Pilofocus video

[NeedHairASAP]

Dr Cole

"Also, recognize that Pilofocus is a long way off if ever technology at this point. The device harvests tiny plugs deep in the scalp. This will fill in with scar tissue so it's absurd to suggest that it is scarless. If anything there will be more scar. What we don't know is what all this subcutaneous and intradermal scarring will do to the donor area. Right now, it is more theory than substance. They are quite fortunate to have financial backing. What we do have with our techniques and donor are treatment is proven results and improved healing. Proven is a whole lot better than unproven theory. Pilofocus also removes all of the deep stem cells. Thus, it is highly unlikely you will have any follicle regeneration. Instead, you will have a thin donor area with lots of gaps and tons of deep fibrous scar tissue."

Finally a doc says this. This was my first thought.... "how can rummaging around deep under the scalp with scissors be 'scarless' or without damage?"

I would classify pilofocus as downright scary.

[youngin]

Finally a doc says this. This was my first thought.... "how can rummaging around deep under the scalp with scissors be 'scarless' or without damage?"

I would classify pilofocus as downright scary.

That's not what he said. He said deep tissue scarring due to taking large grafts from below. Not "rummaging around". I doubt there will be any scarring from that, or else everyone whos ever had liposuction has a shitload of scars.

[hellouser]

Isn't Dr. Cole a strong proponent of Acell? Funny how he would negate Dr. Cooley's findings (and photographic evidence from Dr. Wesley) on Pilofocus + Acell itself creating regeneration.

Doesn't make sense... sounds like bias to me.

[Joker]

This is sort of funny because some people say Dr. Cole is supportive of the new technology, and then some people say he thinks it's terrible. Not exactly sure what to believe.

In any event, I think Dr. Cole's opinion is contrary to common sense (I am not a doctor, so I can't say for certain). With FUE, the "intradermal" scarring is still present because the FUE punch extends all the way down the length of the hair follicle past the bulb (bulbs are indeed present on FUE grafts). Yet this never seems to present a problem.

With the Piloscope, the only "intradermal" scarring is the removal of the bulb itself (again, something that is always extracted with every FUE graft). However, the extra scarring that comes with 1) cutting the surface of the skin, and 2) penetrating all of the skin's layers until the bulb is reached, is now eliminated. It is definitely - no matter how you look at it - a net reduction in scar tissue.

Dr. Wesley has already convincingly proven that there is no extra scar tissue caused by the "rummaging" because of the pocket that exists between certain layers.

Finally, with regard to follicle regeneration - and I'm saying this as a person who is still skeptical that follicle regeneration is even possible - Dr. Cole's critique is almost completely inapposite. He is criticizing the Piloscope for removing too much of each graft, failing to recognize that the Piloscope also has the ability to remove much smaller portions.

Not that it's a competition, but in my opinion Dr. Cole is being too critical of a study and a technology orders of magnitude more sophisticated than anything he has ever put together.

[Artista]

I know for fact that Dr Wesley has 100% of Dr Cole's support on the new Pilofocus technique.
Dr Cole was the first person to COMMEND Dr Wesley right after the presentation in San Fran'.
But regardless as to 'who thinks what' of Dr Wesley's technique..It WILL set a new GOLD STANDARD in this field of hair restoration. I have no doubts about that.

[hellouser]

I know for fact that Dr Wesley has 100% of Dr Cole's support on the new Pilofocus technique.
Dr Cole was the first person to COMMEND Dr Wesley right after the presentation in San Fran'.
But regardless as to 'who thinks what' of Dr Wesley's technique..It WILL set a new GOLD STANDARD in this field of hair restoration. I have no doubts about that.

Didi's comment in this thread is confusing though:

Dr Cole

"Also, recognize that Pilofocus is a long way off if ever technology at this point. The device harvests tiny plugs deep in the scalp. This will fill in with scar tissue so it's absurd to suggest that it is scarless. If anything there will be more scar. What we don't know is what all this subcutaneous and intradermal scarring will do to the donor area. Right now, it is more theory than substance. They are quite fortunate to have financial backing. What we do have with our techniques and donor are treatment is proven results and improved healing. Proven is a whole lot better than unproven theory. Pilofocus also removes all of the deep stem cells. Thus, it is highly unlikely you will have any follicle regeneration. Instead, you will have a thin donor area with lots of gaps and tons of deep fibrous scar tissue."

It goes against Acell being added into Pilofocus along with Dr. Wesley's presentation with Acell and Dr. Cooley being mentioned in it with the use of Acell.

Personally, the two don't add up so I can only dismiss Didi's comment and rely more so on Dr. Wesley's presentation as more credible.

Thoughts?

[Artista]

All I can suggest is that this quotation of Dr Cole's, if he did in fact say it, was said BEFORE the San Fran' presentation.
Ive conversed with Dr Wesley yesterday,,Dr Cole was the first to commend and praise Dr Wesley after witnessing his Pilofocus presentation.
Part of that possible quote ..
"Pilofocus also removes all of the deep stem cells..."
I can tell you that that is absolutely UNTRUE!! The new technique with the use of his specialized endoscope does NOT remove all of the deep stem cells.

