Aderans

[garethbale]

Who is this Joe from Staten Island and why was he so upset?

[StinkySmurf]

So here are my questions:

Why is the black dot/marker in the after photo much bigger than in the before photo? In my opinion, it looks like the after photo is just zoomed?

Does the after photo show the same trail subject or at least the SAME area at all?

Why don’t they publish on their website a good high resolution photo of these presentation photos?

Is Aderans aware about a guy named IronMan, who is doing photo analysis and that’s the reason why they don’t publish high resolution photos? That’s THE question …

Haha! Well, They should be aware of it, but I don't know for sure yet if it means they are

Have you tried zooming the other photo or is there a way to un-zoom this one. Is there not at least an inexact way to compensate for this and get a better look at what happened before and after?

I have seen a tattoo needle hit a hair follicle in a way that later caused something almost like an ingrown hair the way it swelled up and grew into a big black spot. I'm not saying that explains this, but just throwing ideas out there.

[StinkySmurf]

Wow! I just listened to the BTT Show this week, and realised how upset Joe is with me and my posts on this forum!

I hate to be such a newb, but can someone fill me in. Who is Joe and what was it he said that we are injecting into this conversation?

For me it's kind of simple. Desmond brought to my attention the role the androgen receptors play in cultured DP and how this might effect ongoing maintenance with HM while Iron Man brought to my attention the leakage argument and the risk of patchiness.

I really wish people would put their big kid pants on before they come into these Aderans, Replicel, or Dr. Nigam threads. This really is about science folks!!!

I've said this before, but I'm 37 years old which means I'm more or less gonna have this same haircut in three years when I'm 40. This is a good time for me to consider HT or HM sure, but none of this is make or break for me because I sorta like my hair, and it's not really changing.

If I was really suffering from hair loss, and I know it is a very BIG DEAL so please don't think i'm trying to belittle it, but if I was really suffering right now I probably would have made an appointment with Dr. Gho because the evidence gets more convincing all the time that HST works.

[534623]

This method is *extremely flawed*. Simply enlarging a photograph does a number of things;

1) enlarges the pixels
2) smooths out pixelation (photoshop does this)
3) sharpens the end result which gives a false representation

Youre enlarged photographs should be canned from this conversation, scaling rasterized images up always degrades the quality. Unless you have the original photographs in higher resolution, there is nothing here to discuss further.

But this also goes back to my point about photographic evidence being a job of its own; resolution and image sizes are two separate things take form one element. You'd basically have to have a digital media specialist (like myself)...

Sure, I know what you mean – and THAT’s exactly the reason, why they don’t publish high resolution photos (and this IS possible!), because nobody should be able to ANALYZE them!

As explained in another thread, in an adult, a given hair structure is like a FINGERPRINT. That means, if you publish a good quality photo of your hair structure TODAY, and you publish a photo 30 years later from the same area – you will see almost exactly the same hair growth pattern.

For example, these completely “virgin” photos (straight from the patient's digital camera) are just 9 month later (after his 2nd HST) of gc’s 3rd HST in the same donor area, posted by gc himself:

BEFORE extractions (12 hours BEFORE gc’s 3rd treatment)

http://www.fileden.com/files/2011/9/28/3202143/14th%20Jan%202013%20057.JPG

2 days after extractions

http://www.fileden.com/files/2011/9/28/3202143/DSCN1531.JPG

8 days after extractions

http://www.fileden.com/files/2011/9/20/3198745/recip%201%20week%20027.JPG

******************************
Okay, now I simply did the following:

I marked just 1 single extraction site in all photos und labelled this extraction site with #12. Number 12 is easy to find above gc’s birthmark, and you can see EVERYTHING and each and every detail in ALL photos when you CLICK INTO THE PHOTOS TO ENLARGE THEM…

BEFORE extractions (12 hours BEFORE gc’s 3rd treatment)

http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/3/15/3278666/gc-before-HST.jpg

2 days after extractions

http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/3/15/3278666/gc-2days-after.jpg

8 days after extractions

http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/3/15/3278666/gc-8days-after.jpg

Here is the whole HISTORY of extraction site #12 at a glance – THE voodoo-photo:


Different photo-angles or different light conditions of such complete photos, are completely irrelevant for making a detailed analysis…


As you can see, sometimes I had to turn some photos somewhat (but without any loss of quality!), just so that VIEWERS are more easily able to compare the marked and analyzed observation/monitored areas (blue squares in the photos).

