possibly also bleeding after your later sessions when the laser intensity is increased. Final Word: Alternatives to Full Removal If getting a tattoo removed sounds a bit scary or like too much commitment for you, you might want to look at other options instead of a full removal. One option is to get a couple of laser sessions to partially fade your tattoo, so you can then book in a cover-up tattoo . Or, if you don't hate the design, see how you can incorporate new art to make it more suited to your current tastes. TV Review: NAUTILUS Episode 3, 'What Lies Beneath'
USA Today
03-06-2025
- USA Today
5 new Ford recalls announced: See impacted models
5 new Ford recalls announced: See impacted models Show Caption Hide Caption Car recalls: Why they happen and what buyers should know Why do car recalls happen? Here's what to know if your car has an open recall. Ford Motor Company recently issued multiple recalls, affecting over 42,000 vehicles, for issues that can potentially increase the risk of fires and crashes, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The NHTSA lists the recalls, which the Dearborn, Michigan-headquartered automaker reported to the federal government agency on May 27. Affected vehicles include various SUV models, such as some Broncos, F-150s and Escapes. Here are the reasons behind the recalls, the affected models and the provided remedies from Ford. Check car recalls here: Ford, Volkswagen, Ram among recent vehicles recalled Ford recalling some Nautilus vehicles Ford recalled 30,679 2024 Nautilus vehicles, the NHTSA said on May 27. According to the federal agency, the multimedia module software on the affected cars may cause the panoramic and center displays to reboot, resulting in a blank screen and a subsequent loss of view of the speedometer and warning lights, thus increasing the risk of a crash, NHTSA reported. A missing rearview camera can reduce visibility of what is behind a vehicle, which also increases the risk of a crash. The software will be updated by a dealer or through an over-the-air update, which will be free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed on June 16. The recall number is 25C21. Ford recalling some F-150 vehicles Ford recalled 192 2022 F-150 Lightning BEV vehicles equipped with 20-inch or 22-inch all-season tires that were repaired incorrectly under recall 22V-453. The tire pressure monitoring system light may not illuminate, failing to warn the driver of low tire pressure, which increases the risk of a crash. Dealers will update the vehicle's software and fix the issue free of charge, the NHTSA said. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed on June 23. Ford's number for this recall is 25C20. Ford recalls over 1M vehicles: See affected models with camera issues 4 Ford SUV models recalled due to fire risk Ford recalled 6,781 vehicles due to the possibility that their engines may overheat and catch fire when the cars are parked with their block heater plugged in, NHTSA reported. Vehicles affected in this recall are: 2024-2025 Lincoln Nautilus 2023-2025 Escape 2023 Lincoln Corsair 2025 Lincoln Corsair, Maverick, and Bronco Sport vehicles equipped with a 1.5L or 2.0L MPC engine and an engine block heater. The NTHSB reported that the engine block heater may overheat when the car is parked with the block heater plugged in. Dealers will replace the engine block heater element and inspect the electrical cord free of charge, or replace it if necessary. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed on June 6. Ford's number for this recall is 25S52. Ford recalls some newer model Transit, Explorer and F-150 vehicles Ford recalled 154 Transit, F-150 and Explorer vehicles due to a damaged engine that could result in engine failure and a crash. The three affected models are 2025. "The connecting rod and rod bearing components may have manufacturing defects that can lead to engine damage and engine failure," the NTHSB said. The remedy is under development, according to the NTHSB. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed on June 9. Ford's number for this recall is 25S55. Ford recalls 3 SUV models due to possible engine failure Ford recalled 1,797 of its SUV models due to possible engine failure, which may increase the risk of fire and injury. In the event of an engine failure, engine oil and fuel vapor can be released into the engine and accumulate near ignition sources, including a hot engine or exhaust components, according to the NHTSB. Vehicles affected in this recall are: 2020-2023 Escape 2021-2023 Corsair 2022-2023 Maverick. The vehicles are equipped with 2.5L HEV or PHEV engines repaired incorrectly under recall 23V380. Owners are advised to park and shut off the engine as quickly as possible if they hear unexpected engine noises, notice a reduction in vehicle power, or see smoke. Dealers will update the powertrain control module software free of charge, NHTSB said. Ford's number for this recall is 25S54. Anyone with additional questions about the recalls can call Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Natalie Neysa Alund is a senior reporter for USA TODAY. Reach her at nalund@ and follow her on X @nataliealund.
