PDA

View Full Version : HASCI - -How well does it work? Now we'll be able to find out!



Pages : [1] 2

AlmostUndone
05-28-2015, 01:41 AM
The thing is, I've been seeing some hairs in the mirror this morning, which weren’t there a few days earlier hmm… You see, this week, a much-discussed dutch clinic decided to have me as their client. I had to pass up on the opportunity to take photos of my head, using a 2000€ camera, and light equipment to add up a total of 7 kilowatts (enough to burn the paint away from my wall!), some time before my visit to the clinic. Sample photos are provided through links. Eventually we will, when the new hairs have fully matured, be able to verify how many hairs exactly were multiplied.

Some info about the patient in the pictures ie. myself:
Subject: male
Age: Early 30s
Hair type: Brown, thick, slightly wavy
Previous hair transplants: No
Treatment in: Hair Science Institute, Maastricht, May 2015
Grafts obtained for transplant: ≈800
Recipient location: temples, exclusively. Not one graft was visibly transplanted into the center of the hairline. No grafts were transplanted in front of the widows peak.
Estimated area of donor used in the session: estimate of less than 50 % of the ”safe donor zone”.

You should all know about the very warm feeling I had toward the clinic and the way they handled my requests. There was no bullshit. The team was consummately dedicated to fulfill my highest expectations. Many ideas about graft placement came from the doctor, who even surpassed what I had in mind, and she made a lot of choices, where deliberate imperfections contribute to the natural look. I found her to be an extremely talented doctor. Now this is not a suspicious-looking Tom Cruise hairline.

I did not even once feel uncomfortable during the treatment, and probably even fell asleep at least once during the implantation process. The only discomfortable part was after the treatment was over - people in the streets, cars passing by. Everyone must be looking at the guy who just had some creepy stuff done on his head, so I though! But later on, it was just like ”Yeah, so what?”, and I didn’t feel unnormal when some guy chatted with me on the train on my way to the airport.

In the end, I have a good feeling about this treatment. If Hair Science can consistently make one hair out of two, then the full set of photos will prove it. Once my new hairs are fully grown out, the "after"-photos should leave no questions left unanswered.



This will be a very simple thread about numbers, numbers and numbers. Please don't slander, and please, pleeeeeaase, don’t jounce this thread completely off the track.

AlmostUndone
05-28-2015, 02:16 AM
Here's a small set of examples. The pictures were taken 7 weeks before the procedure. There are around 500 usable photos in my vault, and I tried to take as many angles as possible, to get every single follicular unit from such an angle, that we can count how many hairs it has.

Some of these image files had to be split into 3-4 parts to be viewable in full quality. Some of the smallest hairs around the temples can only be seen in full quality. Oh, and don't forget to press "zoom in" on the browser.


First image, quarter 1 (http://postimage.org/image/4nstumkir/)
First image, quarter 2 (http://postimage.org/image/q1a9lq6ar/)
First image, quarter 3 (http://postimage.org/image/4ip2kyd7n/)
First image, quarter 4 (http://postimage.org/image/6brz99yeb/)
Back of the head, 1/2 (http://postimage.org/image/q04x61tur/)
Back of the head, 2/2 (http://postimage.org/image/pongtader/)

Right temple, part1 of the image (http://postimage.org/image/wixriz61v/)
Right temple, part2 of the image (http://postimage.org/image/mzo2piijn/)

Top of the head. (Direction of hairline is upwards). I had to split this image in four parts
Top part1 (http://postimage.org/image/mbf86kjtv/)
Top part2 (http://postimage.org/image/vklzufi3n/)
Top part3 (http://postimage.org/image/uwd5bhjdv/)
Top part4 (http://postimage.org/image/5rm4y2jxf/)


right temple A, part 1 of image (http://postimage.org/image/i8ssl8f37/)
right templeA, part 2 of image (http://postimage.org/image/65ngxo40z/)

front, part1 (http://postimage.org/image/vqzoxir8j/)
front, part2 (http://postimage.org/image/ptvtgpa3n/)


More front and temples. See the small hairs - they can be seen from some angles better than from others, depending on how light hits them.

fr1 (http://postimage.org/image/k8dzqdysj/)
fr2 (http://postimage.org/image/4cp5n3883/)
fr3 (http://postimage.org/image/fqboyaiqr/)
fr4 (http://postimage.org/image/q2xzkdc9v/)
fr5 (http://postimage.org/image/4hswwrfj7/)

caddarik79
05-28-2015, 03:34 AM
awesome, you seem very wishing to make a good case out of yours.
Pics from further to have a generl feeling will be welcome too.
We need to see if donor regenerated and how is your recepient doing.


It's been three years now since my frist and only procedure, shared exactly the same feeling as you!!! It was soooo smooth, I got 1800 grafts, you see the final result after 9 months to a year.

You have a fair idea after 6...

The controversy around HASCI should not be the subject here as you insinuated, let's just focus and count.

A second procedure would bring me a strong front and I was hoping to go back for 1800 or even 2000 sharing 1000 in front (total would then be 2800) and the rest on the vertex which starts to thin seriously (I am 36).

Gaz is also an interesting element since he got 5 procedures.

I wish HASCI were sharing more pics, especially multiple sessions... but they don't.
I hope they will improve their technique (did you speak with them about the future of multiplication?)

Who was your doctor? Deborah? Kristel?

AlmostUndone
05-28-2015, 07:20 AM
The camera lenses for the eventual "after" shots will be even bigger, better. Mark my word, this is going to be nowhere near the gargantuan task of analyzing gc83uk's photos.


I hope they will improve their technique (did you speak with them about the future of multiplication?)

No, all I wanted to know was how the DVD player skipped chapters.



Who was your doctor? Deborah? Kristel?

Deborah.

Arashi
05-28-2015, 12:46 PM
Not sure I understand the reason for this topic ? We already know 100% certain HST doesn't regenerate anything at all. We've seen the close up photo's of the petridish: only 100% intact bulbs there, no split follicles like HASCI always tells. That proofed 100% beyond any doubt, that HST = FUE.

Apart from that, I think your idea is next to impossible. Your photo's are of good quality for sure. But 800 grafts is a LOT. You will need very good photo's immediately after the surgery so you can track which grafts were extracted. And then you need to compare it all to photo's next year. That's a HELL of a job. Not impossible but a hell of a job: find each extracted spot, see how many hairs are gone compared to the pre-op photo's, count it all and then do the same for recipient. And if that wasnt complicated enough in itself, the extra complication is in the fact that 10% of the hair is in its sleeping state. So next year, 10% of the current follicles will be gone and 10% follicles that slept now will be visible then. So 20% difference already just caused by that. That makes it extra hard to track hairs. And you dont seem to have much 'reference points' like moles, birthmarks, scars or things like that. So that makes tracking a lot harder.

All in all, almost impossible, especially for 800 grafts (instead of a 50 graft test), spread over your whole donor (which I assume was the case). Oh and also, it wont just be 800 grafts, most probably you will have way more extraction points than that, maybe even up to 1500 or more, depending on the skill of the technician and the difficultness for them to extrac them (your skin condition). So you'll need to track all that !

And why ? Again, we already know 100% certain it doesnt work. There's no doubt anymore. We know they extract the whole follicle, contrary to what they tell. So nothing left behind = nothing to regenerate. It really boils down to just that ! Stem cells are located inside the bulb. If you take the whole bulb away, nothing can regenerate. End of story, really.

NeedHairASAP
05-28-2015, 01:21 PM
The camera lenses for the eventual "after" shots will be even bigger, better. Mark my word, this is going to be nowhere near the gargantuan task of analyzing gc83uk's photos.



No, all I wanted to know was how the DVD player skipped chapters.




Deborah.


I had Deborah. She is awesome.

I want to say she just just a "nurse" level when I saw her, but was studying to be a doc. It sounds like she has made that leap. Glad to hear it.

Thanks for posting. I will be watching for sure.

@Cad -- most of my hairs didn't even fall out! I had 80% of my final result right after post-op... this was why I was so pleased. The recovery did take a little longer than I thought (scabs, etc.). I probably couldn't walk around "unnoticed" for 14+ days.... of course this is still 100X better than the recovery time for FUT and 59X better than FUE recovery times.

My only complaint was the "angle" of the grafts. With long hair, it's not noticeable, but it may be when shaved (as in arashi's case)... I hope that they've corrected this angle issue in their processes/training.

AlmostUndone
05-29-2015, 09:20 AM
I will take two sets of photos, spaced about 3-4 months apart, to get a verdict as accurate as possible.


You will need very good photo's immediately after the surgery so you can track which grafts were extracted.


I took 100< photos to get everything in focus. Here's one of them. (http://postimg.org/image/mtkj46yjn/)



And you dont seem to have much 'reference points' like moles, birthmarks, scars or things like that. So that makes tracking a lot harder.

I have already done most of the work of connecting photographed areas, using my own reference points. Such as this. (http://postimg.org/image/uddm68rqb/) (Not one of the better quality photos for sure, but take a look)


All in all, almost impossible, especially for 800 grafts (instead of a 50 graft test), spread over your whole donor (which I assume was the case)

I thought g83uk's was impossible, for the reason alone, that he had the extractions spread all over his whole donor. In addition to that, he them spread all over his recipient. You only have to look at the temples in my recipient photos. And the photo, which I just provided of the extraction point, represents almost half of my used donor area. This (http://postimg.org/image/sa36ykrxf/) is the back of my head just hours after surgery.

AlmostUndone
05-29-2015, 10:54 AM
The color of the links are very dark on this forum (ie. the word "this" is supposed to be the link), so I'll post the links once more:
Photo of extraction holes http://postimg.org/image/mtkj46yjn/
Reference points, ie. lines: http://postimg.org/image/uddm68rqb/
Back of my head, hours after surgery: http://postimg.org/image/sa36ykrxf/

Arashi
05-29-2015, 12:07 PM
The color of the links are very dark on this forum (ie. the word "this" is supposed to be the link), so I'll post the links once more:
Photo of extraction holes http://postimg.org/image/mtkj46yjn/
Reference points, ie. lines: http://postimg.org/image/uddm68rqb/
Back of my head, hours after surgery: http://postimg.org/image/sa36ykrxf/

Wow your photo's are indeed good ! And your donor seems about perfect. Well still tons of work but I guess with those kind of photo's it's doable ! On the one hand I think it's kind of useless, cause we've seen the petridish photo's, we know already it doesnt work. On the other hand, some people here still seem to have some believe in HASCI. But then again, if the petridish photo's doesnt convince them, why would your case ?

Nevertheless, good luck mate !

AlmostUndone
05-29-2015, 01:50 PM
@ Arashi
Whatever evidence you got, my opinion is that people need something more "tangible". I need something more "tangible".

It's tons of work, for me. The rest of you're in for the easy part. There are marker lines all over the scalp in my "before" photos. There are also added markers, which I made in a paint program. I took great effort to secure the continuity of the photos. And I'm hoping to throw big money on massive camera lenses for the "after"-photos to capture all the hairs on my head with a minimal amount of pictures. Just relax.

(Hmm... Some of the sample pictures I posted are relatively weak in quality. I probably have somewhere around 500 pictures, so I didn't always have time to pick the best ones for display.)

NeedHairASAP
05-29-2015, 04:01 PM
@ Arashi
Whatever evidence you got, my opinion is that people need something more "tangible". I need something more "tangible".

It's tons of work, for me. The rest of you're in for the easy part. There are marker lines all over the scalp in my "before" photos. There are also added markers, which I made in a paint program. I took great effort to secure the continuity of the photos. And I'm hoping to throw big money on massive camera lenses for the "after"-photos to capture all the hairs on my head with a minimal amount of pictures. Just relax.

(Hmm... Some of the sample pictures I posted are relatively weak in quality. I probably have somewhere around 500 pictures, so I didn't always have time to pick the best ones for display.)


arashi's evidence is pretty poor thb

I look forward to your analysis

jamesst11
05-29-2015, 09:40 PM
Nice post and awesome photos!! I haven't fully researched HASCI, but I do have a question if I may ask... Throughout this procedure, it is expected that the donor will grow back? How exactly is this possible if the entire hair bulb is removed? Are they trying to leave just enough behind in assumption that the stem cells will proliferate into a new, functional follicle?

NeedHairASAP
05-30-2015, 08:09 AM
Nice post and awesome photos!! I haven't fully researched HASCI, but I do have a question if I may ask... Throughout this procedure, it is expected that the donor will grow back? How exactly is this possible if the entire hair bulb is removed? Are they trying to leave just enough behind in assumption that the stem cells will proliferate into a new, functional follicle?

yes this is right


to clarify my last comment.... I am somewhat skeptical of gho--- so arashi may be right. However, arashi's website does not provide a strong argument.

Thus, I really look forward to this analysis. thanks again.

AlmostUndone
05-30-2015, 11:42 AM
I'm busy matching the extraction holes to the "before" pictures, for curiosity's sake. We'll take a look at the regrowth later. I won't be shaving my donor again, as long as there is still redness and gaps.

Arashi
05-30-2015, 01:09 PM
yes this is right


to clarify my last comment.... I am somewhat skeptical of gho--- so arashi may be right. However, arashi's website does not provide a strong argument.

Thus, I really look forward to this analysis. thanks again.

He asked you a very simple question: how can a follicle regenerate if the follicle is fully extracted ? This simple question has a very simple answer: it can't.

In their thesis, HASCI pointed out:


"The aim of the extraction is to remove only a part of the follicle unit, containing follicle and connective tissue from several hair follicles, and leave sufficient follicle unit tissue behind to regenerate hairs"

Then they even say:


"We illustrate the difference between a complete follicular unit (Figure 3A1) and a partial longitudinal follicular unit (suitable grafts) (Figure 3B1)

http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/transection.jpg

Where we clearly see that in the completely intact follicalr unit, the bulbs are completely in tact. In the figure B1 we see what they claim to do, a follicle where parts of the bulbs (containing stem cells) are left behind.

In the petridish photo's we saw complete intact bulbs (see my website). So really, how is this all possible NeedhairASAP ? Tell me, how is this not 100% proof that it doesnt work ? If they claim that they need to leave a part behind to regenerate a new follicle and then just take a away the whole follice then how exactly should we see a new follicle appear ?

joachim
05-30-2015, 05:11 PM
i still don't get it how people still believe in hasci and dr. gho.
arashi has put so much effort into the whole hasci topic. he clearly proofed they are cheating for more than a decade now. go back to all the recent topics where we discussed about hasci on many pages. you will find the evidence yourself.
hasci is a scam and one day the truth will get public.

joachim
05-30-2015, 05:19 PM
He asked you a very simple question: how can a follicle regenerate if the follicle is fully extracted ? This simple question has a very simple answer: it can't.

In their thesis, HASCI pointed out:



Then they even say:



http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/transection.jpg

Where we clearly see that in the completely intact follicalr unit, the bulbs are completely in tact. In the figure B1 we see what they claim to do, a follicle where parts of the bulbs (containing stem cells) are left behind.

In the petridish photo's we saw complete intact bulbs (see my website). So really, how is this all possible NeedhairASAP ? Tell me, how is this not 100% proof that it doesnt work ? If they claim that they need to leave a part behind to regenerate a new follicle and then just take a away the whole follice then how exactly should we see a new follicle appear ?

hey arashi, i had a thought. do you know the BBC documentary series? if not, check it on youtube. some of their documentaries are very good and investigative. they have the courage to reveal such scams. what do you think? wouldn't it be good to pitch them the whole story so that they can investigate that stuff and draw an objective conclusion?

caddarik79
06-01-2015, 03:08 AM
Guyz please, let's not deviate as asked by Almostundone.

He is willing to give us another well illustrated case, let's not re-enter in the debate we had so many times.
You are not trolling anything, but we have a thousand posts where you freely demonstrated your points.

Let's just reset here, and try again.

An intervention of Gaz would be more than welcome to.

I know Arashi has done a lot of work and I am not saying that it does not matter. But let's not be redundant. New page, let's see what Almostundone brings here without presuming or arguing.

Gaz, if you read me, are you planning a sixth one? could you upload some pics of your donor and recipient piost 5 HST?

See you guyz

Arashi
06-01-2015, 05:58 AM
An intervention of Gaz would be more than welcome to.

It would certainly be nice to see Gc's result. But it surely wouldn't proof anything at all. Like I showed, the average person could have 6 times a 1600 HST transplant without getting to donor depletion. Sure, GC's donor was below average but he did get into donor depletion after the 4th HST already. I know you have a different opinion on that, you thought his donor still looked good after 4 times. But that's of course the key here. It can never proof anything beyond doubt cause we don't know exactly how many hairs he had to begin with and we don't know how many hairs he's ending up with, unless we count them all. But since we don't know his begin situation, even counting them all won't yield any valid conclusion.


I know Arashi has done a lot of work and I am not saying that it does not matter.
It's 100% proof HASCI does not work, simple as that. They claim to leave part of the follicle behind and that part is supposed to regenerate into a new follicle. I showed you that's false and that they take the WHOLE follicle away. Nothing to regenerate, so it's just a FUE. So that's all you need to know. Really, it boils down to that. I'm not sure why some people seem to have such a hard time accepting that.

But yeah of course a case like this will be interesting to follow. The photo's he shot are the best we've ever seen. Yet even on these kind of photo's it's going to be extremely hard to do an analysis, mostly caused by the 20% difference in follicle positions now and next year, ONLY caused bye the dormant follicles already.

AlmostUndone
06-01-2015, 12:06 PM
But yeah of course a case like this will be interesting to follow. The photo's he shot are the best we've ever seen. Yet even on these kind of photo's it's going to be extremely hard to do an analysis, mostly caused by the 20% difference in follicle positions now and next year, ONLY caused bye the dormant follicles already.

Hey, correct me if I'm wrong but the difference in follicle positions when shooting "before" and "after" photos would be somewhere between 0-20%, not 20% like you say. The probability of a 0% difference is equal to the probability of 20%, and the probability of anything in between.

