GCs donor pic 24 days after 3000 grafts-donor density

[didi]

As you can see theres difference in density of hair on the left side of pic where grafts were taken from and density to the right where theres no grafts taken

I cant see 'scars' but its obvious that harvested area looks depleted compared to non harvested area.


this picture is taken on day 24 of last procedure;
3000 grafts extracted;

if we know that most hairs already regenerated as they regenerate within first 2-3 weeks then its safe to say that harvested area wont get any or much thicker....

Looking at that picture you can clearly see difference in denisty, look at spacing and big gaps,


The problem is permanent safe area is so small like IM said 2.5 cm x 27 cm its about 70 cm2 area...4900 follicular units grows there, now you take 3000 out of there with 80% regeneration, 20% dont regenerate at all, 40% regrow as thinner or with less hairs then you get what we see in the photo

[Kiwi]

Still... It's the best FUE in town!!!

[Jairus]

As you can see theres difference in density of hair on the left side of pic where grafts were taken from and density to the right where theres no grafts taken

I cant see 'scars' but its obvious that harvested area looks depleted compared to non harvested area.


this picture is taken on day 24 of last procedure;
3000 grafts extracted;

if we know that most hairs already regenerated as they regenerate within first 2-3 weeks then its safe to say that harvested area wont get any or much thicker....

Looking at that picture you can clearly see difference in denisty, look at spacing and big gaps,


The problem is permanent safe area is so small like IM said 2.5 cm x 27 cm its about 70 cm2 area...4900 follicular units grows there, now you take 3000 out of there with 80% regeneration, 20% dont regenerate at all, 40% regrow as thinner or with less hairs then you get what we see in the photo

Cheers for this - glad some evidence is coming out that proves Gho is NOT all encompassing. There are downsides like everything else in particular thin donor regeneration.

[didi]

Im actually surprised by this picture and how bad harvested area looks compared to non harvested. GC has been told by other FUE clinics that he can have 2000 FUE grafts, that would mean he could have 10 000 HST grafts before he really lose 2000 in donor(20&#37...BUT I cant imagine him having another 7 000 grafts taken out of donor area, it already looks like he needs to stop taking grafts around his ears, I dont know what his donor area at the back look like, but sides are done or almost done.


GC
Can you put up some good quality photos of your sides(at right 90 degree angle so we can make better comparison of hrvested and non harvesrted areas) and back buzzed
to zero.

Are we waiting for more regeneration to occur or what we see in day-24 is about it?

[Arashi]

At 85% regeneration and 3000 grafts he should have lost 450 grafts. Picture looks like that just could be right, doesn't it ?

[Arashi]

How many grafts are missing in the picture ? I'd guess about 15-20 ? I could easily select at least another 15-20 before I'd say he'd really have to stop, by then he had 6000 grafts, 3x more the other clinics said he could have. Possibly he even could get more.

[didi]

How many grafts are missing in the picture ? I'd guess about 15-20 ?


Just take a look at black rectangles and compare them to RED rectangle, theres about 13-14 FUs in red(virgin area, thats how GCs donor looked like before he started with HSTs), ...you can see some of black rectangles are badly depleted,
how about the one next to IMs number 12, there are only 3 FUs growing..and it should be 13......too many gaps, spaces between hairs
it simply does not look like 80% regeneration

Did Gho maybe overharvest the area?

[Arashi]

Hehe that analysis is far from valid, Didi. You're using the same rectangular shape while you're 'forgetting' about the curve of the head.

[Arashi]

Besides, you're comparing the worst part of the donor to the best part of his safe zone (if you'd move the red shape up, it would look a lot different). That's not fair either.

[didi]

moving red shape anywhere wouldnt change much, his untouched area is consistent and growth is even..its true i picked the worst areas of donor but theres so many crap areas of donor, even the best ones are still shit compared ...but i could have picked even better virgin area with few more hairs...

Ok curve of his head ...hmm. thats why I asked GC to upload 90 degree angle photo of his sides....


it does not look good so far

[JJJJrS]

it simply does not look like 80% regeneration

didi, your picture is hard to compare because one part is curved like Arashi said. Still, there is no doubt that 80% of the extraction points regenerated hairs. Sometimes the hairs are thinner than before but they're regenerating from the extraction points.

This is the whole reason I did the analysis. The very same area that you're talking about has already been analysed so you can see exactly what was there before the procedure and what was there after.

From the donor side, the analysis I did gives you the complete picture from gc. Rather than isolating a small area with no context, it would be more productive to point out anything in the analysis that you have questions about or disagree with. I'm very confident in the accuracy of it though.

If you want the most complete story, you have to include the recipient and document a 50 graft test.

[clarence]

I'm no dr nigam when it comes to photoshopping, but here goes....

[didi]

I agree with JJJJrs analysis but if you do look at pic you will clearly see area on the left is just not as dense as area to the right,

Why nobody likes to acknowledge that fact?

Thing is when you take 3000 grafts over such a small area with 20% complete loss+30% partial loss...it will look depleted...and it does,

How come IM cant see that, normally hes got good eye when it comes to strips and FUEs but prefers to wear rosy glasses when it comes to HST

[534623]

How come IM cant see that, normally hes got good eye when it comes to strips and FUEs but prefers to wear rosy glasses when it comes to HST

That's easy to explain pipi, because I simply focus on the REGENERATION RATE in general - because that's everything what counts. Even if there would be just a clear visible regeneration rate of 20% identical grafts - it would be still better (NO REAL BIG SCARRING aside) than ZERO ZILCH NADA! With normal FUE, I know in advance that I will get exactly this - namely, zero zilch nada.

ops, I forgot I'm talking to pipi - so I have to start from scatch: 1+1= ...

[JJJJrS]

I agree with JJJJrs analysis but if you do look at pic you will clearly see area on the left is just not as dense as area to the right,

Why nobody likes to acknowledge that fact?

Thing is when you take 3000 grafts over such a small area with 20% complete loss+30% partial loss...it will look depleted...and it does,

gc's density is below average to begin with and you can see that in his early pictures from the 2nd procedure. That's why counting his hairs is relatively easy compared to some other cases or why other surgeons told him he could only extract 2500 grafts. In this case, any loss of density will be more easily noticeable.

In the end, I think the numbers speak for themselves - 20% of his extracted grafts were lost and another 30% are now thinner. I was the one that brought these numbers up but if you really want to provide context to them, than you have to include the recipient in the analysis. This is why I think analysing a 50-graft test procedure is the most important step going forward.

But I think Iron_Man brought up a good point. Imagine if every one of these extraction points were now hairless, or even worse, white dots. In other words, picture every single blue circle or green dot in my analysis as a white dot. This, more than anything else, illustrates the limitations of traditional hair transplants. IM has brought this point up often but the safe zone of the donor area is much smaller than most hair transplant surgeons let on. This is why, in my opinion, traditional hair transplants are a dead-end for most people, and especially why we need to push for new treatments which expand the donor and minimize scarring.