Yahoo
02-06-2025
- Yahoo
New model helps to figure out which distant planets may host life
The search for life beyond Earth is a key driver of modern astronomy and planetary science. The U.S. is building multiple major telescopes and planetary probes to advance this search. However, the signs of life – called biosignatures – that scientists may find will likely be difficult to interpret. Figuring out where exactly to look also remains challenging. I am an astrophysicist and astrobiologist with over 20 years of experience studying extrasolar planets – which are planets beyond our solar system. My colleagues and I have developed a new approach that will identify the most interesting planets or moons to search for life and help interpret potential biosignatures. We do this by modeling how different organisms may fare in different environments, informed by studies of limits of life on Earth. Astronomers are developing plans and technology for increasingly powerful space telescopes. For instance, NASA is working on its proposed Habitable Worlds Observatory, which would take ultrasharp images that directly show the planets orbiting nearby stars. My colleagues and I are developing another concept, the Nautilus space telescope constellation, which is designed to study hundreds of potentially Earthlike planets as they pass in front of their host stars. These and other future telescopes aim to provide more sensitive studies of more alien worlds. Their development prompts two important questions: 'Where to look?' and 'Are the environments where we think we see signs of life actually habitable?' The strongly disputed claims of potential signs of life in the exoplanet K2-18b, announced in April 2025, and previous similar claims in Venus, show how difficult it is to conclusively identify the presence of life from remote-sensing data. Oxford Languages defines 'habitable' as 'suitable or good enough to live in.' But how do scientists know what is 'good enough to live in' for extraterrestrial organisms? Could alien microbes frolic in lakes of boiling acid or frigid liquid methane, or float in water droplets in Venus' upper atmosphere? To keep it simple, NASA's mantra has been 'follow the water.' This makes sense – water is essential for all Earth life we know of. A planet with liquid water would also have a temperate environment. It wouldn't be so cold that it slows down chemical reactions, nor would it be so hot that it destroys the complex molecules necessary for life. However, with astronomers' rapidly growing capabilities for characterizing alien worlds, astrobiologists need an approach that is more quantitative and nuanced than the water or no-water classification. As part of the NASA-funded Alien Earths project that I lead, astrobiologist Rory Barnes and I worked on this problem with a group of experts – astrobiologists, planetary scientists, exoplanet experts, ecologists, biologists and chemists – drawn from the largest network of exoplanet and astrobiology researchers, NASA's Nexus for Exoplanet System Science, or NExSS. Over a hundred colleagues provided us with ideas, and two questions came up often: First, how do we know what life needs, if we do not understand the full range of extraterrestrial life? Scientists know a lot about life on Earth, but most astrobiologists agree that more exotic types of life – perhaps based on different combinations of chemical elements and solvents – are possible. How do we determine what conditions those other types of life may require? Second, the approach has to work with incomplete data. Potential sites for life beyond Earth – 'extrasolar habitats' – are very difficult to study directly, and often impossible to visit and sample. For example, the Martian subsurface remains mostly out of our reach. Places like Jupiter's moon Europa's and Saturn's Moon Enceladus' subsurface oceans and all extrasolar planets remain practically unreachable. Scientists study them indirectly, often only using remote observations. These measurements can't tell you as much as actual samples would. To make matters worse, measurements often have uncertainties. For example, we may be only 88% confident that water vapor is present in an exoplanet's atmosphere. Our framework has to be able to work with small amounts of data and handle uncertainties. And, we need to accept that the answers will often not be black or white. The new approach, called the quantitative habitability framework, has two distinguishing features: First, we moved away from trying to answer the vague 'habitable to life' question and narrowed it to a more specific and practically answerable question: Would the conditions in the habitat – as we know them – allow a specific (known or yet unknown) species or ecosystem to survive? Even on Earth, organisms require different conditions to survive – there are no camels in Antarctica. By talking about specific organisms, we made the question easier to answer. Second, the quantitative habitability framework does not insist on black-or-white answers. It compares computer models to calculate a probabilistic answer. Instead of assuming that liquid water is a key limiting factor, we compare our understanding of the conditions an organism requires (the 'organism model') with our understanding of the conditions present in the environment (the 'habitat model'). Both have uncertainties. Our understanding of each can be incomplete. Yet, we can handle the uncertainties mathematically. By comparing the two models, we can determine the probability that an organism and a habitat are compatible. As a simplistic example, our habitat model for Antarctica may state that temperatures are often below freezing. And our organism model for a camel may state that it does not survive long in cold temperatures. Unsurprisingly, we would correctly predict a near-zero probability that Antarctica is a good habitat for camels. We had a blast working on this project. To study the limits of life, we collected literature data on extreme organisms, from insects that live in the Himalayas at high altitudes and low temperatures to microorganisms that flourish in hydrothermal vents on the ocean floor and feed on chemical energy. We explored, via our models, whether they may survive in the Martian subsurface or in Europa's oceans. We also investigated if marine bacteria that produce oxygen in Earth's oceans could potentially survive on known extrasolar planets. Although comprehensive and detailed, this approach makes important simplifications. For example, it does not yet model how life may shape the planet, nor does it account for the full array of nutrients organisms may need. These simplifications are by design. In most of the environments we currently study, we know too little about the conditions to meaningfully attempt such models – except for some solar system bodies, such as Saturn's Enceladus. The quantitative habitability framework allows my team to answer questions like whether astrobiologists might be interested in a subsurface location on Mars, given the available data, or whether astronomers should turn their telescopes to planet A or planet B while searching for life. Our framework is available as an open-source computer model, which astrobiologists can now readily use and further develop to help with current and future projects. If scientists do detect a potential signature of life, this approach can help assess if the environment where it is detected can actually support the type of life that leads to the signature detected. Our next steps will be to build a database of terrestrial organisms that live in extreme environments and represent the limits of life. To this data, we can also add models for hypothetical alien life. By integrating those into the quantitative habitability framework, we will be able to work out scenarios, interpret new data coming from other worlds and guide the search for signatures of life beyond Earth – in our solar system and beyond. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Daniel Apai, University of Arizona Read more: Are we alone in the universe? 4 essential reads on potential contact with aliens 'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence' − an astronomer explains how much evidence scientists need to claim discoveries like extraterrestrial life Extraterrestrial life may look nothing like life on Earth − so astrobiologists are coming up with a framework to study how complex systems evolve Daniel Apai receives funding from NASA, Heising-Simons Foundation, Department of Defense, Space Telescope Science Institute, and the University of Arizona, and leads the NASA-funded Alien Earths astrobiology research team that developed the framework described here. He is affiliated with the Steward Observatory and Lunar and Planetary Laboratory of The University of Arizona.
