I did indeed question why there was a higher hair count, but I did not offer an absolute conclusion, it would be silly for me to stipulate with 100% certainty that new follicles were the reason for the higher hair count, but the hair count continued to increase right up to 12 months.
Now you can explain this by saying more follicles were simply revitalised in that period, but you can't outright deny the possibility of HSC inducing the growth of new hair follicles, can you? Yes/No?
My entire point to you & 2020 is that you MUST recognise the probability that new hair follicles were created during the two trials, especially given that the actual scientists who actually conducted the research do BELIEVE new hair follicles grew.
Comment