A case of NW7 for in-vivo Doubling / HM / DP - Day 1 @ Dr. Nigam's

[gc83uk]

guys, try to focus on hasci tecnique, which seems to have some innovations in the field. Stop with this ridiculous indian claims.. all of us know that a professional hair surgeon has never sell pills for the weight. Come on shut up

Who are you telling to shut up?

What do you want to discuss on the Hasci technique, I guarantee you it's already been discussed.

[didi]

Ok
1.there are some complaints, I wouldnt say tons, how many complaints do we know of? 5?10?

2. Yes he did

3.Looks like he does wear wig

[elgorvanelsinki]

stop it, dr nigam wants really help us. choosing the best wig

[Arashi]

Ok
1.there are some complaints, I wouldnt say tons, how many complaints do we know of? 5?10?

2. Yes he did

3.Looks like he does wear wig

Ok, so even you confirm that he lies if he doesn't like the truth. Just wanted to check on your view on reality

[didi]

GC

Do we know why have 350 extractions, whats reason for so many holes? Where are all these xtra grafts?

[Arashi]

Who are you telling to shut up?

What do you want to discuss on the Hasci technique, I guarantee you it's already been discussed.

Elgor is just being sarcastic here, bro

[gc83uk]

GC

Do we know why have 350 extractions, whats reason for so many holes? Where are all these xtra grafts?

We don't know. We can guess, but we don't know for sure. Arashi, did you get an answer back from Kristel on that?

[gc83uk]

Elgor is just being sarcastic here, bro

Just piss*d off because they screwed up the test. Why they didn't just do 50 grafts pffft. Thanks for trying though mate, you put plenty of effort into it!

[Arashi]

GC

Do we know why have 350 extractions, whats reason for so many holes? Where are all these xtra grafts?

You don't get it, as usual. Probably mainly because you don't even TRY to help with the research. If you would have analysed the pictures yourself, you'd understand that when gc talks about a maximum, that means that there's simply no way you can find more than 350 spots that could even be considered as extraction site. It's quite fair to say that there realistically are around 300. Kristel confirmed that the discrepancy between the 203 extracted graft and that number would be a combination of needle pricks for sedation and transected hair.

Funny though, how you and Dr Nigam ALWAYS try to turn ANY thread into an (anti) Gho thread.

[Arashi]

Just piss*d off because they screwed up the test. Why they didn't just do 50 grafts pffft. Thanks for trying though mate, you put plenty of effort into it!

I know, I'm frustrated too that they messed up the photo's. But, like said though, I've asked Kristel to go for a new 50 graft test and this time hire a professional photographer. Let's see what happens, I don't believe they'll just leave it at this.

[elgorvanelsinki]

all of them are really strange. hasci had yo do 50 grafts an made two photos with some tattoos. it was not so hard. i'm frustrated, why the hell they don'y want to prove us your technique so we can definitely buy it and make them rich and us happy? still don't understand

[drnigams]

GC,
This is what i have to say--
1)the number of extractions at the donor(you all counted more than 300-350),should be counted as intervened donor ( successful extractions plus failed extractions) and not 200 grafts .
Even if they are failed extractions ,nothing to worry they will grow back shortly,it happens with our invivo extractions,but since root the follicle is not disturbed it should be fine.Hence first thing is it should not be counted as 200 graft extraction.
2)With this it means we have to first confirm total donor interventions(failed plus successful extractions)for extraction with single/double/triple follicles.(with a before pic and the pic after extractions).
And come to a right count of total number of follicles not just grafts intervened.
3)Once we know that,we will have to count the total follicles regenerated at the interventions at the donor and total follicles regenerated at the recipient(temples and scar)
4)I have not understood why did they discard 50 extractions.
5)Frankly i was expecting them to show longitudnally bisected follicle (not follicular unit),but was is seen in the petridish is follicles with bulb like fue extractions with transections.
5)Telogen theory is irrelevant as same is applicable for fut/fue while counting regen.
6)Even if few are telogen follicles ,they will regenerate after few months as the club is still at the donor,as in telogen the bulb and the shaft have separated.
7)The claim that stemcells are extracted and implanted after soaking in preservation medium to multiply follicle stemcells is ultimately proved as an ILLUSION.
8)I am not sure but is it mentioned in the thread that ..HASCI is expecting 200 follicle regen at recipient and 50 less than 200 at donor plus transected extractions regen at the donor.Please confirm what regen of total follicles at recipient and donor they are expecting to grow.
9)Recipient regen should be like fue as they have implanted the follicles with bulb like fue.We should check for doubles at scar and singles at temples.
10)Donor should match with the before pic of extraction sites( successful , failed extractions and transected extractions) count at donor should take into consideration the singles/double/triples.
11)The petri dish clearly shows as mentioned by the post by you all approx. 350plus follicles,which matches the extraction sites at donor approx.
Aperson walks into aclinic ,we see his 350plus follicles out of the scalp, we need to see atleast 350 plus follicles back on scalp ..anything above this is growth secondary to invivo follicular bisection.
You should let me know how many graft regenerated and than can calculate the real result.