So is 20% the percentage of unseen hairs or hair follicles in the resting phase? Jus' wondering, how many weeks throughout the resting phase do hairclubs still stay latched to the skin? Either way, I might as well shoot two sets of "after" photos, and I'd say we'll get very close to home. Just need to keep all this counting from getting too impractical.

Arashi
06-01-2015, 01:20 PM
Hey, correct me if I'm wrong but the difference in follicle positions when shooting "before" and "after" photos would be somewhere between 0-20%, not 20% like you say. The probability of a 0% difference is equal to the probability of 20%, and the probability of anything in between.

So is 20% the percentage of unseen hairs or hair follicles in the resting phase? Jus' wondering, how many weeks throughout the resting phase do hairclubs still stay latched to the skin? Either way, I might as well shoot two sets of "after" photos, and I'd say we'll get very close to home. Just need to keep all this counting from getting too impractical.

There's quite a bit of variance in data. But I think this is accepted to be quite common: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_hair_growth

Here they state that Anagen is 2-6 years. Quite a variance, but let's go with the mean, 4 years. Telogen state is noted to be 1-4 months, let's go with the mean again, 2.5 months. So on average that would then be 2.5/48= 5% in Telogen state. So that then would be a 10% difference and not 20%. However other sources, when you google, talk about 10-20% in telogen state, I guess that's really varies per person and really boils than: is your hair 2, 4 or 6 year in Anagen ?

Either way, it really complicates the research. You're going to wonder: was this follicle here before, was it extracted or is this just a follicle that was in the resting state ?

Regardless, I'd love for you to do this and compare this, would be really cool to see !

AlmostUndone
06-01-2015, 04:00 PM
It takes quite a while for the hair to shed, after the anagen phase has terminated. So when taking photos, the amount of missing hairs should not be quite as high as 10%, and certainly not 20%.


Regardless, I'd love for you to do this and compare this, would be really cool to see !

I will ! Hoping to have a representation of all the extraction points in the following, weeks, maybe? You were right, it's tons of work.

Arashi
06-01-2015, 04:56 PM
It takes quite a while for the hair to shed, after the anagen phase has terminated. So when taking photos, the amount of missing hairs should not be quite as high as 10%, and certainly not 20%.

If 5% is dormant now and in 1 year, when you will do the comparison, another 5% is dormant, thats 10% difference. And that's only the mean, it might be 10+10=20% if your hair spends 2 years instead of 6 years in Anagen.

AlmostUndone
06-01-2015, 06:24 PM
If 5% is dormant now and in 1 year, when you will do the comparison, another 5% is dormant, thats 10% difference. And that's only the mean, it might be 10+10=20% if your hair spends 2 years instead of 6 years in Anagen.

Oh yeah... sorry, I was thinking about something else. Must sleep.

ss1980
06-03-2015, 02:55 AM
This has been debunked long time ago, its done and dusted.

Dean S ended up transplanting body hair due to depleted donor? It sums it up

Arashi
06-03-2015, 03:21 PM
This has been debunked long time ago, its done and dusted.

Dean S ended up transplanting body hair due to depleted donor? It sums it up

LOL yeah after 3 (free) HST's he went to a FUE clinic, who told him his donor was too depleted to do FUE. So they did a body hair transplant. After 3 HST's !! LOL

gc83uk
06-03-2015, 05:29 PM
Congrats AlmostUndone.

Photos are perfect and I agree it should be easier that it ever was in my case to get a more accurate analysis.

Looking forward to seeing some early analysis showing how many total hairs have been extracted would be a good start out of those 800 FU's?

Good luck

caddarik79
06-05-2015, 02:19 AM
Hey Gaz,

How is life? husband and dad, quite another game.
What about your result and update?
And please, tell us straight if you don't want to contribute anymore, so that we don't bother you in different threads asking for updates (and then at least, it's clear for every one and none of us wait and hope for it).

I was really following you case with big interest, found your result very convincing.

Cheers.

AlmostUndone
06-05-2015, 07:47 AM
---EDIT: Photo software issues. Problem fixed---

Arashi
06-05-2015, 12:30 PM
So how is it going AlmostUndone ? I was just thinking, previously I was talking about a year. That's the term that usually is used for a transplant. It's the time that the transplanted hairs in the *recipient* need to go through the cycle of shedding and regrowing. However I just thought of something. In their thesis, when talking about regrowth in the *donor* hasci isnt talking about a year, they're talking about 1 week to 1 months ! If you see picture 6a - 6d in their thesis, you see that most of the "supposed" regrowth happens in 9 days (!!) already and after a month every hair has 'regrown' in the donor. So, we dont have to wait a year, in 3 weeks we can do the final analysis already !!

AlmostUndone
06-08-2015, 08:34 PM
Have a look. This here is the entire used donor zone, 7 weeks before my visit to Holland.
Left part: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ozpg49kdx7ogvkk/Left%20side.png?dl=0
Right part: https://www.dropbox.com/s/3c13237n8z0iqxv/Right%20side.png?dl=0

As you can see, I haven't worked on the extraction holes any more than necessary in order to just get this idea, about how the photos oughta be used, - which ones, where, how much. And it's possible those extraction holes aren't 100% accurate. The red borders which split the images, however, should be very specific and hopefully very accurate, too.

Hmm, there are still a few better quality images, which I have not yet used, and which I would like to use.... But I need a big break right now! It's already taken much time and energy drinks to split the donor area into this many parts so far. (There's also an example there, I think on the right part of the donor, of how even a poor quality image may sometimes be useful only due to fact that it was shot from a completely another perspective. I saved a lot of poor quality images, as well.)

AlmostUndone
06-08-2015, 09:12 PM
I am quite certain there is one piece missing from the file "right part", but ya know..... lots of things to keep track of.

Arashi
06-17-2015, 06:25 AM
How is it going ? In one week you're at your 1 month point, right ? Most hair in donor should have grown back by then, according to HASCI, so we can do the analysis soon !

AlmostUndone
06-18-2015, 03:51 PM
Arashi, it's way too early for the clippers; the skin of the donor is now somewhat "shiny" (still depigmented?) compared to the surrounding surfaces, and the hair may still look 'patchy'. Please understand, at this time there are eyes on me every day.

I think there is still some regrowth occurring. Sorry I don't have very fresh pictures, but here are some earlier ones:


Regrowth day 7 (http://postimg.org/image/jin2nwiub/)

Regrowth day 7 (http://postimg.org/image/6okfgtg0z/)

Regrowth day 17 (http://postimg.org/image/60bkxvhb7/)

AlmostUndone
06-18-2015, 04:14 PM
By the way Arashi, did you look at the donor area photography? You see, I kept going through the material, and discovered many wonderful "before" -photos, which hadn't caught my attention earlier on. Photos which will be useful in getting a sharper view on a lot of the hairs. I'm pretty far ahead on sewing the photos together. Improvement suggestions are always welcome.

I have a very important question: Which image viewing software did you use for the photos?

Arashi
06-19-2015, 12:09 PM
By the way Arashi, did you look at the donor area photography? You see, I kept going through the material, and discovered many wonderful "before" -photos, which hadn't caught my attention earlier on. Photos which will be useful in getting a sharper view on a lot of the hairs. I'm pretty far ahead on sewing the photos together. Improvement suggestions are always welcome.

I have a very important question: Which image viewing software did you use for the photos?

Well if you feel 1 month is too soon, you could do the analysis at 3 months. HASCI did do it too at 3 months. But they showed a photo for 1 month and most hair had 'regrown' (LOL) then.

About image viewing tool, I just used the normal windows tools (paint, image viewer). And I think I used some tool to rotate pics, not sure what it was called, I think it was 'irfanview"

AlmostUndone
06-20-2015, 12:49 AM
Well if you feel 1 month is too soon, you could do the analysis at 3 months. HASCI did do it too at 3 months. But they showed a photo for 1 month and most hair had 'regrown' (LOL) then.

Either way, in the study paper ("Donor hair follicle preservation by partial follicular unit extraction") there was no definite statement about how much hair had regenerated after 1 month. I'll see if hairs have grown thick enough that I can photograph them at 3 or 4 months; my current camera (the one I used for shooting the extraction points) is nowhere as good as the one I'm going to rent for documenting the final result.



About image viewing tool, I just used the normal windows tools (paint, image viewer.
Of course you did! Which is what you shouldn't use. Look at the comparison below. The first picture version is how the graphics look in the Mac OS viewer, Google's Picasa viewer, Photoshop, Gimp, and probably in all browsers as well. The second version is how it looks in Windows Photo Viewer / Photo Gallery.

Link to image (http://postimg.org/image/3lyelf337/)


(I'd bet this happens because of antialiasing. All photoviewers have antialiasing methods for making the picture look pleasant, when you zoom out. This antialiasing is not supposed to be there in a zoomed in image, but the Windows photo viewing software applies it indiscriminately. Or there might be some compression error in Windows.)

Arashi
06-20-2015, 02:29 PM
Either way, in the study paper ("Donor hair follicle preservation by partial follicular unit extraction") there was no definite statement about how much hair had regenerated after 1 month. I'll see if hairs have grown thick enough that I can photograph them at 3 or 4 months; my current camera (the one I used for shooting the extraction points) is nowhere as good as the one I'm going to rent for documenting the final result.



Of course you did! Which is what you shouldn't use. Look at the comparison below. The first picture version is how the graphics look in the Mac OS viewer, Google's Picasa viewer, Photoshop, Gimp, and probably in all browsers as well. The second version is how it looks in Windows Photo Viewer / Photo Gallery.

Link to image (http://postimg.org/image/3lyelf337/)


(I'd bet this happens because of antialiasing. All photoviewers have antialiasing methods for making the picture look pleasant, when you zoom out. This antialiasing is not supposed to be there in a zoomed in image, but the Windows photo viewing software applies it indiscriminately. Or there might be some compression error in Windows.)

Hey, nice find, without anti aliasing it indeed looks a bit clearer, should make the analysis a bit easier ! Yeah I think the 3 month mark is the best to go for, cause they mention the results specifically for 3 months. So 2 more months. Yet you could do the analysis of the surgery already, research on how many hairs were extracted exactly

Arashi
07-15-2015, 07:43 AM
Hey Almostundone, next week you're at 2 months I think ? Did you do the initial analysis already (comparing pre surgery to post surgery) ?

AlmostUndone
07-16-2015, 08:36 AM
Hey Almostundone, next week you're at 2 months I think ? Did you do the initial analysis already (comparing pre surgery to post surgery) ?

Almost 2 months, yeah! Donor looks maybe a bit thicker than it did one month ago. Sorry, but you're gonna have to wait to September. Right now I have very, very much work. I might bring you the pre-op material sooner, but looks like whatever time-off I have goes into traveling etc. etc.

Arashi
07-17-2015, 01:41 PM
Almost 2 months, yeah! Donor looks maybe a bit thicker than it did one month ago. Sorry, but you're gonna have to wait to September. Right now I have very, very much work. I might bring you the pre-op material sooner, but looks like whatever time-off I have goes into traveling etc. etc.

Nah no worries mate. Personally I think it's a bit waste of time, we have enough proof that it doesn't work. But it would be the cherry on the cake to show it using a complete analysis of HST surgery.

jamesst11
07-17-2015, 02:22 PM
I think what we need is the HASCI procedure to be immediately followed by a three week application of Follicept. Then in order for the hair follicles to begin regeneration, the head needs to be emerged in an ice bath, while wearing a laser helmet followed by onion and garlic therapy. that one's for you Arashi. ;)

Arashi
08-09-2015, 02:53 PM
How are you doing mate ? Just checking up on you, since you're almost at the 3 months now so you could start doing the analysis, at least the pre-post surgery part and when that's finished you can do the rest. You are still planning to do this, right ?

caddarik79
08-09-2015, 11:07 PM
hope it will not be like for Gaz and the guy will disappear, vanish, when it starts to be really interesting.

AlmostUndone
08-14-2015, 06:31 AM
Very busy ATM... But I haven't been hit by a bus yet, no. I'll report back when there's something more substantial

caddarik79
08-16-2015, 07:02 AM
you sounded way more motivated and ready to invest time and energy in this when opening your thread!
funny how the outcome for HST follow-up is always kind of disappointing...

AlmostUndone
08-16-2015, 11:29 AM
you sounded way more motivated and ready to invest time and energy in this when opening your thread!
funny how the outcome for HST follow-up is always kind of disappointing...

Cheer up! We're a just few days short of the planned three month mark! That said, a few conditions need to be met for the next round of photos

a) I should take the next photos at daytime - just like in the extraction photos, when I had the benefit of sufficient sunlight.
b) I have been (and will be in the near future) during daytime at home only about once a week. If there aren't many sunny days, I should need the big light equipment for rent... which is kind of a big hassle, to scheduled two successive days in order to pick up and return them from a bit of a distance. (In any case, I am going to rent the big lights for the one-year photoshoot)
c) Yeah I've been maybe too much of a perfectionist with fleshing out the "before" pictures. Finding the best ones was very hard, and some of the pictures had no markers. A lot of time in summer has gone into that, but now almost all the work is finished

Arashi
08-17-2015, 02:03 PM
Cheer up! We're a just few days short of the planned three month mark! That said, a few conditions need to be met for the next round of photos

a) I should take the next photos at daytime - just like in the extraction photos, when I had the benefit of sufficient sunlight.
b) I have been (and will be in the near future) during daytime at home only about once a week. If there aren't many sunny days, I should need the big light equipment for rent... which is kind of a big hassle, to scheduled two successive days in order to pick up and return them from a bit of a distance. (In any case, I am going to rent the big lights for the one-year photoshoot)
c) Yeah I've been maybe too much of a perfectionist with fleshing out the "before" pictures. Finding the best ones was very hard, and some of the pictures had no markers. A lot of time in summer has gone into that, but now almost all the work is finished

You sound very determined to make this the one and only, final case on HASCI, I like that ! And I agree, one good case actually is all that's needed. As some people still seem to have some faith in HASCI, I would also really like to see this analysis happening. I'm very busy lately, but if I can be of any help, let me know please !

willy
08-19-2015, 11:20 PM
Hey AlmostUndone , sorry just to clarify, will you be shaving the donor prior to taking pictures?

AlmostUndone
08-20-2015, 12:00 AM
Hey AlmostUndone , sorry just to clarify, will you be shaving the donor prior to taking pictures?

Yes of course!

Louish
08-28-2015, 01:16 PM
I am eager to see your results, thanks for sharing your experience :)

AlmostUndone
08-31-2015, 03:34 PM
I hate to tell you to wait, just wait. It's almost always dark by the time I come home from work et. al. The light rental shop might soon have to substitute for the daylight, if I am unable to take photos prior to dusk.

We need to decide how to make sense of all the material. Below is my partitioning of the entire donor area (before the procedure) which I recently completed. Around the "fringe areas" (close to the red borders), where the photos start sliding out of focus, you can usually get a glimpse of the hairs from two slightly different angles.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donorleft-v1.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donorright-v1.jpg



Some alternate viewpoints exist separately in these image files:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donorleft-alternative-v1.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donorright-alternative-v1.jpg

AlmostUndone
08-31-2015, 03:53 PM
Those were just jpeg images. The bitmap versions should be somewhat better quality:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donorleft-v1.png
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donorright-v1.png

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donorleft-alternative-v1.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donorright-alternative-v1.png


Also, work remains to be done concerning the extraction-hole photos, such as these which are examples:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/extractions_example1.jpeg
(In this case, the red borders are merely approximations!)

jamesst11
09-01-2015, 12:32 PM
the photos are awesome, but it is just hard to tell where exactly the extraction sites are when looking at the new photos. My question to you is, do you personally think you see regrowth?

AlmostUndone
09-08-2015, 04:56 AM
the photos are awesome, but it is just hard to tell where exactly the extraction sites are when looking at the new photos. My question to you is, do you personally think you see regrowth?

I'd prefer to avoid any kind of speculation on that matter

AlmostUndone
09-12-2015, 05:18 AM
The job is done; we have visual. Making a before/after-comparison for the donor (3+ months post-op) is now fully possible.

First I think we should, as a reference, duplicate the red lines from the "before" picture. Then it will be comparably easy to make circles whereever they made the extraction holes (or at least exclude those follicular groups, which remained visibly untouched. There exist ≈200 photos or more of the extraction holes.) Finally we may count the difference.

It's uncertain now, if I have time to do any of this myself. Wheee.... Here are samples from the new photos, which I shot today:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-12-09%2010.43.31.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-12-09%2012.39.01.jpg

AlmostUndone
09-21-2015, 07:12 AM
Ok, some progress has happened during the past week, afterall. But I feel I can't do everything alone! Everything I have almost put in place, except circles for the extracted hairs.

You can now easily compare the donor area at three different points of time:
April before the procedure (the links in an earlier post), May shortly after the procedure and, finally, September, in this example (how do I use the zoom?): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/sample_comparison1.jpg

Arashi
09-21-2015, 02:34 PM
Ok, some progress has happened during the past week, afterall. But I feel I can't do everything alone! Everything I have almost put in place, except circles for the extracted hairs.

You can now easily compare the donor area at three different points of time:
April before the procedure (the links in an earlier post), May shortly after the procedure and, finally, September, in this example (how do I use the zoom?): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/sample_comparison1.jpg

Interesting ! But just to make sure I understand: in the last picture you posted we see the immediate post-op and then in the same picture, the current situation in the lower 2 pics, right ? How did you draw the red lines ? I mean, how did you link those pictures ? You don't seem to have any clear reference marks like birthmarks or scars (which were very useful in GC83UK's pics).

I'd be willing to help you out, with whatever free time I have (not a lot lately).

AlmostUndone
09-21-2015, 04:03 PM
Interesting ! But just to make sure I understand: in the last picture you posted we see the immediate post-op and then in the same picture, the current situation in the lower 2 pics, right ?

Yup, that's right. The last picture I posted (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/sample_comparison1.jpg) shows the immidiate post-op (May), with extraction holes, and then below, the current situation (September). Of course, this is just an example! I'll have to provide many more pictures pictures to complete the analysis.



How did you draw the red lines ? I mean, how did you link those pictures ?

