how come KP only appears on certain areas of the body? I have KP on my legs, but the area behind my knees are super duper smooth. And the inside of my arms as well. What is up with that? Could figuring this out help me get rid of it? It's so frustrating to see a patch of super smooth clear skin then the rough, red mess around it. It's like God is teasing me and saying "Ha! See what you can't have!"

Hey, be happy you only have it on a few areas. If you find something that works for you you'll have to use less product. I get KP virtually from head to foot. Once I start ordering Glycolic lotion, that ****'s gonna cost me like 50~60 bucks a month, and it might only cost you 25~30!

But to answer your question, much like what causes KP, I don't think anyone has a definite answer to your question. Its like asking why some people get acne only on their face, and others on their body. Maybe if someone found out why, it could be part of the whole puzzle.

I'm no expert but I would have thought it would be connected to where you have body hair as it's the follicles that get affected isn't it? I know I don't have as much hair on the inside of my arms compared to the outside or on the backs of my knees.

heyy be happy it not everywhere.

i actually have it on my outer upper arms, and my stomach. yes, my stomach. but none on my legs at least. hair has nothing to do with it.

Actually, I think I have to disagree with you there.

Look at the first sentence from the wikipedia site.

So I would think hair follicles have something to do with it. You do have hairs on your stomach. They might not be very long but you do have them. Whereas it's impossible to have KP on the palms of your hands isn't it?

wow i got quoted. lol

um i just dont see how..like then wouldnt people have KP on their legs, or back
i mean i have hair on my theighs legs and back so shouldnt i have KP there?

Just because it affects areas with hair follicles does not mean it must affect all areas with hair follicles. I think you're understanding what I said as a misunderstood syllogism. I just meant it won't be able to affect areas with fewer follicles in the same way.

For example if you had an ingrown toenail that would be a problem to do with nails but it doesn't mean all your nails will be ingrown. But you couldn't get an ingrown nail where you don't have a nail. Does that make sense?

I have it on my outside arms (mostly upper and bit on the lower), slightly on my thighs and I think I might have it on my lower legs which I thought was just ingrown hairs but might be KP. I don't have it all over but I definitely don't have it in areas with fewer hair follicles (eg inside of arms).

One theory at the moment that I'm trying is the demodex mite theory which live in hair follicles. I'm taking sea buckthorn to kill them at the moment and it has made my KP worse which it is supposed to do at first so I think it might be true for me at least.

KP is basically just the follicle getting full of keratin. It's not very well understood so as to why you wouldn't have it on your legs and I don't have it on my stomach or back is a bit of a mystery.