Isn't it the "material" under the skin/mucosa that is actually
responsible for feeding the skin/mucosa in the first place?

I'm thinking of this as cutting off a food supply.  If we are to
RF/cauterize the supply under the skin aren't we actually hurting the
mucosa in the process?

Or am I totally off base here.  Can the skin/mucosa actually live on
it's own without the material & bone underneath (or at least much less
material/bone as a result of rf/cautery)?

Dr grossan,
which method produces more pain and what is the average healing time
for each method?

with the removal of the mucosa by mean of simple cutting, one would
expect to see loss of mucus production, the cut surface would also
become scarred (loss of cilia hair) and harden (loss of elasticity) as
well as nerve damaged. thus the new airways would be defined by
different materials, which will not provide enough lubricant to ease
air friction (patient would feel burning sensation), to soften the
pressure/OR OPEN UP THE AIRWAY UNDER STRONG INHAE/EXHALATION (ABNORMAL
OBSTRUCTION, NOISY air movement/KNIFE CUT PAIN), and the mechanic for
SELF CLEANING (due to loss of cilia hair) will also be DISRUPTED
(FREQUENt INFECTIONS, constant irritation) ?

there will also be  an array of secondary problems such as chest/neck
pain (something to do with the getting the right amount of air to the
lungs),  irritated pharynx (from dried cold air), craninal, facial and
ear pain (due to abnormal air pressure/air movement, nerve damaged),
and of course sleep dysnea dizziness, etc ?

Since the simple trimming method is inherently damaging (it could be
a disaster for allergy people), why is it still being used?

will the damaged skin ever grow back normal again?

what would be the long term effects to the lower respiratory system?
cardio vascular system? and ultimately on the life-span of the poor
patient?

your clarifications will be immensely appreciated.