Hmm, linking them was straightforward but very, very time-consuming. You can see in some pictures, there's ink on my scalp which I had made for reference. I also discovered a couple of permanent marks on my scalp, such as this bit of red tissue.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/redmark.jpg

Yet, in many cases I had no references but to "step-walk" along the hairs (proceeding from the ear up, or in one case, from the "cowlick" in the crown). The red lines appear extremely accurate to me, but we still oughta be vary for mistakes !



I'd be willing to help you out, with whatever free time I have (not a lot lately).

Ok thanks. I'll post an update, where I'm at next week! At least all the red lines should be in place by then.

AlmostUndone
10-13-2015, 06:16 AM
Hmm, time is sure going fast, when one is constantly occupied. There has been lots of work concerning the HASCI-photos, too. But I shall be interested to hear what's Arashi's take on the photo set, which will be published before this week closes.

Arashi
10-14-2015, 01:56 PM
Hmm, time is sure going fast, when one is constantly occupied. There has been lots of work concerning the HASCI-photos, too. But I shall be interested to hear what's Arashi's take on the photo set, which will be published before this week closes.

Nice !! Really looking forward to this. However keep in mind that HASCI just seems to split current FU's (which we confirmed via patient photo's) AND they have a lot of failed extractions usually (also verified several times in several patients). So you will see a lot hair grow back in the donor because of that combo of failed extractions + split FU's. This means it's impossible to conclude anything at all without having analysed both donor as recipient: only when we count how much hairs were lost in the donor and how much new hairs this yielded in recipient, we can form a conclusion.

Nevertheless, keep up the good work, really looking forward to it !

AlmostUndone
10-17-2015, 06:02 PM
Nice !! Really looking forward to this. However keep in mind that HASCI just seems to split current FU's (which we confirmed via patient photo's) AND they have a lot of failed extractions usually (also verified several times in several patients). So you will see a lot hair grow back in the donor because of that combo of failed extractions + split FU's. This means it's impossible to conclude anything at all without having analysed both donor as recipient: only when we count how much hairs were lost in the donor and how much new hairs this yielded in recipient, we can form a conclusion.

Nevertheless, keep up the good work, really looking forward to it !

So recipient should be fully grown out at the 1 year mark, huh? That's 7 months to go. Anyways, here are the pictures as I promised. Hopefully there aren't any mistakes in need of correction.

Extractions:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_extractions97.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_extractions97.jpg

3< months after:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_3months97.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_3months97.jpg

Arashi
10-18-2015, 01:21 PM
So recipient should be fully grown out at the 1 year mark, huh? That's 7 months to go. Anyways, here are the pictures as I promised. Hopefully there aren't any mistakes in need of correction.

Extractions:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_extractions97.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_extractions97.jpg

3< months after:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_3months97.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_3months97.jpg

Great work ! You're the type of guy that gets things done, I appreciate that. I was thinking, one interesting ballpoint figure might be this: we've seen that HASCI transplants way lower hairs/graft than others. In fact 1.3 hairs/graft seems to be about the average per session. I dont have any data on variance per patient, but an interesting prediction based on this number might be that you've lost 1.3 * your number of grafts, 800 in your case, hairs. So my prediction is that if you count just your donor loss, you'd have lost about 800 * 1.3 hairs = 1040 hairs !

Did you do any such counting of donor loss already ?

AlmostUndone
10-18-2015, 03:40 PM
Did you do any such counting of donor loss already ?

Sorry. That's gonna have to wait for the, possibly a very distant, future if you're counting on me to do it. I haven't given it much thought, besides my intention to compose the rest of the material around the 1 year mark.

Arashi
10-20-2015, 04:25 PM
Sorry. That's gonna have to wait for the, possibly a very distant, future if you're counting on me to do it. I haven't given it much thought, besides my intention to compose the rest of the material around the 1 year mark.

Ok. Well personally I don't care too much. We've seen the patient photo's where it was 100% certain that they took out the whole graft, unlike the story they're always telling of how they're splitting it and are supposed to leave stem cells behind. That's obviously not happening, so no regrowth is possible. We've seen Dean Saunders who had a depleted donor after 3 sessions and had a body hair transplant done because his donor was gone. So there's no doubt in my mind as to what the result will be. However it would have been nice to also prove this way that it's all a lie.

Anyway, thanks for your time.

AlmostUndone
10-22-2015, 10:14 PM
Ok. Well personally I don't care too much. We've seen the patient photo's where it was 100% certain that they took out the whole graft, unlike the story they're always telling of how they're splitting it and are supposed to leave stem cells behind. That's obviously not happening, so no regrowth is possible. We've seen Dean Saunders who had a depleted donor after 3 sessions and had a body hair transplant done because his donor was gone. So there's no doubt in my mind as to what the result will be. However it would have been nice to also prove this way that it's all a lie.

Anyway, thanks for your time.

Right now I really really need to be concentrating on other things..... *Sigh* If you get sick of waiting, you can always try do your own analysis.

AlmostUndone
12-30-2015, 05:39 PM
Hey everybody, almost 2016! It's been 7 months since my HASCI. And in case you all were wondering, just recently I got one step further and now the extracted grafts are all marked out on my "before" pictures. The job still needs to be one last time checked for errors, or someone *MIGHT* offer a little help with checking for errors, and then we're getting very close to knowing the grafts lost in the donor area.

For the 800 grafts they supposedly got, they made around 1400 or more donor holes. That means for 800 grafts, we have at least 1400 holes to compare between the "before"-pics and the "after"-pics. (However, some of these are certainly superficial wounds.) I wonder what the ratio has usually been in previous cases.

Arashi
01-05-2016, 10:16 AM
Hey everybody, almost 2016! It's been 7 months since my HASCI. And in case you all were wondering, just recently I got one step further and now the extracted grafts are all marked out on my "before" pictures. The job still needs to be one last time checked for errors, or someone *MIGHT* offer a little help with checking for errors, and then we're getting very close to knowing the grafts lost in the donor area.

For the 800 grafts they supposedly got, they made around 1400 or more donor holes. That means for 800 grafts, we have at least 1400 holes to compare between the "before"-pics and the "after"-pics. (However, some of these are certainly superficial wounds.) I wonder what the ratio has usually been in previous cases.

My own ratio was about 20 drills for 12 extractions, so that's pretty much the same as your result. It's of course a key in the HASCI regrowth fable, people like Ironman on this site had mistaken failed extractions for the magic regrowth that HASCI promises.

AlmostUndone
01-05-2016, 05:58 PM
My own ratio was about 20 drills for 12 extractions, so that's pretty much the same as your result. It's of course a key in the HASCI regrowth fable, people like Ironman on this site had mistaken failed extractions for the magic regrowth that HASCI promises.

Hey, fresh start right? Where is he?

Arashi
01-05-2016, 07:08 PM
Hey, fresh start right? Where is he?

He left this site once he realised he was wrong about regrowth. I think he had 3 HST's so his donor had taken quite a visible hit.

AlmostUndone
01-05-2016, 09:16 PM
He left this site once he realised he was wrong about regrowth. I think he had 3 HST's so his donor had taken quite a visible hit.

I doubt you heard that from a horse's mouth. In any case, I just now made some final refinements to the "before" image where there are markers placed over every extracted FU. There's possibly over 1500 circles, and that includes places which have been wounded but no hairs visibly removed. Some things still remain to be done:
+duplicating the markers (ie. circles) to the "after" image.
+counting the difference in hairs.
+photographing and making the comparison for the recipient site. The recipient site is much smaller than the donor and should be relatively easy to handle.

This might still take a while. Holiday season is over and then it's busy, busy, busy.

Arashi
01-14-2016, 08:34 AM
I doubt you heard that from a horse's mouth.

Hehe I didnt, Ironman would never admit he was wrong. But since Dean Saunder's donor was completely depleted after 3 HST's and Ironman had also a prior FUT treatment, it could very well be that his donor was depleted too after 3 sessions (on average it would take 5-6 HST sessions for donor to deplete on normal, virgin scalps, based on my calculations). I think that's what happened and that's why he's stopped posting. But it's just speculation of course.

Anyway good luck with your endavour

AlmostUndone
02-03-2016, 05:07 PM
This endavour quite labour-intensive. I finished today getting all the circles in place in the "3 months after" pictures, as well. Easiest way to count them is....... Hmmm, I'm still thinking about that bit.

AlmostUndone
02-15-2016, 06:42 AM
Hoping to find a way to get this done, without wasting too much time, and achieve consistency as well. Anyone got suggestions?

Look, here's an example of an area, which can be counted: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/counting_example1.jpg

Arashi
02-18-2016, 06:25 PM
Hoping to find a way to get this done, without wasting too much time, and achieve consistency as well. Anyone got suggestions?

Look, here's an example of an area, which can be counted: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/counting_example1.jpg

Wow, really nice work mate ! From quickly looking it seems like the pattern we've seen all over before, a combo of failed extractions and split follicles.

Anyway if you want me to help out, just post a few more like these and I can count them and take over some of your work.

Swooping
02-18-2016, 06:42 PM
A troubling case about HASCI has emerged on another forum too. 3K grafts, very sparse sub-par results. The guy paid almost 20k. With permanent ongoing redness.

These guys are at best mediocre at performing hair transplants.

Not to mention their regeneration claims which is a dream pur sang.

Let it go already.

caddarik79
02-19-2016, 01:10 AM
A troubling case about HASCI has emerged on another forum too. 3K grafts, very sparse sub-par results. The guy paid almost 20k. With permanent ongoing redness.

These guys are at best mediocre at performing hair transplants.

Not to mention their regeneration claims which is a dream pur sang.

Let it go already.


Would be really nice to paste us the link to this forum, would like to see it by myself !

Arashi
02-19-2016, 05:28 AM
Would be really nice to paste us the link to this forum, would like to see it by myself !

I'm pretty sure the moderator will ban you for that. But maybe swooping can copy/paste the photo/text ,would like to see it too, thanks !

Arashi
02-19-2016, 05:29 AM
A troubling case about HASCI has emerged on another forum too. 3K grafts, very sparse sub-par results. The guy paid almost 20k. With permanent ongoing redness.

These guys are at best mediocre at performing hair transplants.

Not to mention their regeneration claims which is a dream pur sang.

Let it go already.

Hey Swooping. Yeah I kinda agree but there are still people on this forum who believe or at least have doubts about HASCI. Don't ask me why, we've already shown that it's a lie (because HASCI just ejects the whole follicle, nothing stays behind, we've shown that on photo's). Anyway, for them it would be nice to have this case documented. Although then again, if after those other photo's they still have doubts, they'll probably always have doubts.

Swooping
02-19-2016, 07:13 AM
Yeah can't link to the forum but will dump the text here for consumer interest. I only added 3 pictures, to much effort to add them all (see links to the three pictures below the text). Dr. Gho even commented on your site Arashi ;).


Hi everyone

I'd like to share my story here so that others may benefit from my experience and not make the same mistakes I have so far. I've been worried about hair loss ever since I was 18 or so, since my temples went bald very early on, and my father is completely bald so I knew the problem would only get worse as time went on. However, when I heard about a hair stem cell therapy offered by HASCI in the Netherlands, I got some hope. Previously I did not start any treatments because I know I will likely progress to NW6 or NW7 eventually. However, their claim - backed by research papers and celebrity testimonials - is that there is "virtually complete regrowth of the hairs in the donor area" which would allow for virtually limitless procedures. As such, I decided to tackle the problem early on and enjoy my youth with a full head of hair.

The first hair transplant was performed on 2013-03-12. Nine months after the surgery when final results were supposed to be visible, I was quite disappointed by the density though. Some redness was also still visible, which the doctors assured me would dissipate within a year after the surgery. I scheduled a second hair transplant for 2014-09-22 which was a year and a half after the first one. Each time they did about 1,400 grafts.

It has now been almost a year and a half since the second surgery and my hairline seems to be receding faster. Density in the temples is slightly higher than after the first surgery, but not what I was hoping/expecting. In fact, earlier this year I shaved my head for the first time because I was considering going for SMP as to avoid chasing after my receding hairline. Unfortunately, I found out that my scalp is just too red in the transplant area, it looks horrible especially under artificial lighting at certain angles. Since it has been a year and a half since the final surgery I am worried this might be permanent.

Recently, I've read some disturbing information about the HASCI clinic (summarized at http://www.hasci-exposed.com/analysis.html) and indicate that the claims made by Dr. Coen Gho at HASCI are deceitful.

Personally, I feel like I spent about 20,000 USD in vain and all I got were two poorly executed FUE treatments which left me with damaged skin and possibly limited my options for both going bald gracefully as well as having enough donor hair left to keep from going bald.

Right now I am consulting with some other surgeons to see what options I have left in terms of further hair transplants. I have several questions I'd like answered to decide on my next course of action. If HASCI has been deceitful about their claims and does not offer a solution I fully intend to file a lawsuit personally or a class-action lawsuit if other disadvantaged patients present themselves;

1. Is HASCI indeed a scam and if so, why hasn't this come to light yet after several years of them making claims and performing surgeries?
2. The fact that hairs seem to be at odd angles and pointing in different directions, is this due to my type of hair or were they implanted incorrectly?
3. Are any treatment options available for the redness in case I go the SMP route? Lasers seem to have their fair share of risk as well of further discoloration.
4. I trusted the doctor to decide on the shape of the hairline, but it seems to me that they chose one that does not look natural, is that correct?

== UPDATE 2016-02-18 ==

Today I had a Skype consultation with Dr. Gho. We discussed the topics I had doubts about.

REDNESS: Not explained

He says it's the first time he has ever seen redness lasting this long (just my luck) and rather than offering a solution for the redness, he offered to hide it with a free-of-charge third procedure to fill up the low density areas and gaps so the redness would no longer be visible using a new technique (pick & place).

NEW TECHNIQUE: Proof pending

He told me to watch a video (in Dutch) about the new technique which is the only information I've received so far. Supposedly the difference is that the hair is inserted at the time the perforation of the skin is made, and as such smaller punch size suffices and there is much quicker healing and less issues with blood and crusts. I'm waiting for more information by email since the video isn't exactly scientific evidence nor does it provide much information about the technique itself:

http://www.hasci.com/nl/nieuws-media...-aflevering-4/

What I find a bit odd is that according to some videos on their website, the punch size in the recipient area is already as small as the one from the donor area (0.5 mm), so I don't understand how they would use an even smaller punch as the graft wouldn't even fit anymore.

DENSITY ISSUES: Not explained

I told him I had read the information on HASCI exposed and asked him to clarify why density with HASCI is apparently much lower than with normal FUE techniques. He sort of dodged the question saying that natural density will never be achieved, especially on a first pass. He followed this up saying that one wouldn't want too high density hair in the temples since as my natural hair starts thinning out, I'd have unnatural looking results. However, none of this explains why there seem to be consistent complaints about density with HST. I have seen some FUE results and often these look much denser on the first pass with less grafts than my two transplants for a total of 2,800 grafts.

ANGLES OF TRANSPLANTED HAIRS: Not explained

When I asked why the hairs were growing in different directions, he did not really provide an answer about the flaws in his current technique, but mentioned that with his new technique there should be more consistency in hair direction along with the other benefits.

DONOR REGENERATION & MULTIPLE HST'S: Proof pending

When I mentioned my main worry is the news report about Dean Saunders being depleted after three HST transplants, he declined that the donor area could have been depleted and said the doctor who did a body hair transplant on him didn't know what he was doing. He assured me that I would be able to do at least 8 and likely up to 11 total transplants and said that he has clients who have had 8 of these. I asked if I could see photos and speak to these people to hear about their experience with HASCI. He replied that he would ask them if their contact information could passed and said he could not send photos without permission. He sent me a photo of a donor area of someone who had had 4 transplants for a total of 6,000 grafts, which did not seem depleted. On forums I have read that people have between 3,000 and 7,000 grafts available for transplant in their donor area depending on original density and other factors, so I would still need to receive more information and references.

PARTIAL EXTRACTION: No proof provided

When I asked about the doubts raised at http://www.hasci-exposed.com/partial.html he told me that there is no way to really see the difference with just a photo, one would need to use a microscope to see the difference between normal FUE grafts and their HST grafts. It seems odd then that their presentation includes regular photos showing the difference rather than photos from under a microscope. In fact, the photos taken by HASCI Exposed seem to be of higher quality than those used in their presentation.

HAIRS PER GRAFT

I touched the subject of the number of hairs per graft being lower than the industry average. He said that in the temples one must use 1-hair grafts for natural results. I haven't done much research into the ratio of 1 vs 2 vs 3-hair grafts in the temples so this may be true, but for providing coverage on the remainder of my head I would be worried that two passes are required with HST and density is still disappointing.

CONCLUSION

I'm not convinced at all at this stage. I'll wait for his email to see what evidence and references he provides regarding his new technique but unless there is some very compelling information, I still feel he owes me a full refund for at least the surgeries since there is no evidence that I now have more hairs than I did before or that they even used the techniques they explain on their website. In fact they should be happy refunding just the surgeries considering the travel expenses I incurred, lost time/productivity and possibly costs for treatment of the redness they caused.

http://s27.postimg.org/5drxmtltv/2013_03_12_HASCI_1_Right.jpg

http://s28.postimg.org/co6mo1yv1/2013_12_12_Low_density_nine_months_post_op.jpg

http://s27.postimg.org/q07ggnqgz/2016_01_03_Right_profile_with_short_hair.png

Arashi
02-19-2016, 03:21 PM
Thanks swooping ! This is exactly why we need an analysis like "almostundone" is doing. To hopefully bring a final blow to HASCI and their regeneration claims.

@Almostundone: again, if I can help out, please share some more pics for me to analyze and I'm happy to help out !

jamesst11
02-19-2016, 03:30 PM
Why did people just assume this would work? I am sick of all this f*cking bullsh*t

Swooping
02-19-2016, 04:03 PM
Why did people just assume this would work? I am sick of all this f*cking bullsh*t

Dunno man. As far as I am concerned when someone makes claims there has to be hard evidence for that claim. Science right?