[didi]

Didi's comment in this thread is confusing though:



It goes against Acell being added into Pilofocus along with Dr. Wesley's presentation with Acell and Dr. Cooley being mentioned in it with the use of Acell.

Personally, the two don't add up so I can only dismiss Didi's comment and rely more so on Dr. Wesley's presentation as more credible.

Thoughts?

Dismiss didi's comments? Im just a messenger, that is what Dr Cole said (this morning-local time) in the other thread

[didi]

All I can suggest is that this quotation of Dr Cole's, if he did in fact say it, was said BEFORE the San Fran' presentation.
Ive conversed with Dr Wesley yesterday,,Dr Cole was the first to commend and praise Dr Wesley after witnessing his Pilofocus presentation.
Part of that possible quote ..
"Pilofocus also removes all of the deep stem cells..."
I can tell you that that is absolutely UNTRUE!! The new technique with the use of his specialized endoscope does NOT remove all of the deep stem cells.

Artista,

you are wrong, Dr Cole said it 10 hours ago, so it is after SF conference

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?p=154940#post154940

[hellouser]

Artista,

you are wrong, Dr Cole said it 10 hours ago, so it is after SF conference

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthr...940#post154940

Now this is confusing. We're going to need some clarity from Cole, Wesley and Cooley.

Here's what else Dr. Cole had to say (and interesting bit about Dr. Nigam)

We have not solved the problem of white dots, but we are getting better at it with Acell. It does seem that if we can eliminate the leakage of Acell, we can get excellent healing.

I really don't think the permanent zone is really permanent in all patients either. I know that strip patients do tend to thin out in their donor area over time and this can make their concealed scar obvious later on.

The goal to eliminate white dots is important. We know that you can wear your hair much shorter following maximal harvesting following FUE than you can with strip surgery. White dots simply preclude your capacity to shave your head. Then again, not all individuals get white dots.

In our follow up 1 sq cm study on Acell, we are comparing a non-acell side to an Acell treated side. We eliminated two additional ingredients to the Acell treated side this time, however. So far at 6 weeks are are holding steady at three sites growing a single hair on the Acell side. None of those sites had a transected hair follicle. On the non-Acell treated side, we have on extraction site growing a single hair and there was a single transected follicle in that site. We want to compare healing at 3 months on each side. It should be interesting. So far, the growth is a little slower than the last study on the Acell treated side, which suggests that the other two ingredients might be important. We will keep studying the growth and then follow up with another comparative study by adding the other two ingredients again.

I did spend a good bit of time with Dr. Nigam in San Francisco. He talks a good game. I need to go there to evaluate the results, however. Other physicians in India are no so sure about his claims. We shall see.

[Artista]

Didi,,i responded to your follow up on the other thread.
I appreciate your actions in doing so.,

[didi]

Is is very confusing cause Dr Cole's initial impression was that pilofocus is 'very impressive' then 2 days after he changed his mind

Maybe he wants to join Dr Nigams camp just like Dr mwamba did, he will visit him in Mumbai after Xmas

[greatjob!]

The device harvests tiny plugs deep in the scalp. This will fill in with scar tissue so it's absurd to suggest that it is scarless. If anything there will be more scar.

If this is really a direct quote from Dr. Cole it is ridiculous. It sounds a lot like the strip surgeons' counter to fue in the early stages of fue, and frankly makes zero sense. If you are able to extract the grafts from below the skin I can understand that it could still create scar tissue below the skin, but that is not what matters in this field, it's all about visible scarring. If you take the graft from below the skin the only hole in the skin is going to be the diameter of the hair shaft which is about 0.1 mm in width. I don't know about you, but I would consider that scarless. 0.1 mm is smaller than the smallest hypodermic needle. Are you worried about scarring from getting a shot?

[534623]

If you take the graft from below the skin the only hole in the skin is going to be the diameter of the hair shaft which is about 0.1 mm in width. I don't know about you, but I would consider that scarless.

That's basically correct. But the following part from Dr. Cole's post is definitely also correct:

Also, recognize that Pilofocus is a long way off if ever technology at this point. The device harvests tiny plugs deep in the scalp. This will fill in with scar tissue so it's absurd to suggest that it is scarless. If anything there will be more scar. What we don't know is what all this subcutaneous and intradermal scarring will do to the donor area. Right now, it is more theory than substance.

So the next question will be - How well will it work if you try a further procedure (if you need further procedures) when there is nothing more than a clump of hard scar tissue below the skin's surface??

Sure, you could try to apply an ACell suspension or any other wound healing agent suspension simultanously or after the extraction part (subcutaneous injections) in an effort to avoid hard scar tissue all around below the skin's surface. But the outcome would be always "mixed results" - which no third party will be able to detect or to judge.

[Artista]

I want to state for the record that I wish I had not added to this particular segment of conversation regarding what Dr Cole's point of view is or isn't.
I do have much respect for him and his accomplishments thus far.
In my view (and in others view) Dr Wesley has begun a new technique that will be a 'Game-Changer' in the industry.