Scar treatment on this site is documented by two models: the 10600nm fractional CO2 laser and the 1927nm thulium laser. The CO2 detail page's application statements cover acne scars and burn, surgical, and traumatic scars, among other applications, and the thulium detail page's function statements include superficial acne scars and skin quality improvement. Both statements are attributed to their detail pages, and neither is presented as a guaranteed treatment outcome.
The important difference between the two models is documentation depth. The thulium model has a full specification table, including power, pulse width, pulse energy, and scanning settings, transcribed on its product page. The CO2 model has no published parameter table at all, and its product page says so plainly rather than inventing figures. A buyer comparing the two for scar work should therefore weigh a documented model against an application-level model, and should request the CO2 specification sheet before treating the two as comparable on engineering grounds.
The CO2 detail page also lists surgical, ear-nose-throat, and gynecological uses. This site does not reproduce that surgical list as buying claims, because this site is positioned for beauty equipment buyers and a surgical claim needs its own evidence and regulatory basis in the buyer's market. A buyer with a surgical use in mind should ask the company directly which applications it supports for the model as supplied and which documents apply in that market.
The fractional CO2 versus erbium comparison guide compares only documented figures and notes the CO2 parameter gap wherever it arises, and the CO2 blog post walks through the same gap from a buyer's perspective. Reading either before an inquiry will make the inquiry sharper: ask for the CO2 specification sheet, the warranty terms, and the market documents, and compare the answer with the thulium model's documented table.
Related pages: Fractional CO2 laser · Thulium laser · Fractional CO2 vs erbium guide