So everything you need is just a cheap digital camera and you can’t fake such photos!
So feel free to encircle and to label all the other extractions sites of your choice around or below or above or on the left side or on the right side of extraction site number 12 – which serves as a MARKER for you, so to speak. Oh, and don’t forget to report the percentage (%) of regrowth sites.

[clarence]

Jeez you could at least have switched the quality to maximum in youtube's panel...

Much better, see?

[UK Boy]

I really find Desmond's posts informative and enjoyable to read as well. I don't get why anyone would find them upsetting, well maybe the one the other week when he went majorly pessimistic and said we were all doomed - is that what upset Joe. If we're going to talk about someone upsetting people on the forum Desmond definitely isn't who comes to mind though. Why didn't Joe have anything to say about Ironman and his constant putting everything and everyone down?

[Jcm800]

That's a shame Desmond. Personally I find your posts very informative and a good read

[Desmond84]

Wow! I just listened to the BTT Show this week, and realised how upset Joe is with me and my posts on this forum!

Just wanted to say (particularly to Joe), I'm really sorry if my posts really offended you brother or anyone else for that matter. When I joined this forum late last year, there was minimal information on this forum about what Aderans is or what it can do. So, I spent a lot of time to gather information and show ppl through scientific journals what its potentials may be!

I just thought having hope will help you fight another day!

As of today, I will be holding back on my posts until major breakthroughs!

All the best to all my brothers and sisters out there.

- Desmond

[hellouser]

Here is Washenik’s presented photo in the video enlarged…

http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/3/15/3278666/ARI-results.jpg

If you don’t like my enlarged photo…

http://www.alopezie.de/fud/index.php/fa/10806/

…a user in a German hairloss forum tried the same.

This method is *extremely flawed*. Simply enlarging a photograph does a number of things;

1) enlarges the pixels
2) smooths out pixelation (photoshop does this)
3) sharpens the end result which gives a false representation

Youre enlarged photographs should be canned from this conversation, scaling rasterized images up always degrades the quality. Unless you have the original photographs in higher resolution, there is nothing here to discuss further.

But this also goes back to my point about photographic evidence being a job of its own; resolution and image sizes are two separate things take form one element. You'd basically have to have a digital media specialist (like myself) creating the presentations for the public ensuring everything is up to even the highest nitpicking standards like the ones you yourself are expecting... and theres nothing wrong with that, its just that I highly doubt that these companys think about what format and pixel density images are taken and how important consistent lighting is.... and you know why? Because this isnt their speciality, so I would *not* hold this against them.

[hellouser]

Why is the black dot/marker in the after photo much bigger than in the before photo? In my opinion, it looks like the after photo is just zoomed?

Skin has a tendency to stretch and contract, hence why undesirable women have stretch marks (booyah, I'll get hated by Tracy on this comment).

Also, tattoos don't stay exactly the same on forever anyway. I wouldnt be worried about it too much.

[534623]

I have some questions concerning ADERANS…

Aderans shows always just “success photos” at presentations/meetings/videos – right?