Well.. Unless we talk about vulnerable people off course.. And people with hair loss are often vulnerable as hell.

People love also to rationalize certain things they want to believe in, just to keep their "hope" alive.

Doesn't even matter if you will prove 100% that HASCI regeneration claims are not true, enough people will continue to go there anyway.

Arashi
02-19-2016, 06:04 PM
Hoping to find a way to get this done, without wasting too much time, and achieve consistency as well. Anyone got suggestions?

Look, here's an example of an area, which can be counted: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/counting_example1.jpg

Man I must congratulate you, you're doing really an awesome job !! I thought I'd analyse the pics myself and see if your circles were placed correctly. I could only find 1 error in the 105 circles you've placed in the main part (you missed nr 49, see my pic, not even an error, you just forgot a circle), so less than 1% error, really really good job !

My analysis:
Before: http://s29.postimg.org/wi5quy0pz/Before.jpg
After: http://s24.postimg.org/9tzvyp60l/after.jpg

Will do the counting tomorrow but that's trivial now. Again, wonderful job mate, I'm impressed ! If we can do the same for the recipient, we can count exactly how much hairs were lost in donor and how much gained in recipient and we can see how much hairs were 'regenerated' (LOL yeah right).

If you post some more of these pics, I'll continue counting !

BTW we discussed earlier that the normal hair cycle might complicate the comparison (hairs that were in sleeping state will be visible 3 months later and vice versa) but it seems this isnt really an issue. I saw only a couple of hairs that were obviously in sleeping state after 3 months and vice versa. You can also clearly see in a few parts how the hair is going into sleeping state: when you look closely you will see a very very thin hair where there earlier was a normal hair for example).

So, this is really looking good man !!

Arashi
02-19-2016, 06:33 PM
BTW, did a quick calc, I think you've lost 91 hairs in the first 104 extraction points. Will re-count to verify tomorrow.

Arashi
02-19-2016, 07:10 PM
Recounted, got to 96 hairs lost now in the first 104 extraction points: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=69920300967059054270

Also the original files (slightly better quality, other files I just uploaded got recompressed) http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=29973522306456854616 and http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=06948740335858343404

The actual number might be a bit off but I do think it's within a 7% error margin. And it doesnt have to be 100% perfect, we have a margin for error, because we're here to prove if 80% regenerates like HASCI claims, LOL.

Arashi
02-20-2016, 08:25 AM
Why did people just assume this would work? I am sick of all this f*cking bullsh*t

Well there are several reasons.

1) First of all HASCI gave away free treatments to Dutch celebrities. This bought them a lot of credit initially, people always look up to celebs and when they go to a certain doctor, even if they get a treatment for free, that means something to the public. Eventually this backfired since Dean Saunders donor got already depleted after 3 seasons and most celeb results are quite horrible.

2) HASCI transplants way less hairs per graft than other clinics (see also the above analysis I just posted, you will see that mostly they transplant 1 hair per graft). This gives the illusion that they can do a lot more sessions than other clinics. But the reality is that they just transplant way less hair per session :)

3) Like you can see in the above analysis I just posted, they split FU's. This gives the illusion of regrowth. But it's just split hair and failed extractions (like 'almostundone' noted, he has 1400 extraction points but only 800 grafts were transplanted, so 600 'failed extractions', which might look like regrowth to newbies to their fables but it's just unextracted hair growing back)

4) Most importantly: they published an article in a 'peer reviewed scientific magazine'. This was THE biggest reason people initially believed hasci. In that article they showed 85% regrowth after 3 months ! And since this was a scientific magazine AND peer reviewed, people thought it must have been true. However after some research it turned out that the 2 reviewers who reviewed the article, did NOT check the results. In a lawsuit against HASCI, it turned out:

"The committee wrongly assumed that the "peer reviewed"method also examined whether the HSCT method really leads to multiplication of hair. The managing director of the journal of Dermatological Treatment has informed us that this is not the case and that the review panel, consisting of two experts, particularly examined whether the published research met the standard of the magazine, concerning contents and subject, and whether the research was acceptable. More generally, it appears that there is much criticizism on the value that is awarded to peer review. A peer review is no guarantee of the effectiveness of a method. Contrary to the evaluation by the Committee, the publisher does not assess whether an article is sufficiently scientifically sound"

So it's all a bunch of BS. Or in better words: fraud. In petridish photo's from a forum member we could clearly see that HASCI just ejects the whole follicle and doesnt leave a part behind, like they showed on photo's in that article. And I'm 100% confident we'll see that in this new analysis we're doing now too.

In fact, about that last, I already can do a prediction regarding "Almostundone's" case:

"Almostundone" had 1400 extraction points. In the 104 extraction points I analyzed, 96 hairs were lost. If this would be the average result for "Almostundone" that would mean he had lost in total: 1400/104 * 96 = 1292 hairs. By analysing previous cases, we found that HASCi transplants on average 1.28 hairs/graft. So that would mean for the 800 grafts "Almostundone" had done, he would have gained 800 * 1.28 = 1024 hairs in recipient !! So no hair multiplication, but a net loss of 268 hairs !! Actually I don't think it will end up in such a huge loss, I think he might have a bit more hairs transplanted/graft AND/OR these 104 extraction points I analyzed contained more hairloss than the average extraction point, but I do think that recipient will have received less hairs than in donor were loss, in other words, I'll bet ya that just like with any FUE, the net hair result is going to be negative !!

Maybe we should do a class action law suit if indeed turns out that Almostundone had a net hair loss. I'm prepared to invest a few thousand dollars in a lawyer.

Swooping
02-20-2016, 08:38 AM
"The committee wrongly assumed that the "peer reviewed"method also examined whether the HSCT method really leads to multiplication of hair. The managing director of the journal of Dermatological Treatment has informed us that this is not the case and that the review panel, consisting of two experts, particularly examined whether the published research met the standard of the magazine, concerning contents and subject, and whether the research was acceptable. More generally, it appears that there is much criticizism on the value that is awarded to peer review. A peer review is no guarantee of the effectiveness of a method. Contrary to the evaluation by the Committee, the publisher does not assess whether an article is sufficiently scientifically sound"


Good point...

http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124


His report “Why most published research findings are false” is the most cited paper in PLOS Medicine and has contributed to him being profiled in the New York Times and becoming famous.


When a theory is shown to be incorrect or a publication in error, it is all too easy to think that the scientist who came up with this theory is a liar or a dishonest fraudster intent on misleading the public for personal gain. Or as Richard Smith, former editor of the British Medical Journal, puts it: Most scientific studies are wrong, and they are wrong because scientists are interested in funding and careers rather than truth.


Companies and hedge funds are catching up with the fact that so many published studies are misleading—because it’s one thing to have the study published in a journal, with the publishers making money and the authors enjoying “fame and the love of beautiful women,” but it’s another thing to invest millions of dollars in what appear to be new possible treatments or diagnostic tests when the result may be wrong. So companies are learning the importance of replicating studies, and a recent study by Amgen of preclinical studies showed that 80-90% could not be replicated. Hedge funds have thus become nervous about investing in what seem to be promising scientific results and are hiring contract research organisations to replicate studies before they make any investments.

Enough said :).

Arashi
02-20-2016, 11:47 AM
Exactly swooping, sad but true, a lot of those papers are false, thanks for that link !

@Almostundone: I figured I'd also check your extraction points circles, and again, you've all placed them correctly: http://s2.postimg.org/oi8to3ty1/extractions.jpg

Wonderful job mate ! So as an overview:

1) before: http://s29.postimg.org/wi5quy0pz/Before.jpg
2) extractions: http://s2.postimg.org/oi8to3ty1/extractions.jpg
3) after: http://s24.postimg.org/9tzvyp60l/after.jpg

(btw while doing this I found that I also made an error, I placed number 18 two times. I labeled them 18a and 18b in the 'extractions' photo).

Arashi
02-20-2016, 12:25 PM
Oops, missed a few circle numbers, here's the corrected extraction pic: http://s9.postimg.org/61my0tsfz/extractions.jpg

BTW I must say, man, I'm excited :) This is the first time we have really good quality photo's of the whole area, 800 grafts makes it a bit more managable than those mega sessions and the structure of your hair is just perfect for analysis. I must admit that I was a bit sceptic when you opened this thread with this title 'now we'll be able to find out', but man, you were right ! This is going to be the first time we can finally show with a real life example what the result of a HST surgery is !!

Arashi
02-20-2016, 01:58 PM
Also, I recounted all the hair loss and updated the file: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=00338717536856346723

I changed a few but the total only comes out 1 lower, my final result is 95 lost hairs in 105 extraction points.

Looking forward to the next area !

jamesst11
02-20-2016, 04:05 PM
Also, I recounted all the hair loss and updated the file: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=00338717536856346723

I changed a few but the total only comes out 1 lower, my final result is 95 lost hairs in 105 extraction points.

Looking forward to the next area !

I am not following this too closely and for some reason cannot upload your pics on my computer. Are you saying with certainty that out of 105 extraction points, 10 hairs grew back? I wonder what is was about these extractions that allowed that, and if the correlating transplanted hairs grew in the recipient site.

Arashi
02-20-2016, 04:53 PM
Are you saying with certainty that out of 105 extraction points, 10 hairs grew back?
No. What we're doing here is counting how many hairs were lost in donor and how many hairs have been added to the recipient. Currently we're counting donor loss. So far 105 extraction points of the 1400 have been analysed, so the other 1295 still need analysing, and then donor needs to be analysed and then we have an exact number on how well HASCI's HST works :)

So this will take a few weeks ....

Arashi
02-21-2016, 10:49 AM
Almostundone, were are you mate, I have some time today to analyse some more :)

AlmostUndone
02-22-2016, 08:33 PM
Hey, Arashi. I once did a complete check on the "extraction wounds" photos to see, if I had placed the circles correctly into the "before" pictures. I hope you don't have to deal with many errors. Here I will post the first half for the donor area:

BEFORE PROCEDURE
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/left_side_final_98.jpg
BEFORE PROCEDURE (SOME ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINTS, NO CIRCLES MADE YET):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/left_side_final_alternative_98.jpg

EXTRACTIONS:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_extractions97.jpg
EXTRACTIONS (AN ADDITIONAL VIEWPOINT):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_extractions97%20-%20A16%20ADDITIONAL%20PICTURE.jpg

>3 MONTHS AFTER
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_3months.xcf
This is a Gimp file. You can easily make corrections to the circles, if you are using Gimp. If you would like me to convert it to JPEG for you, just let me know. (I have a readymade circle brush for GIMP, but for some reason, dropbox refuses to upload it)

AlmostUndone
02-22-2016, 08:59 PM
If this would be the average result for "Almostundone" that would mean he had lost in total: 1400/104 * 96 = 1292 hairs. By analysing previous cases, we found that HASCi transplants on average 1.28 hairs/graft. So that would mean for the 800 grafts "Almostundone" had done, he would have gained 800 * 1.28 = 1024 hairs in recipient !! So no hair multiplication, but a net loss of 268 hairs !! Actually I don't think it will end up in such a huge loss, I think he might have a bit more hairs transplanted/graft AND/OR these 104 extraction points I analyzed contained more hairloss than the average extraction point

Also, that area was harvested quite near the end of the procedure. It may have been the nurse got better at making successful extractions towards the end.

Arashi
02-23-2016, 05:33 AM
Cool, thanks mate ! I'll use gimp then. Going to the office right now, when I'm back I might have some time later.

Arashi
02-23-2016, 05:36 AM
Hey, Arashi. I once did a complete check on the "extraction wounds" photos to see, if I had placed the circles correctly into the "before" pictures. I hope you don't have to deal with many errors.

Nope, your work was near perfect (only forgot one circle and another circle where a graft didnt grow back was misplaced slightly: circle for nr 3 in the 'after' photo should be bit more to the right but no problem there). Other than that, everything was flawless ! Great work ! And I'm happy to help out mate, excited about all this !!

paleocapa89
02-23-2016, 06:13 AM
First, let me congratulate you guys on your meticulousness. This is how research should be done, and scammers (if they are) should be unmasked.

So if I understand this correctly, they are able to split multi hair grafts (that contains more than 1 hair) and transplant a part of it to the recipient while the other part hopefully regrows, basically making two 1hair grafts from a 2hair graft for example. So in a best case scenario, the number of hairs on top of ones head would say the same but the number of follicles would double? But they unavoidably will make some errors where some hairs are lost.

During the extraction do they take out the whole graft, split it and then put one part of it to the front and one part of it back to where it came from, or do they only extract half of the follicle. Does the extracted hair in the donor area fell first before it (if it does) regrows?

Arashi
02-23-2016, 01:42 PM
First, let me congratulate you guys on your meticulousness. This is how research should be done, and scammers (if they are) should be unmasked.

So if I understand this correctly, they are able to split multi hair grafts (that contains more than 1 hair) and transplant a part of it to the recipient while the other part hopefully regrows, basically making two 1hair grafts from a 2hair graft for example. So in a best case scenario, the number of hairs on top of ones head would say the same but the number of follicles would double? But they unavoidably will make some errors where some hairs are lost.

During the extraction do they take out the whole graft, split it and then put one part of it to the front and one part of it back to where it came from, or do they only extract half of the follicle. Does the extracted hair in the donor area fell first before it (if it does) regrows?

Patience mate, soon we'll have answers ;) But yeah I think the above is correct

@Almostundone: thanks, just downloaded the pics. So to be sure, the photo's above is were you're currently are, right ? So I can continue here ? Just analyzed some of the photo's, it's starting to make sense now how they fit into each other. One question though: I'm unfamiliar with Gimp, I just downloaded it, you said it's easy to move the circles, how do I move an exisiting circle ? And how do I add a new one ? Thanks !

Arashi
02-23-2016, 03:41 PM
Ok I just finished mapping (=checking) the 2nd area: your circles were correctly placed. 49 extraction points, 48 hairs lost. Onto the next ! :)

AlmostUndone
02-23-2016, 04:53 PM
One question though: I'm unfamiliar with Gimp, I just downloaded it, you said it's easy to move the circles, how do I move an exisiting circle ? And how do I add a new one ?

You need a brush which is shaped like a circle. You can download the brush I used: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/circlebrush.gbr

I think you need to copy the brush file to Gimp's "Brushes" folder. You can find out this folder's location by looking at Preferences > Folders > Brushes. Copy the gbr-file into the folder like a normal file in your operating system. (According to GIMP help, "the brush search path includes two folders; the system brushes folder, which you should not use or alter, and the brushes folder inside your personal GIMP directory. And any GBR, GIH, or VBR file included in a folder in the brush search path will show up in the Brushes dialog the next time you start GIMP, or as soon as you press the Refresh button in the Brushes dialog.") The size of the brush can be altered freely, but its color cannot be changed.

My circles exist as a separate layer in all of the files. You'll be fine in GIMP by learning only four keyboard shortcuts: shortcuts for the toolbox window, the layer window, undo, and redo. Zoom in using the looking glass tool, or hold CTRL to zoom out. Be sure to use the latest version, as GIMP has some annoying bugs (such as the "tool settings" appearing gray all the time. If you have problems, I'll help you out). Maybe you can try importing or converting the Gimp-file to Photoshop or whatever photoeditor you are familiar with?




So to be sure, the photo's above is were you're currently are, right ? So I can continue here ?

The photos above should contain everything which is known of the left half of my donor area (ie. ranging between the occiput to the left sphenoid). I'll upload the right half after some minor improvements to its layout.

I haven't counted the lost hairs, but everything else is basically done. The red lines do not need anymore checking. The red lines represent borders of the best pictures in the "before" photos. All the visible hairs before the procedure are found in "left_side_final_98.jpg" and the upcoming "right_side_final_98.jpg". (The "left_side_final_alternative_98.jpg" is only a collection of some alternative viewpoints. And "98" refers to the jpeg quality.)

The ">3 months after" photos are maybe not in a very logical order. I should have checked once more to see, if I placed the circles correctly into the ">3 months after". Hopefully you'll be able to spot any possible errors.

Arashi
02-23-2016, 07:07 PM
I decided to just export the picture as bmp and continue in paint like I did before. Anyway I analyzed 2 more sections, by drawing lines exactly as I did in the first area I posted. I only found 1 error you made, you forgot to place 1 circle. You work pretty neatly, very nice ! Anyway so in total so far I now have analysed 232 extraction points and I've registered 213 lost hairs in those extraction points.

so about 1/6th of total donor area has been analysed so far.

Anyway, I'll continue to work this week to get hopefully the whole left side done. Once the left side is done I'll upload and post my analysis as a whole.

What about recipient, did you have any chance to do some work there already ? I'd really love to do that soon too. Cause I'm predicting you'll see rougly 1200 new hairs in recipient (which means there's no regrowth at all of course).

AlmostUndone
02-23-2016, 07:37 PM
What about recipient, did you have any chance to do some work there already ?

Not yet. I think recipient looks nicer now than it did only 2 months ago. I think they said 9 months, before all the recipient hairs would grow, and 9 months have now passed, but who knows... aren't there doctors who say it'll take 1 year? Still, composing the photos for recipient should be much faster and easier than for the donor (they only put hairs high in the temples, and none into the middle/forelock), and the existing photos are really good quality.

Thanks Arashi. I wanted to have my own analysis, also, but presently I find it hard to work uninterrupted for a long time.

Arashi
02-23-2016, 07:46 PM
Not yet. I think recipient looks nicer now than it did only 2 months ago. I think they said 9 months, before all the recipient hairs would grow, and 9 months have now passed, but who knows... aren't there doctors who say it'll take 1 year? Still, composing the photos for recipient should be much faster and easier than for the donor (they only put hairs high in the temples, and none into the middle/forelock), and the existing photos are really good quality.

Thanks Arashi. I wanted to have my own analysis, also, but presently I find it hard to work uninterrupted for a long time.

Yeah you're right, recipient should be 9 months at least. Anyway let's first get donor analyzed then, will probably take a couple of weeks anyway. Done half way with the 4th area, will continue tomorrow, later

AlmostUndone
02-24-2016, 11:05 AM
Here's part deux. Fingers crossed.

