I'm not a math whiz so maybe you guys can help me here if you can see something like this going on with your skin.
At the slowest comparison my skin seems to be turning itself over/healing at a rate that's 90 times faster than normal. How I figured this: My old red marks would last a minimum of 3 months (90 days at the absolute shortest, smallest zit I would get) Now, the minimum time that I experience a red mark is one day.
3 months x 30 days = 90 days
90 days / 1 day = approx 90 times faster
At the highest comparison the turnover rate appears to be 260 higher than my skin used to heal. For a red mark that was there more than 5 years, I took
365 days x 5 years = 1,825 days one of my longest red marks lasted.
The longest red mark that I have now lasts about 7 days.
1,825 days / 7 days = 260.7 times faster than before.
Is this supposedly a wrongful method to conclude it?
At the slowest comparison my skin seems to be turning itself over/healing at a rate that's 90 times faster than normal. How I figured this: My old red marks would last a minimum of 3 months (90 days at the absolute shortest, smallest zit I would get) Now, the minimum time that I experience a red mark is one day.
3 months x 30 days = 90 days
90 days / 1 day = approx 90 times faster
At the highest comparison the turnover rate appears to be 260 higher than my skin used to heal. For a red mark that was there more than 5 years, I took
365 days x 5 years = 1,825 days one of my longest red marks lasted.
The longest red mark that I have now lasts about 7 days.
1,825 days / 7 days = 260.7 times faster than before.
Is this supposedly a wrongful method to conclude it?