For independent VIEWERS, such photos do not allow them to analyze these photos – contrary to Histogen, for example:
********************************

http://youtu.be/khVm4wSpzjo

"When Dr. Cole returned from the Bahamas, he told me about the Histogen presentation he attended there. He was unimpressed because of the before and after images. Many of you are familiar with the strategy of obscuring details with a photo flash in before images and presenting the after images without photo flash. This of course should be avoided at all costs, especially if you are trying to promote a breakthrough medical technology. This statement should not be taken to imply that representatives of Histogen deliberately presented misleading photo evidence of hair growth. On the other hand if you ever present a medical breakthrough to a sophisticated audience like doctors, by all means present the highest quality images available.
Here is the link to Histogen's PDF they have posted:

http://www.histogen.com/downloads/sid_2012_HSC_Final.pdf

Now this PDF is really a huge pixel dimension document. When opened and rasterized in PhotoShop, it reveals some relatively large dimension before and after images. To many people PhotoShop is synonymous with photo fakery. That is not necessarily the case. PhotoShop CAN be used to fake photos, but the newer versions have advanced technology that can find pixels obscured by a flash for instance. So PhotoShop has some very important and legitimate uses.

Histogen may very well be a breakthrough product, but Dr. Cole was unimpressed with the presentation because of the photo flash on the before images …"
***********************************

Why I’m mentioning all this?
Because Aderans, contrary to Histogen for example, they do not publish “really huge pixel dimension documents” or photos on their website – I have never seen any.

Anyways, so I’ve tried the following…

http://youtu.be/l_JHbtXJ0a8

Here is Washenik’s presented photo in the video enlarged…

http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/3/15/3278666/ARI-results.jpg

If you don’t like my enlarged photo…

http://www.alopezie.de/fud/index.php/fa/10806/

…a user in a German hairloss forum tried the same.

So here are my questions:

Why is the black dot/marker in the after photo much bigger than in the before photo? In my opinion, it looks like the after photo is just zoomed?

Does the after photo show the same trail subject or at least the SAME area at all?

Why don’t they publish on their website a good high resolution photo of these presentation photos?

Is Aderans aware about a guy named IronMan, who is doing photo analysis and that’s the reason why they don’t publish high resolution photos? That’s THE question …

[hellouser]

It was 1984 and I am 7. I see a commercial" for the "Hair club for men" Rogaine

13 (1997) years later, there is a pill (approved by the FDA) that will give you back your hair.

16 years later, Pill has been proven to also take some peoples dick away.

We are due for a break through, or the no dick thing was the break through. If the no dick thing is the break through we are ****ed for another decade.

Youre being modest, we are *long* overdue for a breakthrough.

[paradigmshift]

Is there something positive to spread? Did I miss something??
If so, please let me know!

You look not bad. May be lose some weight and cut the hair short?

As far as the positive: if Lauster and Aderans can grow so little as a single hair in vitro, then it's only a matter of time before someone industrializes the process. I am more worried about greedy patent hogs than the science at this point. Remember the transistor and Moore's Law (transistor density doubles every 10 years). Are we the last generation to grow bald? Because that would be terrible luck.

[nativer]

It was 1984 and I am 7. I see a commercial" for the "Hair club for men" Rogaine

13 (1997) years later, there is a pill (approved by the FDA) that will give you back your hair.

16 years later, Pill has been proven to also take some peoples dick away.

We are due for a break through, or the no dick thing was the break through. If the no dick thing is the break through we are ****ed for another decade.

[hellouser]

I remember Maradona saying he would be going with a Gho procedure in the near future and waiting for an Aderans or Histogen procedure once available on the market.



My question is; is this feasible? I ask because I'm curious if implanting grafts into the donor area damages any follicles that aren't growing hair. I mean, suppose I myself got a Gho HST procedure done to fix my hairline and temples and then went in for a procedure with Aderans that also focused on my hairline and temples. Would it be reasonable to expect further growth in that area or would the only possibility be for another HST procedure in order to thicken up that area?



A secondary question; if the hair we are able to regrow using CB, RU, etc, could we expect to keep it stopping all medication AFTER an Aderans procedure? There's been a lot of talk and assumptions that Aderans acts as a permanent halt to further hairloss.