BEFORE PROCEDURE:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/right_side_final_98.jpg
BEFORE PROCEDURE (SOME ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINTS. POSSIBLY USEFUL!, TOO): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/right_side_alternative_98.jpg

EXTRACTIONS:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_extractions97.jpg
EXTRACTIONS (AN ADDITIONAL VIEWPOINT): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_extractions_97%20-%20B15%20ADDITIONAL%20PICTURE.jpg

AlmostUndone
02-24-2016, 11:27 AM
>3 MONTHS AFTER (GIMP FILE):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_3months.xcf

Arashi
02-24-2016, 06:56 PM
>3 MONTHS AFTER (GIMP FILE):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_3months.xcf

So for my understanding: the left and right side are like seperated area's ? Like in the middle there were no extractions ?

BTW, I've currently analyzed 25% of your donor.

AlmostUndone
02-25-2016, 04:38 AM
So for my understanding: the left and right side are like seperated area's ? Like in the middle there were no extractions ?

Correct. They are separated, disjoint. No overlap exist between them.

All of the donor they used is now there, in those pictures.

Arashi
02-25-2016, 09:31 AM
Correct. They are separated, disjoint. No overlap exist between them.

All of the donor they used is now there, in those pictures.

Perfect. I'm at 30% of your donor now, so far I've analyzed 441 extraction points which contained 374 lost hairs. So everything thing so far adds perfectly up, if there was NO regeneration at all. Also we can already dismiss the possibility of 80% regrowth at this point, even without having looked at your donor. The 80% regrowth is impossible, cause at this rate we'll end up at about 1280 lost hairs in your donor. 80% regrowth means that recipient will contain 5x more new hair than was lost in donor (like if you transplant 100 hairs, you'll receive 100 in recipient and will have regrown 80 in donor so only lost 20 in donor, so 100:20 is 5x ratio). So that would mean in your case that you should have received 6400 hairs in your recipient. At 800 grafts that would mean you'd have 8 hairs/graft !! LOL. I've only come across a few 4 hair grafts and so far have no seen more than 4 hairs lost in a graft, so your donor will most likely not contain anything beyond 3 hair/graft maximum)

So, everything at this 30% mark points at 0 regrowth at all and most probably some net hair *loss* instead (1280 lost hairs in 800 grafts, transplanted 1:1 would mean 1.6 hair/graft in recipient, which would be really high for HASCI already. Most likely your donor will have less hair/graft which would then equal net hair loss). But I will continue working and we can only make a final conclusion once we have counted the whole donor AND the whole recipient.

jamesst11
02-25-2016, 09:55 AM
Perfect. I'm at 30% of your donor now, so far I've analyzed 441 extraction points which contained 374 lost hairs. So everything thing so far adds perfectly up, if there was NO regeneration at all. Also we can already dismiss the possibility of 80% regrowth at this point, even without having looked at your donor. The 80% regrowth is impossible, cause at this rate we'll end up at about 1280 lost hairs in your donor. 80% regrowth means that recipient will contain 5x more new hair than was lost in donor (like if you transplant 100 hairs, you'll receive 100 in recipient and will have regrown 80 in donor so only lost 20 in donor, so 100:20 is 5x ratio). So that would mean in your case that you should have received 6400 hairs in your recipient. At 800 grafts that would mean you'd have 8 hairs/graft !! LOL. I've only come across a few 4 hair grafts and so far have no seen more than 4 hairs lost in a graft, so your donor will most likely not contain anything beyond 3 hair/graft maximum)

So, everything at this 30% mark points at 0 regrowth at all and most probably some net hair *loss* instead (1280 lost hairs in 800 grafts, transplanted 1:1 would mean 1.6 hair/graft in recipient, which would be really high for HASCI already. Most likely your donor will have less hair/graft which would then equal net hair loss). But I will continue working and we can only make a final conclusion once we have counted the whole donor AND the whole recipient.

both of you need to try and publish a paper on this, and provide it on the internet. This is very disappointing and people should know.

Arashi
02-25-2016, 09:59 AM
both of you need to try and publish a paper on this, and provide it on the internet. This is very disappointing and people should know.

I'm going to update my website (hasci exposed) of course with this case (if that's ok with AlmostUndone of course). Also I'm now seriously thinking about a collective mass lawsuit against HASCI in which we ask our money back.

AlmostUndone
02-25-2016, 11:26 AM
@Arashi

It's ok. Hopefully such findings will be taken seriously by organizations, who deal with consumer rights and hair loss.... Spencer... et. al.

(I hope nobody uses the Windows photo viewing program. You know, the one which badly pixelates the images.)

caddarik79
02-25-2016, 02:26 PM
well done guyz !

Arashi: if HST is really the fraud you are calling for more than 3 years already and if you can build solid proofs out of this thread, I think you are right to propose a lawsuit because it would mean that they have fooled hundreds and hundreds of people like you and I and many others via their regeneration argument.

I would never have considered a simple FUE or any other intervention, never, because moving follicles from one place to another was not my motivation, I chose to make that step for the ONLY very reason that they claimed 85% regeneration in donor !
I never took a single pill of finasteride nor have I ever put minox on my head because they are not good solutions. I was patiently waiting for multipication or something related to regenerative medecine.

The fact that they refuse further discussions when it comes to show evidence of multiple procedures (8 HST and only slightly depleted donor -- in Spencer interview but never ever a picture of those) is already a bit weird.

If it ever comes true and checked and triple checked and official that they have no regeneration happening, I am in for the lawsuit.

If they are regenerating 85% as they claim, I'm in for multiple sessions (I have money aside just for that), as simple as that !

paleocapa89
02-25-2016, 03:08 PM
I don't want to defend HASCI at all, but do you think there is a possibility that the donor follicles which you noticed that lost hair will regenerate fully at a later time? I've read about FUE transplant somewhere for example that it is possible that a transplanted 2haired follicle will first produce 1 hair and later another one as it matures. Is there a possibility that it will happen to the donor follicles as well? Or maybe a damaged donor follicle might regenerate in the next anagen cycle several years later? I'm just theorizing stuff, I don't have the required knowledge of course.

BTW do we know what determines whether a hair follicle will produce 1-2-3 or 4 hairs? Is it determined during fetal development when the follicles form? Can a follicle ever transform from a 1haired follicle to a 3haired follicle forexample? I've read somewhere that during AGA miniaturization the multi haired follicles will produce less and less hairs as they shrink, so I'd assume a 4haired follicle can transform to a 1haired follicle forexample due to AGA. So many questions..

Arashi
02-25-2016, 04:17 PM
I don't want to defend HASCI at all, but do you think there is a possibility that the donor follicles which you noticed that lost hair will regenerate fully at a later time?

The cases that HASCI showed in their paper all showed that hair started to 'regenerate' already after a few days and most hair had 'regenerated' after 3 months, that's why we used that time frame too.

Arashi
02-25-2016, 05:16 PM
@Almostundone: hey do you happen to know if HASCI took 400 grafts from the left and 400 from the right ? Or isn't it split like that ?

AlmostUndone
02-25-2016, 05:29 PM
@Almostundone: hey do you happen to know if HASCI took 400 grafts from the left and 400 from the right ? Or isn't it split like that ?

No it isn't like that.

<350 from the right, and 450< from the left. I recall the nurse said something like that. Can't remember the exact number.

Arashi
02-25-2016, 05:43 PM
No it isn't like that.

<350 from the right, and 450< from the left. I recall the nurse said something like that. Can't remember the exact number.

Ok, great ! I've now counted 611 extraction points on your left donor side (I'm still not done with the left). What I did in my analysis is count every graft that grew back in the same amount of hairs as failed extraction, and all others as succesful extractions. That way I've now counted 353 succesful extractions in your left side. So I figured, if the grafts are split 400/400 then something must be wrong in my method. But >450 from the left, that seems to correspond quite good with my findings :)

Arashi
02-26-2016, 04:36 PM
So I finished analyzing your left donor part ! I've counted 821 extraction points and according to my analysis 646 hairs were lost there.

I've counted every graft that appeared in the same formation in before and after photo as a failed extraction and thus the grafts that had less hairs in the after photo I've counted as succesful extraction. That way I ended up with 465 succesful extractions, which seems to correlate quite good with what you've said (>450 grafts extracted).

So everything at this moment points at no regeration at all: grafts that grew fully back seem just failed extractions and the total hairloss in succesfully extracted grafts correlate with normal hair gain in recipient (at this point would come down to 1111 lost hairs which would be 1.38 hair/graft which would be a normal HASCI recipient density result) .

I will continue counting your right part the coming week. Also will upload my analysis photo's soon (tomorrow I think). And then we'll need to count recipient soon ! I think next weekend I'll have your right donor side ready so we can then start with the recipient

Arashi
02-26-2016, 05:07 PM
Actually, here is my whole analysis of the left side:

pre situation:

area1: www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area1_Before.jpg
area 2-10: www.hasci-exposed.com/images/before_left_side_final_98.jpg

(I should probably just paste area1 into the area 2-10 photo)

after situation:

www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area1_after.jpg
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area2_after.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area3_after.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area4_after.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area5_after.jpg (I rotated it for easier analysis)
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area6_after.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area7A_after.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area7B_after.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area8_after.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area9_after.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area9A_after.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area10_after.bmp

Excel sheet:

www.hasci-exposed.com/Differences.xls

I've made it so that anyone can easily verify our work and count everything or parts themselves and check the analysis.

AlmostUndone
02-26-2016, 08:21 PM
So I finished analyzing your left donor part ! I've counted 821 extraction points and according to my analysis 646 hairs were lost there.

I've counted every graft that appeared in the same formation in before and after photo as a failed extraction and thus the grafts that had less hairs in the after photo I've counted as succesful extraction. That way I ended up with 465 succesful extractions, which seems to correlate quite good with what you've said (>450 grafts extracted).

So everything at this moment points at no regeration at all: grafts that grew fully back seem just failed extractions and the total hairloss in succesfully extracted grafts correlate with normal hair gain in recipient (at this point would come down to 1111 lost hairs which would be 1.38 hair/graft which would be a normal HASCI recipient density result) .

I will continue counting your right part the coming week. Also will upload my analysis photo's soon (tomorrow I think). And then we'll need to count recipient soon ! I think next weekend I'll have your right donor side ready so we can then start with the recipient

Oh, ok. :) I just updated the "left_side_final_98.jpeg" file (i.e. the "Before" photos). There was some problems with the circles in the "secondary" viewpoints, especially in the lowermost sections of the image. I made some corrections to these "secondary" viewpoints, where I found some circles were a bit differently aligned than in the main photos. Also, I used more eraser on some circles, which seemed to be obscuring the hairs. And also, there was 1 extraction point, which was missing, in the upper-right part of the image (area 3, I think). You can superposition the new version on top of the old to see the difference.

AlmostUndone
02-26-2016, 08:31 PM
Ps. I noticed you didn't count the tiny area just above the ear, where there are 7 extraction points

Pps. The outermost fringe zones of each photo, which provide secondary viewpoints, are sometimes very useful in determining how many hairs there are in a group. For example, I myself counted many of the hairs in area 9, using the outermost edge of area 8. Hope you saw this advantage when counting :)

AlmostUndone
02-27-2016, 12:10 AM
I also updated "right_side_final_98.jpg". I recommend going with the latest version!
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/right_side_final_98.jpg

Arashi
02-27-2016, 06:18 AM
Hey mate. I've updated http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/before_left_side_final_98.jpg
I copied Area 1 into it, which I had analyzed seperately. I also put in the Area numbering with bigger fonts so it's easier to see how I labeled it.

Those missing 7 extraction points, in what area are they ? I now labeled area 11 seperately, not sure if that's what you mean ? But I already counted them in Area 8.

Also, can you maybe give me the area numbers and graft numbers in my pics that you've changed ? Thanks !

AlmostUndone
02-27-2016, 06:18 AM
Just now, made another minor addition to the aforementioned picture (right side).

Those missing 7 extraction points: I was talking about the left side of the "before" pictures, just below area 10, or left to area 7B. You didn't label that area?

I'm in a hurry now, but trying to remember, left to graft 4 I see, to have added an extraction point. The others modifications are mostly just corrections to the extent or size of the circles in the fringe areas, for example, my circles in the "fringe" area on the right side of area 8, which is kind of the same location as area 9.

PS. If you had photoshop or any other basic photo editor, you could superpose the old version with the new and see pretty quickly the differences.

Arashi
02-27-2016, 06:19 AM
Just now, made another minor addition to the aforementioned picture

Ok cool, havent started with the right area just yet, will do so today !

Arashi
02-27-2016, 06:33 AM
Those missing 7 extraction points: I was talking about the left side of the "before" pictures, just below area 10, or left to area 7B. You didn't label that area?

Ah right I see them now, yes you are right, I missed those, will analyze them today too. Thanks !



I'm in a hurry now, but trying to remember, left to graft 4 I see, to have added an extraction point. The others modifications are mostly just corrections to the extent or size of the circles in the fringe areas, for example, my circles in the "fringe" area on the right side of area 8, which is kind of the same location as area 9.

PS. If you had photoshop or any other basic photo editor, you could superpose the old version with the new and see pretty quickly the differences.


Yeah I'm not such an advanced graphics artist unfortunately ;) I'm using paint which is kinda difficult when it comes to changes. Other than that I like it a lot, very straightforward and doing exactly what I need.

Anyway if you could find the area's + graft numbers, that would help a lot. I'll then make the changes (by copy/pasting the original part over it and then redo the circles).

Also should I start with the right side already or are you still working on checking/updating that ?

AlmostUndone
02-27-2016, 08:40 AM
@ Arashi

Ok, I'll point them changes out to you. Tomorrow, perhaps.

I'm done with the right side. Hm... backgrounded turns red. Hope there's nothing else strange about the file. It's probably just some bug because I haven't restarted my computer in several weeks. I'll try uploading it again, but will take six hours for me to get home.

Arashi
02-27-2016, 08:51 AM
@ Arashi

Ok, I'll point them changes out to you. Tomorrow, perhaps.

I'm done with the right side. Hm... backgrounded turns red. Hope there's nothing else strange about the file. It's probably just some bug because I haven't restarted my computer in several weeks. I'll try uploading it again, but will take six hours for me to get home.

Ok let me know when I can download the right side please

I've updated the before picture now with Area 11 (those 7 missing grafts) and added the after photo: http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/area11_after.bmp
I've also updated the excell sheet with Area 11.

And I've place some nice pointers to quickly show how to interpret the whole photo (I had to stare at it quite a while before I understood it myself, now people should be able to quickly see how everything fits together).

http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/before_left_side_final_98.jpg

It's become a nice piece of art eh :)

Looking forward to analyse the right side ! I think I can have it done within a week, so recipient next weekend ? :)

Arashi
02-27-2016, 01:01 PM
Ah I just downloaded the right side and see what you mean with the red area. That doesnt seem a problem, I can fill out the red area with white later. Will start now with the right side !

Arashi
02-27-2016, 02:59 PM
@Almostundone: I'm making good progress with the right side already ! It's, like you said, smaller than the left so it should be less work. I'm pretty sure I'll have it done before next weekend already. So, I was thinking, if you have time you could start shooting pics of recipient already, outline the parts and link them, all like you did for the donor.

AlmostUndone
02-27-2016, 03:54 PM
Oh, good if you are. Take a look still at the newest version, with one more added viewpoints for, updated one second ago.

Recipient, next weekend? In your dreams, man! Society needs me too. But I might start very soon linking the existing "before" photos for recipient.

Arashi
02-27-2016, 06:17 PM
Oh, good if you are. Take a look still at the newest version, with one more added viewpoints for, updated one second ago.

Recipient, next weekend? In your dreams, man! Society needs me too. But I might start very soon linking the existing "before" photos for recipient.

I had hoped recipient would be trivial and relatively quickly done but thinking now about it, seperating the newly implanted hairs from the exisisting ones is going to be a hell of a job too indeed.

Anyway, I'll keep working on analyzing donor this week.

AlmostUndone
02-27-2016, 06:35 PM
I had hoped recipient would be trivial and relatively quickly done but thinking now about it, seperating the newly implanted hairs from the exisisting ones is going to be a hell of a job too indeed.

You may be right. But putting the necessary images together is no problem. I got pretty sharp photographs right after the procedure, which at least sharply delineate the zones, where the grafts landed:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-05-30%2012.16.17.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-05-30%2012.20.02.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-06-01%2016.41.21.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-06-01%2016.59.08.jpg

And Here are the corrections, I was talking about:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/arashi_corrections1.jpg

Arashi
02-27-2016, 08:40 PM
You may be right. But putting the necessary images together is no problem. I got pretty sharp photographs right after the procedure, which at least sharply delineate the zones, where the grafts landed:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-05-30%2012.16.17.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-05-30%2012.20.02.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-06-01%2016.41.21.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-06-01%2016.59.08.jpg

And Here are the corrections, I was talking about:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/arashi_corrections1.jpg

I think normally they put grafts between the temples too, but in your case it all seems to have been placed inside the temples, which is like a perfect scenario for analysis. Do you have good pre-op photo's of recipient too ?

AlmostUndone
02-27-2016, 09:28 PM
I think normally they put grafts between the temples too, but in your case it all seems to have been placed inside the temples, which is like a perfect scenario for analysis. Do you have good pre-op photo's of recipient too ?

They didn't put any in the front, either.

I succeeded extremely well capturing getting those very small hairs in the temples. I haven't had time to cherry pick them. But here's few wider shots, which I'm planning to connect the more zoomed in photos. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Recipient.jpg

Arashi
02-28-2016, 06:49 AM
They didn't put any in the front, either.

I succeeded extremely well capturing getting those very small hairs in the temples. I haven't had time to cherry pick them. But here's few wider shots, which I'm planning to connect the more zoomed in photos. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Recipient.jpg

So you've shot a great amount of high quality pics, both pre-op and post surgery and put some lines on your scalp to easily link the photo's really really nice !

