How does Dr. Wesley's Scarless Pilofocus work?

[hellouser]

I think a lot of people would be suitable for more than 6000. Consider a donor area of 7cm x 32cm = 224cm2. Let's assume a donor density of 85fu/cm2. That gives 19040FU. I think because of the cluster of scarring and white dotting with traditional FUE you can push it to about 35% extraction or 6664. Let's say 6500. I do believe past this and the donor is shot. With this new method surface scarring will be eliminated so we don't need to worry about the clustering unsightly effect. I think 45% extraction might look not so bad. So 8568 may be possible.

So I'm guessing we're looking at maybe an increase from say 6000 to 8000. But that's just a guess. We'll have to wait and see.

That sounds good, but still unacceptable in 2013. Full out cure should have been a reality at least a decade ago.

That said, Gho should use this technique and increase the number of grafts per session for complete reversal. If even half the grafts regenerate out of 8,000, then we still have another 4,000 to use for a combined 12,000 grafts. That alone is ALMOST complete coverage for a full NW7

Average balding around is between 250-300cm2. For decent density, at 50 grafts/cm2, you need 15,000 grafts. At 250cm2, 12,500 grafts.

Its a damn shame Gho isnt doing much lessen the need for 7 visits over a span of 5+ years to get complete reversal with his HST method.

Regardless and I'll repeat, unacceptable in 2013.... ALL of todays methods and findings. Cure should have been here A LONG TIME AGO. To boast about these small incremental improvements is to fall privy to naivety and ignorance.

[Breaking Bald]

Kind of off topic, but I wonder if a device like this, if it is truly scar less will be used for hair removal from unwanted areas?? Like something more effective than electrolysis.

[Follicle Death Row]

I still don't get why so many of you guys are so excited with this when theres no regeneration and we're still limited by about 6,000 grafts (on average) of donor grafts?

All this does is give scarless results, which Rahal/H&W/Gho have already achieved. So whats the big deal?

I think a lot of people would be suitable for more than 6000. Consider a donor area of 7cm x 32cm = 224cm2. Let's assume a donor density of 85fu/cm2. That gives 19040FU. I think because of the cluster of scarring and white dotting with traditional FUE you can push it to about 35% extraction or 6664. Let's say 6500. I do believe past this and the donor is shot. With this new method surface scarring will be eliminated so we don't need to worry about the clustering unsightly effect. I think 45% extraction might look not so bad. So 8568 may be possible.

So I'm guessing we're looking at maybe an increase from say 6000 to 8000. But that's just a guess. We'll have to wait and see.

[amadeus]

Do not become hopeful about this donor doubling idea. Nothing in the patent says the machine will have enough control to stop after the stem cell bulge at the bottom of the follicle and CUT the hair. Everything in the patent refers to punching and pulling out the whole hair.

I really hate to agree with Ironman, but I think this is what Spencer was eluding to when he said that theoretically there could be regeneration. It makes perfect sense. This part of the surgery does not have to be listed on the patent. It really has nothing to do with the device itself.

Fingers crossed! With or without regeneration this is major!

[PayDay]

I still don't get why so many of you guys are so excited with this when theres no regeneration and we're still limited by about 6,000 grafts (on average) of donor grafts?

All this does is give scarless results, which Rahal/H&W/Gho have already achieved. So whats the big deal?

Neither H&W or Rahal claim to give scarless results and Gho still cuts blindly from the outside of the scalp, but leaves very minimal scars from what I can tell.

I'm also assuming that it is easier to punch through the fat from under the follicles with a blunt tool especially when you have full visibility, which lessons the likelihood of transection. The surgeon might be able to maneuver the splayed follicle into a blunt punch easier and not cause any damage. There is also some suction involved according to the patent so maybe this helps to straighten the splay once it is cut a little?

I would think that boring in from the top blindly would make extraction of a whole or a specific part of the follicle even more difficult than coming from under it with full visibility.

[hellouser]

What do you mean Rahal and H&W achieved this ?
H&W only do FUT (strip), and Rahal does traditional HTs (FUT, FUE)..

AFAIK, H&W and Rahal do FUE with minimal scarring (or unnoticeable anyway).

Seriously, who gives a FVCK if we're still limited, this is NOT a solution to AGA.

[youngin]

No - that's necessary, because there simply is no such thing like "bulge of stem cells at the bottom" of hair follicles nor a "stem cell bulge at the bottom" of hair follicles.

There are obviously stem cells at the bottom, which I referred to as a bulge. I'm so sorry you disliked my wording.

[youngin]

All this does is give scarless results, which Rahal/H&W/Gho have already achieved. So whats the big deal?

Rahal and H&W can do scarless?????? Its exciting cause its innovative. It's probably faster and more accurate than traditional FUE. Which hopefully means cheaper.

[534623]

Sorry your English language doesn't work. I didn't say FOLLICULAR BULGE. I said "stem cell bulge at the bottom" rephrased to mean "bulge of stem cells at the bottom". Do you want me to define the word BULGE for you? Trolling piece of shit.

No - that's necessary, because there simply is no such thing like "bulge of stem cells at the bottom" of hair follicles nor a "stem cell bulge at the bottom" of hair follicles.

[aim4hair]

I still don't get why so many of you guys are so excited with this when theres no regeneration and we're still limited by about 6,000 grafts (on average) of donor grafts?

All this does is give scarless results, which Rahal/H&W/Gho have already achieved. So whats the big deal?

What do you mean Rahal and H&W achieved this ?
H&W only do FUT (strip), and Rahal does traditional HTs (FUT, FUE)..

[hellouser]

I still don't get why so many of you guys are so excited with this when theres no regeneration and we're still limited by about 6,000 grafts (on average) of donor grafts?

All this does is give scarless results, which Rahal/H&W/Gho have already achieved. So whats the big deal?

[534623]

Waiiit.. Are you saying this will expand donor supply?

That depends on what exactly do you mean with "this".

Anyway, whatever you try (Wesley's removal of INTACT follicles or partial removal FROM UNDER THE SKIN - so-called "follicular unit splay" in the subcutaneous layer (fat layer) ....


...causes the biggest hurdles. When you look at the pic above, to remove/extract follicular units (FU's) from BELOW the skin (!) - doing this could, in fact, require bigger extraction tools to grasp all follicle bulbs intact from below the skin.

[Follicle Death Row]

Bloody hell! I had thought about this type of way of doing it before but didn't actually think it was possible. Fantastic!!!

So in short, laproscopic follicle removal. Nice, very nice. Sounds quite labour intensive but a damn sight better than current methods. Will follow this closely.

[youngin]

I'm not hopeful that it will work, but I think you may want to read the patent again. Section 100 states that incisions of variable size and locations may be made. I'm just wondering if there are enough stem cells in the dissected portion to regrow a hair without an additive (like Nigam uses). Perhaps IM can address this.

Section 100 is referring to the incision made to put the tool under your scalp.

[Joker]

I'm not hopeful that it will work, but I think you may want to read the patent again. Section 100 states that incisions of variable size and locations may be made. I'm just wondering if there are enough stem cells in the dissected portion to regrow a hair without an additive (like Nigam uses). Perhaps IM can address this.