How does Dr. Wesley's Scarless Pilofocus work?

[stayhopeful]

Ohhhhh, this just depends on WHAT EXACTLY they extract from below the skin.

According to the patent claims, they always try to extract follicles "INTACT" - that's the reason why I highlighted this part ("INTACT FOLLICLES") in my previous posts. Intact follicles simply means "intact follicles" - that means, everything is still attached to the HAIR SHAFTS like the complete follicle bulb (including the DP), the complete inner- and outer root sheaths, as well as the dermal sheaths (the glassy outermost layer which surrounds every single follicle). In simple words, ALL hair producing cells.

A really cool approach would be the following (patented by IronMan):

Instead of simply plucking out hair shafts (hair follicle stem cells are still attached to plucked hair shafts!!) from above the skin's surface - simply leave the dead and coarse hair shafts behind in the skin, and "pluck in" and remove all the remaining parts/hair follicle producing follicle tissue/cells from below the skin.

That means, you would see absolutely NOTHING at the skin's surface after the procedure (there is not even the need to shave the donor area!), because you only extract hair follicle producing tissue from BELOW the skin's surface, while the HAIR SHAFTS itself (including the still attached follicular stem cells) still stick in the skin.

In more simple words ...

... doing exactly what Dr. Gho is doing - but everything just from BELOW the skin. Doing this is -in theory- not unrealistic at all, because with SUCH an approach, you just "denude" somewhat the dead and coarse hair shafts below the skin (just to get enough follicle tissue from them), while the dead coarse hair shafts itself still stick in the skin. The still attached follicle tissue to the hair shafts, will completely regenerate the follicle (very fast!) in the donor area, and the extracted grafts/follicle tissue (these grafts do not contain the dead and coarse hair shafts as you can clearly see them in normal extracted FUE grafts!) will produce also hair (after implantation) in the recipient area.

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

[Joker]

IM, I think I understand what you're saying. That is something we really need an answer on ASAP. Dr. Wesley should read up on the Gho technique and its applicability to this new process.

[youngin]

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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?

[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)..

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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!