someTE=gc83uk;115986]Dr Nigam,

I'm interested to hear your opinion on the recent 200 graft test by Dr Gho. There are no results to speak of yet, but I would like to know your opinion on the grafts in the petri dish? Have you seen this image... 200 grafts - 150 singles and 50 doubles

Nobody will accuse you of bashing, I just want your honest opinion on it.[/QUOTE]

[Arashi]

all of them are really strange. hasci had yo do 50 grafts an made two photos with some tattoos. it was not so hard. i'm frustrated, why the hell they don'y want to prove us your technique so we can definitely buy it and make them rich and us happy? still don't understand

I think HASCI would really need to proof their technique and show us SOLID proof. 99% of the times Didi is talking out of his arse, but he does have a point that it's weird that after all these years we're still even discussing Gho's technique. That's why I've also strongly urged them to re-do the test, this time only 50 grafts and get a professional photographer who knows how to make solid macro photo's.

[Arashi]

GC,
This is what i have to say--
1)the number of extractions at the donor(you all counted more than 300-350),should be counted as intervened donor ( successful extractions plus failed extractions) and not 200 grafts .
Even if they are failed extractions ,nothing to worry they will grow back shortly,it happens with our invivo extractions,but since root the follicle is not disturbed it should be fine.Hence first thing is it should not be counted as 200 graft extraction.
2)With this it means we have to first confirm total donor interventions(failed plus successful extractions)for extraction with single/double/triple follicles.(with a before pic and the pic after extractions).
And come to a right count of total number of follicles not just grafts intervened.
3)Once we know that,we will have to count the total follicles regenerated at the interventions at the donor and total follicles regenerated at the recipient(temples and scar)
4)I have not understood why did they discard 50 extractions.
5)Frankly i was expecting them to show longitudnally bisected follicle (not follicular unit),but was is seen in the petridish is follicles with bulb like fue extractions with transections.
5)Telogen theory is irrelevant as same is applicable for fut/fue while counting regen.
6)Even if few are telogen follicles ,they will regenerate after few months as the club is still at the donor,as in telogen the bulb and the shaft have separated.
7)The claim that stemcells are extracted and implanted after soaking in preservation medium to multiply follicle stemcells is ultimately proved as an ILLUSION.
8)I am not sure but is it mentioned in the thread that ..HASCI is expecting 200 follicle regen at recipient and 50 less than 200 at donor plus transected extractions regen at the donor.Please confirm what regen of total follicles at recipient and donor they are expecting to grow.
9)Recipient regen should be like fue as they have implanted the follicles with bulb like fue.We should check for doubles at scar and singles at temples.
10)Donor should match with the before pic of extraction sites( successful , failed extractions and transected extractions) count at donor should take into consideration the singles/double/triples.
11)The petri dish clearly shows as mentioned by the post by you all approx. 350plus follicles,which matches the extraction sites at donor approx.
Aperson walks into aclinic ,we see his 350plus follicles out of the scalp, we need to see atleast 350 plus follicles back on scalp ..anything above this is growth secondary to invivo follicular bisection.
You should let me know how many graft regenerated and than can calculate the real result.

someTE=gc83uk;115986]Dr Nigam,

I'm interested to hear your opinion on the recent 200 graft test by Dr Gho. There are no results to speak of yet, but I would like to know your opinion on the grafts in the petri dish? Have you seen this image... 200 grafts - 150 singles and 50 doubles

Nobody will accuse you of bashing, I just want your honest opinion on it.

Hehe. There's so much nonsense in the above that I wouldn't know where to start. But since you asked for it, GC, I'l llet you do the talking

[didi]

'99% of the times Didi is talking out of his arse, but he does have a point that it's weird that after all these years we're still even discussing Gho's technique.'