I don't think HASCI expected to get someone like you in their clinic, who would be able to kill their little fairytale with such high quality photo's :) In fact I myself thought it would be impossible/unfeasible to do such an analysis. But your case is like a dream case for analysis, because of the relatively small amount of grafts, all recipient grafts placed in a virgin scalp area, the markings you've made to connect the photo's and the very high quality pre-op and post-op photo's you've shot ! So nice indeed !

Anyway I'll have a couple of hours today again, will continue my work on the donor analysis.

Arashi
02-28-2016, 02:15 PM
Done for the day, can't see any more hairs :) So far I've counted 1256 extraction sites, I've counted 945 lost hairs and 686 succesful extractions. So I'm at about 85% of your donor now. I should easily be able to finish the remaining 15% next week.

Current prediction of the final result: 800/686 * 945 = 1102 lost hairs in donor. If your recipient density is 1.3, like we've seen in previous HASCI cases, then you'd have received 1040 hairs in your recipient. Which would mean no regeneration but a net loss of 68 hairs.

But again, we'll need to analyse your recipient to find out about the density !

Arashi
02-29-2016, 07:59 PM
So, I've finished the donor analysis ! My findings:

* I've analysed 1598 extraction points
* I've counted 1172 lost hairs
* I've counted 854 extraction points that had less hair in the after photo.

As HASCI transplanted 800 grafts, one would expect 800 extraction points with less hair, I'm pretty happy to have ended less than 7% away from that ! I myself explain this (small) difference because of:
A) Some hair just going into resting mode instead of really being lost
B) errors in counting.
C) Some failed extractions might have caused severe damage to grafts and thus hairloss


If we go with the situation that's most favourable for HASCI (so no category C, but just A and B), then we'd need to lower the 1172 with 7%, which would translate to 1090 really lost hairs in donor. This would translate to 1.36 hair/graft in recipient.

As we've seen even lower hair/graft count in previous cases, at this point this result would indicate no regrowth at all. BUT we'll now need to analyse recipient to make sure !

@Almostundone: I'll wait till you're done with you initial work on recipient. In the meanwhile I'll go over my analysis again, do some recounting, analyse other views etc and will update the result.

So here's my analysis of the right side of your donor:

The before situation:
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_final_98_nieuw.jpg

The after situation:
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area A.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area B.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area C.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area D.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area E.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area F.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area G.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area HJ.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area I.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area K.jpg
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/right_side_After_Area L.bmp

And the excel sheet with my calcs:

http://www.hasci-exposed.com/RightSide.xls

As I'll be doing my re-analysis the next few days, the files at those links locations might be updated with corrections. BTW when I'm talking about re-analysis I mean the analysis of how many hairs were lost per graft. The lines/circles are perfect, I'm pretty sure of that. But it's the hairloss itself that might contain errors: it's sometimes hard to see how many hairs there are in a graft. But analysing alternative viewpoints might cut down on some errors there.

Swooping
03-01-2016, 04:31 AM
Good job Arashi :). Would be fun if you would all come together and sue them.

c5000
03-01-2016, 09:42 AM
After having had 3 previous HSTs, I would be interested in joining the lawsuit...

Arashi
03-01-2016, 09:57 AM
After having had 3 previous HSTs, I would be interested in joining the lawsuit...

Great ! Well I'm first going to double check the donor result and then we'll still need to analyse recipient. But it doesnt look good for HASCI at this point for sure. But yeah let's discuss a possible lawsuit when all the analysis is done and double checked, I'm too seriously thinking about at least inquiering at a law firm about the costs and how they consider the case.

Arashi
03-01-2016, 03:15 PM
I've recounted the right side, the result is almost the same (uploaded the new file). I'll recount the left side this week too and while waiting for the donor pics I'll also compare with alternative viewpoints !

Arashi
03-02-2016, 07:35 PM
Today I've recounted the left side, area 1 to Area 7B. Only made a few changes and the final result is again almost the same. Uploaded the edited files. Will try to finish recounting tomorrow.

After that I'll probably take a look at the alternative views too (still haven't done that)

AlmostUndone
03-03-2016, 07:55 AM
I thought there were gonna be loads of mistakes in my work, but when I re-checked, I think I only found 1 badly placed circle in the afterimages. Pretty good, huh? That said, some circles had to be added. I'll take a closer look at Arashi's work sooner or later.

Arashi
03-03-2016, 09:06 AM
I thought there were gonna be loads of mistakes in my work, but when I re-checked, I think I only found 1 badly placed circle in the afterimages. Pretty good, huh? That said, some circles had to be added. I'll take a closer look at Arashi's work sooner or later.

Your works was really near perfect !! I think I only removed a circle around a graft 2 times. You did forget a couple of circles here and there, but it weren't many neither.

Anyway I've finished recounting everything ! I've uploaded the changed excel sheets. What I still haven't done is analysing alternative views. Nor have I checked the extraction points to be correct (I only did that for Area 1, you didnt make any errors there and you work very neatly in general so I figured the rest was ok too, but I might check a few area's for errors there).

Anyway, so my final result based on the above:

You have lost 1166 hairs in your donor and I've counted 848 extraction points with less hair than before of the total of 1599 extraction points that you had.

So 848 grafts that's just 6% more than you had done (800 grafts), I think it's pretty close ! Again, the reason here might be a combination of counting errors, hairs going into sleeping state and/or that HASCI damaged some grafts during failed extractions. Anyway if we go with the scenario that's best for HASCI and we're assuming that no grafts were damaged during failed extractions, then that would mean we'd need to lower the result with 6%, so that then would be 1096 hairs really lost in donor.

So, if your average recipient density would be higher than 1.37 hair/graft, then that would point at regrowth (well actually we'd need to see that 6% extra to be sure, so above 1.45 hair/graft would point at regrowth). Lower density than 1.37 hair/graft would equal net hair loss ! Keep in mind that in all 3 previous hasci recipient cases we've analysed, I didnt see a result above 1.3 hair/graft in donor.

Can't wait to look at your recipient though ;)

Arashi
03-03-2016, 09:22 AM
And oh yeah, 80% regrowth would now mean that we'll need to see 6.85 hair/graft on average in your recipient. Wow that would be something eh :) But since I didnt encounter any more than 5 hairs/graft in your donor (mostly 2-3 hair/graft), that only seems to be possible in HASCI fairytale land ;)

Arashi
03-03-2016, 09:29 AM
I thought there were gonna be loads of mistakes in my work, but when I re-checked, I think I only found 1 badly placed circle in the afterimages. Pretty good, huh? That said, some circles had to be added. I'll take a closer look at Arashi's work sooner or later.


It's of course totally up to you but I'd love for you to first do the recipient ! I double checked my own work now and I'm pretty sure it's good. An option would be though, if you want to take get a quick idea of the correctness of my analysis, to analyse just one area, take a random area and analyse that area and you'll see that it's quite good :)

Also for anyone in general interested in verifying my work: Like AlmostUndone said before, make sure you are NOT using windows photo viewer: it anti-aliases and makes it harder to count. I'm using 'irfanview' myself, that doesnt anti aliase. And make sure you zoom in enough, sometimes you really need to zoom in to see if there's 2 or 3 hairs. Look good for really thin hairs, sometimes a hair gets a lot thinner in the after photo. And it's a good method to look for the hair ends, sometimes you see like a small balloon there at the end of the hair and you can look for these in difficult situations.

There will always be situations where it's really hard to tell how many hairs there are though in a graft. In those cases I tried to vary the estimates: first graft I really doubt I take the high estimate, 2nd the low etc. That's probably the best way to negate the uncertainty as much as possible.

Arashi
03-03-2016, 09:57 AM
BTW, something we haven't discussed: sometimes you'll see that in the after photo a graft has *more* hair than in the before photo. In those cases I counted the result as 0. This could happen either due to photo's not really telling the whole story or, more likely, to hair coming out of resting state. So, since I didnt count those hairs that come out of resting state but did count the hairs that go into resting state (as hair loss), I think it makes a lot of sense to use that 6% correction I demonstrated before (so lower the final result with 6 %).

Actually I would bet that if you count the extra hairs in grafts in the after photo, you'd end up with that 6% too.

jamesst11
03-03-2016, 11:57 PM
This is impressive. Arashi, you should do this for money, through a website or something! I would probably pay a few hundred dollars for you to map my hair counts before, and during different regiments, especially in the MPB zones. Does anyone offer this kind of thing? Certainly you could design some kind of software that is able to make it easier?

Arashi
03-04-2016, 06:14 AM
This is impressive. Arashi, you should do this for money, through a website or something! I would probably pay a few hundred dollars for you to map my hair counts before, and during different regiments, especially in the MPB zones. Does anyone offer this kind of thing? Certainly you could design some kind of software that is able to make it easier?

Thanks but one really needs the kind of high quality photo's that AlmostUndone shot, most people are not able to shoot them like that. And doing it manually, it's tons of work. And I just built upon what AlmostUndone did first, the linking of the photo's and then the marking of the grafts with circles, he must have spent at least the amount of time that I've spent, so doing it manually, that's a LOT of work.

Writing a computer program for it, thats an interesting thought though

Arashi
03-05-2016, 07:17 AM
@Almostundone, is there any way I can help you out with recipient already ? Basically I'm just waiting for you, I have some free time and I'd love to dedicate it to this project. If you can think of any way I can help you at this stage, maybe linking photo's, maybe circling grafts, just let me know mate !

AlmostUndone
03-06-2016, 06:36 PM
@Almostundone, is there any way I can help you out with recipient already ? Basically I'm just waiting for you, I have some free time and I'd love to dedicate it to this project. If you can think of any way I can help you at this stage, maybe linking photo's, maybe circling grafts, just let me know mate !

I felt it necessary to begin my own analysis of the donor area. It's quite almost ready, but cost me those few days which I could have spent linking recipient photos. But I wouldn't mind linking them, so I won't need to upload 60 large-sized photographs for you?

You can't circle any grafts before I've taken the final photographs. No I can't promise it'll be done this month. It depends a bit on the sun's angle into my apartment; I rented huge electric lights for the "before" pictures, but it was more convenient to rely on daylight as I did in the rest of the photos.

Arashi
03-07-2016, 08:44 AM
I felt it necessary to begin my own analysis of the donor area. It's quite almost ready, but cost me those few days which I could have spent linking recipient photos. But I wouldn't mind linking them, so I won't need to upload 60 large-sized photographs for you?

You can't circle any grafts before I've taken the final photographs. No I can't promise it'll be done this month. It depends a bit on the sun's angle into my apartment; I rented huge electric lights for the "before" pictures, but it was more convenient to rely on daylight as I did in the rest of the photos.

Hmmm not even this month, that's quite a disappointment. But then again, it's your project man and I'm grateful you're doing all this.

Again, if there's any way I can help out to speed things up, take some work of your table, just let me know.

Good luck !

AlmostUndone
03-08-2016, 01:11 PM
Arashi eh, I'm working my ass off even when I'm not engaged to this project. My own analysis killed off a week at least, but I really wanted to make an easy way for anyone to see how many hairs were lost.

Verifying the analysis you made is slow work, as it's difficult to look up numbers, and with the need to compare before/after images side by side. In my analysis you don't always need to compare the images side by side. I composed a rectangular grid where all the circled extraction sites fall into groups of four. You can just look up any arbitrary group from the excel sheet to see if everything adds up, and circling errors are also easy to detect in this way.

I counted exactly the same result as you previously did in the first area. You counted 91 hairs lost in 104 extraction points. I counted 89 hairs lost in 105 extraction points plus 2 sites, where we saw more hair in the "after" photo than in the "before photos.
Meaning this: 216 out of 305 + 2 hairs grew back. The rest, 91 hairs, were lost.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/CTEST_march.jpg

Arashi
03-08-2016, 02:59 PM
Arashi eh, I'm working my ass off even when I'm not engaged to this project. My own analysis killed off a week at least, but I really wanted to make an easy way for anyone to see how many hairs were lost.

Dont get me wrong mate, I know you do. It's a shitload of work. It's just the suspense man, we're so close to the final conclusion, can't wait ;) But again, I'm not complaining at all, in fact, I'm really grateful for all you're doing ! And I'm sure others are too. Without you we would never have had this analysis !




I counted exactly the same result as you previously did in the first area
Awesome !

AlmostUndone
03-13-2016, 04:50 PM
I counted 1243 lost hairs in my donor.

In the "before" images, I can confirm a total of 4354 hairs which existed in the extraction sites. In the "after" images, using all the multiple viewpoints available, I could verify no more than 3248 hairs left. This simple calculation reveals 1106 lost hairs.

However, I observed a bunch of extraction sites, where we could see more hairs in the "after"-image than in the "before"-image. That totals up to 137 hairs (named in the excel sheet as "reduntant hairs"). This comparison shows that there were 4354+137-3248 = 1243 lost hairs in total.

I should be able to justify every hair count in the images by looking at the extraction sites from all the viewpoints we have. My analysis has the advantage over Arashi's in being relatively easy for anyone to verify. Instead of individual extraction points, the basic unit of my analysis is a group of 4 extraction points. Now hopefully I remembered to include everything:

EXCEL COUNT SHEET: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donor_count_march.xls



Left side, before: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donor_left_before_98.jpg
Right side, before: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donor_right_before_98.jpg

Left side, after: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donor_left_after_98.jpg
Right side, after: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/donor_right_after_98.jpg

Left side, extractions: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_extractions97.jpg
Left side, extractions (AN ADDITIONAL VIEWPOINT): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_extractions97%20-%20A16%20ADDITIONAL%20PICTURE.jpg
Right side, extractions: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_extractions97.jpg
Right side, extractions (AN ADDITIONAL VIEWPOINT): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_extractions_97%20-%20B15%20ADDITIONAL%20PICTURE.jpg

AlmostUndone
03-13-2016, 05:25 PM
Is everything here correct, I'll need to inquire.

Arashi
03-13-2016, 07:16 PM
I counted 1243 lost hairs in my donor.

That's 12% more lost hairs than I counted. But that's pretty acceptable to me (I think I've been quite conservative indeed in my counting). If the amount of hair in your recipient is anywhere between 1106-1243 hairs, then we're just looking at a normal FUE. And I'm betting money on it that that's what we're going to see :)

Remember: 80% regrowth means that we'll need to see 5x more hair than that ;)

JJJJrS
03-13-2016, 07:49 PM
Nice work guys! It's great to finally see a definitive analysis of the HST procedure. I thought it wouldn't be feasible beyond a 50 graft test procedure but the effort and dedication shown here is very impressive!


That's 12% more lost hairs than I counted. But that's pretty acceptable to me (I think I've been quite conservative indeed in my counting). If the amount of hair in your recipient is anywhere between 1106-1243 hairs, then we're just looking at a normal FUE. And I'm betting money on it that that's what we're going to see :)

Remember: 80% regrowth means that we'll need to see 5x more hair than that ;)

That was the conclusion I came to after the last analysis I did. Nice to finally be able to prove it though.

AlmostUndone
03-14-2016, 01:09 PM
That's 12% more lost hairs than I counted. But that's pretty acceptable to me (I think I've been quite conservative indeed in my counting). If the amount of hair in your recipient is anywhere between 1106-1243 hairs, then we're just looking at a normal FUE. And I'm betting money on it that that's what we're going to see :)

The truth is apparently somewhere between your analysis and mine. I counted in the "before" images some bunch of hairs which you missed. And there lay a couple of small mistakes still intact in my work.

Some examples. "Area H" in your analysis: 16 and 65, both easy to see why they are incorrect, and 2, 14, which can be better seen from alternative viewpoints within the same image file. Secondary viewpoints in the same image may reveal some which you missed.
"Area I" in your analysis: 6 (the third hair can be seen from 2 or 3 different viewpoints in the image), 9 and 8.
"Area 9" in your analysis: 76, 148, 141, and 139 (The secondary angle in the before-image reveals 2 hairs you must have missed).
"Area 10" in your analysis: 24 and so on and so on.

There must be similar issues especially in "Area 9/9A" and maybe "Area K", or there are more mistakes in my analysis than what I can presently see.

Arashi
03-14-2016, 02:56 PM
Some examples. "Area H" in your analysis: 16 and 65, both easy to see why they are incorrect

I double checked each of the extraction points and there are of course several extraction points up for debate. H65 indeed was clearly incorrect though, should be -2, I corrected it in my sheet (will upload the changes later). H16 I'm not sure I agree with you there though, here it is: http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/H16.jpg In the before I see 2 hairs and in the after I see 2 too (the left one is a lot thinner/lighter but in the after photo but it's there). Maybe your point is though that it was a 3 hair graft and the hair to the right of H16 in the before photo is part of the same graft ? Yeah that's up for debate, it might indeed be but I figured it was too far away from the other 2 hairs. So I figured that's a one hair graft that's gone into sleeping mode. But I'm 50/50 on that one actually, it indeed also might be the same graft. In fact, now I'm looking at it some more, I'm indeed starting to think the most probable is that it was a 3 hair graft indeed.

Will look at your other points too now. But I didnt check alternative viewpoints so it's very well possible that some corrections indeed need to be made because of evidence shown in the alternative view.

Anyway good work mate !

Arashi
03-14-2016, 03:02 PM
Nice work guys! It's great to finally see a definitive analysis of the HST procedure. I thought it wouldn't be feasible beyond a 50 graft test procedure but the effort and dedication shown here is very impressive!



That was the conclusion I came to after the last analysis I did. Nice to finally be able to prove it though.

Hey JJJJrS, good to see you back man ! Yeah exciting times eh, I too figured it would be inpossible/infeasible to do this, but here we are ;) Exciting stuff !

Arashi
03-14-2016, 03:06 PM
BTW, I hadnt posted the results of my 2nd analysis yet (my double check), the number I'm currently at is 1168 lost hairs, so that's only 6% difference from your number !

AlmostUndone
03-14-2016, 03:34 PM
Well it's better than 12%... or perhaps you meant 10,2% or what




H16 I'm not sure I agree with you there though, here it is: http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/H16.jpg In the before I see 2 hairs and in the after I see 2 too (the left one is a lot thinner/lighter but in the after photo but it's there). Maybe your point is though that it was a 3 hair graft and the hair to the right of H16 in the before photo is part of the same graft ?
No, my point is that alternative angle which I included into my final update: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/H16_AlmostUndone.jpg


Will look at your other points too now. But I didnt check alternative viewpoints so it's very well possible that some corrections indeed need to be made because of evidence shown in the alternative view.

The errors I suggested to you were just some random examples; I didn't check most of it.

In my own analysis, I did hopefully look at all of those slim alternative viewpoints into the neighbouring area which already existed in the "before" main image. But neither I ever looked into any of those additional "Alternative viewpoints"-files which you can find earlier in this thread.

Arashi
03-14-2016, 03:47 PM
H2, H14, which can be better seen from alternative viewpoints within the same image file.
* H2 was a 4 hair graft IMHO and in the after photo I see 4 hairs too (the two to the right are very light/thin)
* H14 I noted as 3 hairs going to 2 hair graft but it might also be a 4 hair graft going to 2 hair graft (I think that's your explanation ?)


"Area I" in your analysis: 6 (the third hair can be seen from 2 or 3 different viewpoints in the image), 9 and 8.
I6: I see as 3 going to 1 hair graft, I think this is good ?
I9: agreed, should be -1, corrected it.
I8: agreed, should be -3, corrected it.


"Area 9" in your analysis: 76, 148, 141, and 139 (The secondary angle in the before-image reveals 2 hairs you must have missed).
*76: Yeah in 2nd view this actually seems to be a 5 going into 2 eh ! I changed it.
*139: Yeah 2nd view shows indeed that this should be -2, changed it
*141: Not sure what you're seeing here ? I do see 2 into 2, like I had it in my calcs (could even be 3 into 3 but that's not changing anything)
*148: agreed should be -1.



"Area 10" in your analysis: 24 and so on and so on.

I dont see an alternative viewpoint here ?

Arashi
03-14-2016, 03:51 PM
Anyway, Almostundone, it isn't my goal to get to a 100% accurate picture. I'm sure, like you said (and demonstrated), by analysing 2nd viewpoints more errors can be found. I'm now at 1173 lost hairs, that's pretty close to your 1243 anyway. For regeneration to occur we'll need to see WAY more hairs than 1200 in your recipient. If we end up with 1300 hairs, then we might go over everything in the donor again, perfecting it and see if we can find those 1300. But even then, that would be trying to (dis)prove that 5% regeneration happened. Who cares about 5% regeneration, LOL. And then there are always other uncertainties like the amount of hairs going into sleeping state or the amount of hairs that was in resting state in the pre picture. So trying to prove 5% regeneration is pointless anyway if you ask me.

I'd say it's time to look at recipient :)

If we'd end up with 1500 hairs in recipient for example, then I think it would make sense to go over everything again, analyse 2nd view points etc. But I highly doubt that. It would make a lot of sense that you'd end up with roughly 1.3 * 800 = 1040 hairs in recipient (since 1.3 seems to be a normal hasci recipient density)

50% regrowth btw would mean that we'd need to see roughly 2400-2500 hairs in your recipient. Which already seems impossible cause that would mean an average of 3 hairs/graft !!! LOL

AlmostUndone
03-14-2016, 04:52 PM
* H2 was a 4 hair graft IMHO and in the after photo I see 4 hairs too (the two to the right are very light/thin)
* H14 I noted as 3 hairs going to 2 hair graft but it might also be a 4 hair graft going to 2 hair graft (I think that's your explanation ?)
* I6: I see as 3 going to 1 hair graft, I think this is good ?
*141: Not sure what you're seeing here ? I do see 2 into 2, like I had it in my calcs (could even be 3 into 3 but that's not changing anything)
Jus saying there was a viewpoint added in one of my last updates which may have helped me. In the down-left corner:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/right_side_final_98.jpg


I dont see an alternative viewpoint here ?
I know. I just decided to bring this one to your attention, when in fact it may be my mistake to mark it as a 5 going into a 4.


I'm sure, like you said (and demonstrated), by analysing 2nd viewpoints more errors can be found.
I think I managed to analyze them all myself. Here it's mostly just down to carelessness then. But I've had enough of the donor, for now. Kinda feel bad to keep you guys waiting a while for recipient stuff hmm

HTsoon
03-14-2016, 05:05 PM
After you guys are done disproving donor regeneration, I got another task for you guys, disproving the Easter bunny LOL. Jk jk

cocacola
03-19-2016, 07:19 PM
As someone who did an hst, my position was always innocent until proven guilty.

However, in the light of new evidence i must agree that to come up with some sort of acceptable regeneration figure we would need to see a very thick receipient. Something that i never seen with hasci.

At this point i think a class action becomes the most logical resolution as if we see no regeneration this becomes pure scam. I hope we have any documentation of 80% regeneration claims by hasci.

Arashi
03-30-2016, 10:07 AM
Any updates ?

AlmostUndone
04-01-2016, 02:00 PM
Any updates ?

Nada. I never got home in time to get the right amount of light from outside, and the next two weeks are gonna be pretty tight for me. Damn.

Canucks
04-03-2016, 12:55 PM
Great job AlmostUndone and Arashi !
@ Arashi from the analysis do you think they're splitting the follicle or just removing the whole thing (i.e. an fue with smaller punch)?

Arashi
04-04-2016, 06:50 AM
Great job AlmostUndone and Arashi !
@ Arashi from the analysis do you think they're splitting the follicle or just removing the whole thing (i.e. an fue with smaller punch)?

Most certainly they split it. It's what we saw from the petridish photo's before and it's what we see here: 3 hair grafts growing back as 1 or 2 hair graft is most common.

Swooping
04-09-2016, 04:07 PM
Great job AlmostUndone and Arashi !
@ Arashi from the analysis do you think they're splitting the follicle or just removing the whole thing (i.e. an fue with smaller punch)?

He is using a smaller punch to partially split them in a vertical manner. Not manipulating the hair follicle structure itself further in vitro AFAIK.

If the hair follicle is split horizontally it can apparently regenerate and quite often too, however the hair follicle will grow back thinner (diameter decrease); http://drcarloswesley.com/T/06082014.pdf.

Arashi
04-10-2016, 01:18 PM
He is using a smaller punch to partially split them in a vertical manner. Not manipulating the hair follicle structure itself further in vitro AFAIK.

If the hair follicle is split horizontally it can apparently regenerate and quite often too, however the hair follicle will grow back thinner (diameter decrease); http://drcarloswesley.com/T/06082014.pdf.

I remember Dr Nigam tried that, he failed. But he's an idiot so not sure what to think of it. I also remember that Dr Aaron Gardner said on this forum that he thought it would be possible to dissect the follicle under a microscope and make 2 out of 1 that way. He also said that it's not feasible to do so because of the man hours needed, I think he predicted 5 minutes per follicle, so 12 per hour, so rougly 100 hairs for 1 day of work, so that's not feasible unfortunately. Maybe with some machine/robot though...

But splitting them vertically, blindly, like HASCI does, that's not working for sure. Hopefully AlmostUndone has some time for us in the coming weeks, so we can see the results :)

AlmostUndone
04-17-2016, 01:53 AM
I had huge plans to do it next weekend, but I was just booked there to a very occasional side-job o' mine. However.... the following next weeks look veeery promising.

I'm still probably gonna depend on daylight. So there's another variable.

Arashi
04-17-2016, 04:11 PM
I had huge plans to do it next weekend, but I was just booked there to a very occasional side-job o' mine. However.... the following next weeks look veeery promising.

I'm still probably gonna depend on daylight. So there's another variable.

Ok good to hear the next weeks look promising ! Good luck !

AlmostUndone
05-01-2016, 06:25 AM
Today I shot the recipient. Obviously it will take a while to make the necessary connections, and then we can see if we have enough pictures to answer the question in this thread's title

AlmostUndone
05-01-2016, 01:25 PM
Anybody can help me get started. Let's connect these two images.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/61-connect.jpg

Goal: find 1 common hair or follicle

AlmostUndone
05-06-2016, 01:09 PM
Ok, so it's been 11 months, and by now we can get an pretty strong idea about what 800 grafts looks like. I've included before and after into one image so it's starting to make sense:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_work_11months.jpg

Arashi
05-07-2016, 11:57 AM
Good job mate ! Good luck with linking all the photo's, if you want me to do something, let me know. Otherwise I'll just do the counting again.

AlmostUndone
05-07-2016, 12:45 PM
Good job mate ! Good luck with linking all the photo's, if you want me to do something, let me know. Otherwise I'll just do the counting again.

Ok mate, good to hear of you! I know you can count, but I need some time to compose the necessary photos. Thanks.

AlmostUndone
05-12-2016, 01:12 PM
I need help or some idea how manage this one. Need to find a before-after connection as high up as possible in the picture... (Or at least somewhat higher than the current red line which I hope is correctly drawn.)

https://www.dropbox.com/home/Public?preview=task11.jpg


Otherwise I don't have much left to do before we can count the recipient.

Arashi
05-14-2016, 06:05 AM
I need help or some idea how manage this one. Need to find a before-after connection as high up as possible in the picture... (Or at least somewhat higher than the current red line which I hope is correctly drawn.)

https://www.dropbox.com/home/Public?preview=task11.jpg


Otherwise I don't have much left to do before we can count the recipient.

Your link doesnt work

AlmostUndone
05-14-2016, 01:02 PM
Your link doesnt work

Sorry, I forgot to paste public link. Actually, I managed to solve my problem already. Came home, sat down and found out the solution. I'll let you know if I get stuck again.

Arashi
05-15-2016, 07:45 AM
Sorry, I forgot to paste public link. Actually, I managed to solve my problem already. Came home, sat down and found out the solution. I'll let you know if I get stuck again.

Great to hear ! Sounds like you're making very good progress, nice !

AlmostUndone
05-15-2016, 04:17 PM
Great to hear ! Sounds like you're making very good progress, nice !

I'm pretty sure it will be done this week or the next.

If you have time more than I have, here's a relatively easy one. I just need to put the red line into place (in the picture to the right):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/task12.jpg

AlmostUndone
05-18-2016, 08:00 PM
Here is the score. We might need more pictures. If so, let me know where and what.

The shooting angles in the "11 months after" -pictures differ considerably from the "before"-pictures. So maybe we might have to take more photos later, hm?

Before:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_before_97.jpg

After, 11 months:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_11months.jpg

Wounds after the procedure:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recep_wounds.jpg

Arashi
05-21-2016, 06:43 AM
Hey almostundone,

I think I might have some time this weekend. Any updates you can post which I can build upon ?

BTW, by looking at your recpient it's already pretty clear that the majority are singles, then doubles and I see a few tripples at first sight. This already implicates that we're looking at less than 1.5 hair/graft. Which means that we already know the result: it did not work (what a surprise, LOL). But we still need the complete analysis. So I'll try to help you out here.

AlmostUndone
05-21-2016, 03:39 PM
Hey almostundone,

I think I might have some time this weekend. Any updates you can post which I can build upon ?

No.

I found one more "before" pic to add. In places it's sharper than the rest:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-04-08%2010.51.28.jpg

Maybe sometimes in summertime I should try to photograph the recipient from an angle closer to the "before" pictures? Especially the left temple ie. my left, your right
(unless the new picture I provided does anything)

AlmostUndone
05-21-2016, 04:42 PM
Compare the new "before" picture to the 4th picture from the right, lower row, in the "11 months after" file. The angles are not far apart

AlmostUndone
05-22-2016, 04:03 PM
Here's some help with understanding the differences in perspective:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/pleft_before-after1.png
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/pleft_before-after2.png
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/pleft_before_comparison.png

AlmostUndone
05-22-2016, 04:22 PM
One more https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/pleft_after1.jpg

AlmostUndone
05-26-2016, 03:49 PM
Actually I think I should take some more pictures of my right side next week, mm?

AlmostUndone
05-28-2016, 02:53 AM
I quickly expect to hear suggestions for ntaking new pictures, if needed. Thanks

Arashi
05-28-2016, 03:07 PM
I quickly expect to hear suggestions for ntaking new pictures, if needed. Thanks

Hi mate, sorry I'm low on free time these days. I did take a look at your pictures last week but I couldnt make much sense out of them, let alone count hairs. Not sure how the pics link into each other and the angles indeed were problematicly different

AlmostUndone
05-28-2016, 04:19 PM
Hi mate, sorry I'm low on free time these days. I did take a look at your pictures last week but I couldnt make much sense out of them, let alone count hairs. Not sure how the pics link into each other and the angles indeed were problematicly different

To clarify,
Post #190 contains "before"-photos and "11 months after" -photos. These should be quite enough for the analysis, when successfully linked. (Sorry, I should have ordered the pictures better. But my computer is at the end of its leash, so it probably takes 10 minutes just to move one layer.)
Post #192 contains a nice picture, which I was planning to add to the "before procedure" image.
Post #194-#195 just shows you how some of the above images are linked. You can see the orange shape which I randomly drew; it's the same orange shape in all pics an angles.

I hope I'll have time to take more pictures soon and help you with properly linking them... but that's all for then.

censur
06-16-2016, 03:07 AM
Any updates guys? :)

I am, like many others, very very greatful for you guys helping everyone find out the truth about HST. I guess we will have the final conclusion soon - if it works or not.

IF you can prove there is no donor regeneration at all I guess the only way forward is a lawsuit or settlement with HASCI?
I am, however, considering HASCI to be innocent until proven guilty, so I will definitely await the final conclusion before saying anything negative about their treatment.
I am still really hoping it does work. Otherwise I have already made a very bad decision to undergo several HST:s.

caddarik79
06-16-2016, 07:49 AM
-

caddarik79
06-16-2016, 07:51 AM
Any updates guys? :)

I am, like many others, very very greatful for you guys helping everyone find out the truth about HST. I guess we will have the final conclusion soon - if it works or not.

IF you can prove there is no donor regeneration at all I guess the only way forward is a lawsuit or settlement with HASCI?
I am, however, considering HASCI to be innocent until proven guilty, so I will definitely await the final conclusion before saying anything negative about their treatment.
I am still really hoping it does work. Otherwise I have already made a very bad decision to undergo several HST:s.


and how is your result after several HST (how many?)
I am considering going for a second but cannot do that in the coming months, rather 2017.

AlmostUndone
06-16-2016, 02:23 PM
There's no way for me to take new pictures using natural light, before end of next month (the sun is now too high to reach any of my rooms). In the meanwhile I was hoping someone would try to count all the hairs in the recipient using the existing before and after-pictures. Let someone tell me it can't be done.

Arashi
06-17-2016, 07:28 AM
There's no way for me to take new pictures using natural light, before end of next month (the sun is now too high to reach any of my rooms). In the meanwhile I was hoping someone would try to count all the hairs in the recipient using the existing before and after-pictures. Let someone tell me it can't be done.

So your approach would be to just count ALL the hairs in the both recipient areas that was implanted in ? And then do that for after and before ? Hmmm interesting idea, I think that would work better than trying to pinpoint every extraction point ... In that case we'd just need to link before and after without having to pay much attention to the extraction points themselves (other than making sure that we've pinpointed the whole area)

Still, it's quite difficult since there are a lot of those light coloured hairs, like you're wondering if it's even there or not, both in before and after ... This seems to complicate the recipient a lot compared to the donor. However this seems to be much more the case for the after photo's, which is a good thing cause these can be shot again. The before photo's seem to be clearer.

Arashi
06-17-2016, 08:01 AM
I'm getting the impression that a lot of those 'thin' hairs in your recipient are hairs that just started growing in the last few months. Maybe it all gets clearer in a few months when those hairs have grown thicker. Hairs that start growing after a transplant, after haven fallen out, always start to grow in that same manner (very thin at first). So maybe we should wait a few months and then shoot the photo's again, what do you think ? Of course we could count before already (and even have a go at after of course)

*EDIT*

Look, here's an example of what I'm saying: http://hasci-exposed.com/images/example.jpg

These are new hairs that just started growing in the last 1-3 months. They start as very thin hair and mostly are curled in a weird way (which tends to get better of the months). I think this complicates the process at this point. I think it might be a lot easier to count in a few months, once these hairs are a bit thicker.

AlmostUndone
06-17-2016, 11:18 AM
So your approach would be to just count ALL the hairs in the both recipient areas that was implanted in ? And then do that for after and before ? Hmmm interesting idea, I think that would work better than trying to pinpoint every extraction point ... In that case we'd just need to link before and after without having to pay much attention to the extraction points themselves (other than making sure that we've pinpointed the whole area)

To consider pinpointing every extraction (implantation?) point, the before/after shooting angles should have to be very identical. But I'll somehow hope to achieve that at the end of July.

I'm getting the impression that the recipient looks the same as two months ago anyways.

Yes some of the hairs were strangely curled, but got better with time.

AlmostUndone
08-15-2016, 01:22 PM
Hmm sorry about the delay. Been very busy last month. I'll try to take the photos soon

AlmostUndone
08-19-2016, 05:54 AM
I've got myself some 200 new photos to sort out, today 15 months after the procedure. Looking pretty good, we'll see

AlmostUndone
08-22-2016, 11:24 AM
I put the groundwork in place. The photo angles are beginning to match, but at this stage progress is gonna be very slow. (And my computer is even slower.)

Before (April 2015) (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_before_august22.jpg)
After (August 2016) (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_after_august22.jpg)

AlmostUndone
08-23-2016, 01:51 PM
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_comparison.jpg

AlmostUndone
08-24-2016, 06:02 AM
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_comparison2.jpg

AlmostUndone
09-01-2016, 01:38 AM
Hey, I think one more week, and the final answer shall be laid before your eyes. We're almost there now.

cocacola
09-05-2016, 08:18 PM
Thank you for taking the time to explore this thing in such depth! I am hoping results will show some regeneration, but if they dont show any i wonder if we have any sort recourse versus hasci...

AlmostUndone
09-09-2016, 04:35 PM
Before (left side) (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_before_left_95.jpg)

Before (right side) (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_before_right_95.jpg)


Thirteen months after (left side) (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_after_left_95.jpg)

Thirteen months after (right side) (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_after_right_95.jpg)







There is it. The final answer is in those pics! I put in immense markings, and now it shouldn't be hard for someone to count what the regeneration rate is.

Oh, time is up. I have done my share, delivered what I promised. I hope the pictures are enough to count all the new hair in the recipient, but I won't be doing it myself. Cheers

caddarik79
09-10-2016, 01:29 AM
Hello Almostundone,

Euuuuuuh, it seems that you provided pictures of your recipient.
But the regeneration debate is about what comes back in the donor area... no?
Their claim is that 85% of what is taken in donor will come back.

I don't get how could we figure this out with recipient ara pictures.

AlmostUndone
09-10-2016, 03:56 AM
Hello Almostundone,

Euuuuuuh, it seems that you provided pictures of your recipient.
But the regeneration debate is about what comes back in the donor area... no?
Their claim is that 85% of what is taken in donor will come back.

I don't get how could we figure this out with recipient ara pictures.

A while back we already did two separate analysis of the donor which you'll find earlier in this thread: Before and after, just like the recipient. What more do you wish for??

caddarik79
09-10-2016, 06:30 AM
Sorry did not see that. What were the conclusion for donor ?

AlmostUndone
09-10-2016, 08:28 AM
Arashi's analysis: 1166 hairs lost in the donor. (on page 15 of this thread)
My own analysis: 1243 hairs lost in the donor (on page 16 of this thread)

My analysis had a very different concept from Arashi's. The results for both oughta be re-checked at some point

AlmostUndone
09-10-2016, 01:20 PM
Fifteen months after, not thirteen months.

AlmostUndone
09-18-2016, 02:45 PM
What happened guys? One year ago - no, five months ago you tell me you are very excited, but can't now perhaps help out a little bit. Cocacola, cadarrik? What should we do??

Look how much work I've done guys! Today I updated the pictures one more time (See links above) so you guys should now be able to easily figure out the final answer, tomorrow, if you'd like.

Arashi
09-20-2016, 06:57 AM
What happened guys? One year ago - no, five months ago you tell me you are very excited, but can't now perhaps help out a little bit. Cocacola, cadarrik? What should we do??

Look how much work I've done guys! Today I updated the pictures one more time (See links above) so you guys should now be able to easily figure out the final answer, tomorrow, if you'd like.

Agreed, I also think it's a good idea of one of them would do the final counting. Because if I'd do it and I'd tell the world 'surprise, HASCI is just an expensive FUE, no new hair was created at all', they'd just say the research was bad, like they've been saying so far.

Anyway really awesome job so far Almostundone, I know how hard it was to get to where you are now, so much work !

Arashi
10-04-2016, 11:19 AM
What happened guys? One year ago - no, five months ago you tell me you are very excited, but can't now perhaps help out a little bit. Cocacola, cadarrik? What should we do??

So it seems no one is interested in the final conclusion. Well I guess we know the answer already. You had 800 grafts transplanted and you've lost roughly 1200 hairs in donor as we found in your donor analysis. Combine that with the fact that we've seen earlier HASCI transplants roughly 1.5 hair/graft and yeah, we know the answer already I guess. HASCI's magic trick is just a FUE with 1.5 hair/graft on average.

Still if no one wants to do it, I might do the final calcs, but currently I'm really busy

Swooping
10-04-2016, 04:32 PM
So it seems no one is interested in the final conclusion. Well I guess we know the answer already. You had 800 grafts transplanted and you've lost roughly 1200 hairs in donor as we found in your donor analysis. Combine that with the fact that we've seen earlier HASCI transplants roughly 1.5 hair/graft and yeah, we know the answer already I guess. HASCI's magic trick is just a FUE with 1.5 hair/graft on average.

Still if no one wants to do it, I might do the final calcs, but currently I'm really busy

Hey Arashi, how you doing.

Arashi
10-20-2016, 07:38 PM
Hey Arashi, how you doing.

Hey Swooping how are you doing mate ?

Everything fine here. I've just started counting the recipient since nobody seems to feel like doing it. On the one hand it's kind of unnecessary, but on the other hand, the work doesn't feel complete without it.

Arashi
10-20-2016, 07:58 PM
@Almostundone: I've started mapping the before/after the way I previously did (coloured lines and numbers) and man you've done a great job again mate :) Everything I checked tonight you've mapped correctly, that must have been some blood, sweat and tears to get that done, big respect ! I've started on your left temple, a bit above the area where grafts got transplanted so it's easier to link before to after. Once I've mapped that area I'll move onto the transplanted area to do the counting.

Depending on the time I have I hope to have everything ready in about 2 weeks.

AlmostUndone
10-21-2016, 06:06 AM
Yup, glad to hear from you mate. The enclosed areas inside the blue borders supposedly represent unchanged areas.

Hope you're not looking at the older versions of the images. (Sometimes maybe two weeks after initially posting the image links, I was still updating the photos, with a few added angles and corrections)

I'll be following this thread in case you have a request for additional photos, for any location.

Arashi
10-21-2016, 11:45 AM
Yup, glad to hear from you mate. The enclosed areas inside the blue borders supposedly represent unchanged areas.

Hope you're not looking at the older versions of the images. (Sometimes maybe two weeks after initially posting the image links, I was still updating the photos, with a few added angles and corrections)

I'll be following this thread in case you have a request for additional photos, for any location.

Hey !

No just to be sure I downloaded the pics from the previous page yesterday night and started with them, I figured you might had updated them ;)
Busy day today with all kinds of stuff, not sure if I have time to continue but I will be over the coming days. Will keep you informed !

AlmostUndone
10-21-2016, 03:38 PM
No just to be sure I downloaded the pics from the previous page yesterday night and started with them, I figured you might had updated them ;)

I haven't updated them in weeks, so you're good :)

Arashi
10-21-2016, 06:02 PM
I was mapping/linking the area where no grafts where transplanted and also did a part of the area where grafts did get transplanted. I noticed that in that last area quite a few hairs that were on your before situation are now gone in the after situation. First thing that crossed my mind was that HASCI must have killed them (definite shockloss) but then I figured that this is the area (your temples) where you're balding, so most likely it's due to that natural balding process. Unfortunately this complicates the research a bit, because I figured to just treat the area as one part, count all hairs in before and in after and compare. But this won't work now, in fact I'm sure your net result isn't 800 grafts more in your donor area, but less, but that's just normal then.

So, I think it's best to continue to try to map/link the area, that's what I'm going to try to do. It's difficult because of this but I think it's doable.

Arashi
10-22-2016, 07:47 AM
You know, what takes the fun out of doing all this is that we know the answer already. Really it's so damn obvious if you look at your recipient. I mean we know you had 800 grafts tranplanted, we know you've lost around 1200 hairs in your donor. So for regrowth to have happened, we'll need to see more than 1.5 hair/graft on average in your recipient. One quick look is all it takes to easily see it's going to be less than that, not more.

So that takes the excitement away like I did feel when counting your donor. But oh well I guess we need to do this to really close this thing.

Third day of mapping for me today, going to try to continue every day for a few hours the upcoming days, looks like it might take about 1 week per temple ... I've found that the way to do it is to focus on the thick hairs in your recipient's before photo's, these are most likely to show up in the after photo's too (thin hairs mostly either died or got replaced with a fresh donor one)

Arashi
10-23-2016, 08:35 AM
So this is where I'm at right now:
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/B8_before.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/B8_after%20-%20Copy2.bmp

The farther away from the temple, the easier the analysis is, because the before situation is pretty much equal to the after situation. I'm confident my lines in this area are correct. The going gets a lot tougher closer to the temple, I'm also not even sure if the lines that I drew closest to the temple are 100% correct. The problem of course here is that the situation differs enormously here between before and after: this is the area where most grafts got transplanted and also the area where most grafts in the before situation died due to your balding process in the last year.

So I think it's going to be really hard to map this area like I've been doing. I think we need to attack it from another angle.Most hairs in the before photo in that area are quite thin already, these usually have died in the after situation, or are even (way) thinner. In the after situation we see a lot of thick hairs, these are transplanted hairs. So we could just count all those thick hairs in that area, add them to the other marked hairs outside that area (I've marked them with X but I'll need to go over them again I'm sure I've missed a LOT since I've been focusing on drawing the lines, not marking the X's) and see if we come close to that 800 transplanted grafts.

Anyway what do you think ?

Arashi
10-23-2016, 08:44 AM
BTW, I feel confident most lines are correct, only a few might need (slight) corrections. I think I'll go check everything first again and mark the missing grafts, because I'm sure a lot are missing. I want to make sure my current progress is correct before moving on

Arashi
10-23-2016, 09:08 AM
I'm uploading 2 improved versions as we speak, I should probably go over it all first before even uploading them, I'm sure I'll make more corrections today.

Arashi
10-23-2016, 09:29 AM
And uploading new versions. Man it's so easy to make a mistake when a hair in the before photo died and a new graft got transplanted close by. But it's relatively easy to spot errors because the geometrical forms between the lines in the before and after photo will be different, so I think this methodology works quite nice. All-in-all I think I can get the current mapping near perfect but the temple itself will remain difficult.

Anyway I'll keep checking my current progress first and when I feel confident my current work is near perfect I'll post it here.

Arashi
10-23-2016, 01:03 PM
Uploading new versions again, made some improvements but the area closest to the temple is still a bit uncertain.

One thing I hoped wasn't necessary is to look at the 'wounds' pictures, since just linking before to after by just looking at those 2 is a lot faster. But I think that I'll do that too, to get a better idea of where the new grafts SHOULD be. Anyway, still tons of work to do ...

BTW to me it seems that you drew those blue area's based on the wounds pictures, correct ? Maybe you have some work there, would be really helpful if you had for example wounds pictures with the same blue area's drawn.

AlmostUndone
10-23-2016, 03:32 PM
I think you've got alot of great work done Arashi.

I had done some initial work but I've no time to do more:
Left: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/l_scaffold1.jpg
Right: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/r_scaffold1.jpg


Here's some 'wounds' pics I picked for the left side. Probably not very helpful, but you decide:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_wouds_left_95.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_wouds_left_95_addendum.jpg


BTW to me it seems that you drew those blue area's based on the wounds pictures, correct ? Maybe you have some work there, would be really helpful if you had for example wounds pictures with the same blue area's drawn.

No, you are wrong. The blue areas have nothing to do with the wound pics. I drew the blue lines for areas, where I saw no new hairs between before/after.

Arashi
10-23-2016, 07:41 PM
Thanks mate, I've compared your initial work to my progress, it adds up and validates it :)

I've been working more on the left part of the pictures, linking and mapping and I've started to mark transplanted hair with red tiny circles (I should probably change colour since the red doesn't jump out enough).

Man it's a hell of a job :) But I'm hoping that end of this week I'm done with the left recipient.

Anyway I've uploaded the updated versions again, see post 231 (https://www.baldtruthtalk.com/threads/20249-HASCI-How-well-does-it-work-Now-we-ll-be-able-to-find-out%21?p=241893&viewfull=1#post241893)

(I've uploaded them but the site is still displaying the previous version, I guess due to caching or something).

Anyway enough for today, can't see any more hairs !

Arashi
10-24-2016, 07:23 PM
I had a few hours today to work on it again, I'm uploading my progress again (might take a while to display).

Changes:
* mapped upper right corner of the pictures
* mapped a big part of the upper left corner of the pictures
* removed yellow numbering (numbering grafts that appear in both after and before is useless)
* started adding numbering for transplanted grafts (white font)
* changed colour of circles for transplanted grafts from red to white (better noticeable)
* added a 'c' into all area's that I've double checked (I'm only inserting that 'c' into the before pictures) both for it being correct as for having marked died/transplanted grafts.
* marked more transplanted grafts
* minor corrections

Again can't see any more hairs for today, tomorrow a new day ..

Arashi
10-26-2016, 07:28 PM
Yesterday and today I've been mapping/linking more area, encircled more transplanted grafts (I just uploaded the new version to the link in post 231) and I've started mapping/linking a different after photo: http://www.hasci-exposed.com/B88_after.bmp
This extra photo was VERY helpful to better determine the amount of transplanted hair and also correcting some errors (I still have to correct some, there are some errors that I saw already, didnt have time yet to correct).
So, quite some progress again, but also still a long road ahead ...

Arashi
10-27-2016, 07:33 PM
@Almostundone:

Any idea what's up with the angle of the hairs in recipient_after_left photo b7 ? It's the only photo that shows the lower part of your left recipient but the angles of the hairs are really different than the angles in B4. This makes linking it way harder. Don't you have a photo of this area where the angles are like in B4 ?

Thanks !

AlmostUndone
10-28-2016, 07:40 AM
You could start with those, although I didn't take much time into rotating them for you.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/after_left_addendum281016.jpg


Here's one picture so you can see more of the B4 angle:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/B4_more.jpg

Arashi
10-28-2016, 09:12 AM
Thanks mate, these are helpful indeed !

One week per temple was a bit too optimistic it seems now, I figured I only needed 1 before and 1 after photo but that's impossible unfortunately sine there's no 1 photo that shows the whole area sharp enough. So we need several photo's. Luckily you've shot enough, so it's just a matter of time and dedication ...

Arashi
10-30-2016, 12:47 PM
So a little progress update, here's where I'm at right now:

After HST recipient photo's:
www.hasci-exposed.com/after_B4_more.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/after_B8.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/after_B9_main.bmp (the 'main' after photo)
www.hasci-exposed.com/after_B10.bmp

Before HST recipient photo's:
www.hasci-exposed.com/before_main.bmp (the 'main' before photo)
www.hasci-exposed.com/before2.bmp

As you can see, I've used 2 before photo's and 4 after photo's. As we need to determine how much new hairs were added to your recipient, the after photo quality for the recipient needs to be better than the before photo's, which are only needed to pinpoint the new grafts. Hence I needed 4 after photo's and 'only' 2 before photo's.

As you can see in the main before photo: www.hasci-exposed.com/before_main.bmp I've mapped the whole area. The only part that's not mapped in much detail is the temple part, this is because it's really hard to map. To me it SEEMS that most/all of the hairs there died and got replace with fresh donor ones, because the hairs are mostly very thin in the before photo's and very thick in the after photo's. So I'm tempted to count all hairs in that area as new ones. Luckily these are all singles, so if there's an error there it doesn't skew the result too much.

Anyway I'll now only need to go over the whole area again, add missing circles and count everything. But I'm tired of all this right now, will continue next week and do something else with my free time than count hairs, for a change ;)

AlmostUndone
10-30-2016, 04:06 PM
Anyway I'll now only need to go over the whole area again, add missing circles and count everything. But I'm tired of all this right now, will continue next week and do something else with my free time than count hairs, for a change ;)

That's a good idea probably. I'm surprised how well you're doing. I feel like that everything would have taken twice as long for me. I might compile the last 'wound' pictures soon just in case!

Tip: For counting purposes, it's not necessary to map all of the blue areas, as 99% of their surface show no new hairs.

Arashi
11-04-2016, 10:51 AM
My latest progress update:

After HST recipient photo's:
www.hasci-exposed.com/after_B4_more_LEFT.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/after_B8.bmp
www.hasci-exposed.com/after_B9_main.bmp (the 'main' after photo)
www.hasci-exposed.com/after_B10_RIGHT.bmp

Before HST recipient photo's:
www.hasci-exposed.com/before_main.bmp (the 'main' before photo)
www.hasci-exposed.com/before2.bmp

@Almostundone: do you have a way of linking one of the wound pictures to a before or after picture ? This would be extremely helpful ! Right now, it's sometimes really hard to see if there's a new graft or if it's just the same graft as before (especially if there's a graft with 'lighter' colour in the before picture, it might be that it's a dying graft and if there's a much 'darker' graft in pretty much the same spot, it looks like a new graft, but we can't know 100% sure. A link with the wounds pictures would remove the doubt here).

Anyway all this is a huge job, I'm not sure how much time I'll have the coming weeks but I guess this is going to take a while ...

AlmostUndone
11-06-2016, 04:14 AM
@Almostundone: do you have a way of linking one of the wound pictures to a before or after picture ? This would be extremely helpful ! Right now, it's sometimes really hard to see if there's a new graft or if it's just the same graft as before (especially if there's a graft with 'lighter' colour in the before picture, it might be that it's a dying graft and if there's a much 'darker' graft in pretty much the same spot, it looks like a new graft, but we can't know 100% sure. A link with the wounds pictures would remove the doubt here).

I don't. Sorry.

shazam
11-06-2016, 06:30 AM
HASCI seems to have achieved a very good result with Wesley Sneijder...

Arashi
11-06-2016, 02:21 PM
I don't. Sorry.

Well I have been staring for hours at the wounds pictures, just couldn't figure out how to link them to the before/after pictures but I've just managed to do it ! Exciting stuff, I was getting bored with this, but now that I've managed to link the wound pictures, it's become so much easier AND will yield a much better result ! I already noticed that not all transplanted grafts survived (like HASCI always claimed), this is what made the linking harder.

I'll upload the linked pictures soon

Arashi
11-06-2016, 02:58 PM
Here is how the wounds link into to the after picture:

http://www.hasci-exposed.com/after_B10_RIGHT.bmp
http://www.hasci-exposed.com/wounds - EDIT.bmp

* Yellow circles: grafts I've found via the wounds picture
* White circles: grafts I had located already via the previous method
* Red circles: grafts that didnt make it
* Green circles: grafts that were not transplanted but simply were there already.

Man, I'm quite excited, this speeds up the process big time AND makes it so much better :) I must admit, the idea of giving up was going through my mind, if you just compare after to before pictures, you'll never know 100% sure if a graft was new or not, IF there was a graft in the before picture that died and HASCI put a new one in roughly the same spot. But now with the wounds pictures we can pinpoint them all and we simply know for sure :)

AlmostUndone
11-06-2016, 05:33 PM
Wtf, how was that done? Very nice. ;) Here are more wound pictures:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/recipient_wounds_right_95.jpg

Ps. There is a semi-permanent red spot in the upper-right corner of the upper-right image. Maybe you can use it to link the wound pics to the before pics?