New Stemcell Treatment Photos... wow?

[neversaynever]

Dr gho or anyone cannot see DP or DS,since it's a blind technique ,they can only with understanding of hair morphometry and guess with experience and may try to extract a part of FU which may contain some part of DP and or DS cells.Ideally the disection at the levelof aubers line would be the best option .

Good. Do it Dr Nigam! Make us hairy Looking forward to seeing more doubling case studies. I cant see why you would not get growth in donor and receipient. Really hope you present us case studies thatll convince us all.

One thing I'm curious about how many grafts max you can extract? Whats the highest youve done so far for doubling? Or what would you hope will be the highest? Are their dangers damaging donor regrowth if you take too many grafts? Im really hoping it works, because it shouldnt be just Gho doing this technique, and his patent doesnt apply to india.

[Boldy]

Dr gho or anyone cannot see DP or DS,since it's a blind technique ,they can only with understanding of hair morphometry and guess with experience and may try to extract a part of FU which may contain some part of DP and or DS cells.Ideally the disection at the levelof aubers line would be the best option .

Its good to see that you are also going to experiment with DP culture in medium that preserves its hair inducing ability after more doublings, If you manage to do this right like in the current studies, it would be a clever improvement over what currently is available on the market.

each subsequent passage. After passage two, each sample had undergone an average of 15.3 doublings, approximately a 40,000-fold expansion in cell number. At this point, cultures were still
capable of rapid growth. We have not performed an extensive study of culture growth to senescence, but some cultures have been passaged for more than 50 doublings without a significant reduction in the growth rate

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9doxfq9hqny8olc/8%20hair%20folucle%20newogenesis%20induced%20by%20cultured%20human%20scalp%20dermal%20papilla%20cells.pdf

Good luck with it.

[StinkySmurf]

Its good to see that you are also going to experiment with DP culture in medium that preserves its hair inducing ability after more doublings, If you manage to do this right like in the current studies, it would be a clever improvement over what currently is available on the market.




Good luck with it.

Aderans solved this problem didn't they. They can maintain hair inducing ability for as many cycles as they want now right?

Dr. Nigam,

I meant to ask did you encounter problems maintaining the inducing ability at 3 months. Is this why you originally started at 18 days or is it just cheaper cost and an easier domestic sales pitch?

Thanks!

[Boldy]

Aderans solved this problem didn't they. They can maintain hair inducing ability for as many cycles as they want now right?


Thanks!

Indeed they seem to have made it more efficient.

[534623]

Only thing is that dr ghos technique improves if he injects progenitor stem cells into the donor and bisected follicles.
His technique will improve if he start injecting DP cultured potent cells into both the bisected FU.
And his technique will improve if he starts bisecting HF in vitro under high magnification.9not blindly in vivo)

Trust me - Dr. Gho doesn't need "advices" from amateurs, who couldn't show themselves neither this nor that.

By the way - from where do you get these so-called "progenitor stem cells" and/or "DP cultured potent cells" for injection into bisected follicles? From the supermarket next to your clinic?

Dr. Gho doesn't need any injections into his PL-FUT (HST) grafts - these grafts proceduce hairs with the same characteristics as in the donor area (where the left behind follicle parts regenerate also) - even without any "progenitor stem cells" and/or "DP cultured potent cells" injections into them. The point is, that the "bisected grafts" should produce each and every missing part ON THEIR OWN.

[garethbale]

Trust me - Dr. Gho doesn't need "advices" from amateurs, who couldn't show themselves neither this nor that.

By the way - from where do you get these so-called "progenitor stem cells" and/or "DP cultured potent cells" for injection into bisected follicles? From the supermarket next to your clinic?

Dr. Gho doesn't need any injections into his PL-FUT (HST) grafts - these grafts proceduce hairs with the same characteristics as in the donor area (where the left behind follicle parts regenerate also) - even without any "progenitor stem cells" and/or "DP cultured potent cells" injections into them. The point is, that the "bisected grafts" should produce each and every missing part ON THEIR OWN.

534

Do you work for, or are you affiliated with Dr Gho?

[neversaynever]

534

Do you work for, or are you affiliated with Dr Gho?

Ignore it. You're feeding him.

[534623]

534

Do you work for, or are you affiliated with Dr Gho?

hmmm – interesting question …

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpost.php?p=99563&postcount=122

YOU tell me …

Just because someone like me is fully aware about the work of an individual …

http://www.hasci.com/default2.aspx?id_menu_item=e62e845e-3cdd-4539-88cc-52726601fe25&special_type=0

… and reports about his work, that doesn’t necessarily mean, that this person “is working for this individual” – or do you also think, I work for Dr. Lauster …

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=10995

… just because I report what he is doing? Why don’t guys like “Spex” or “Jotronic” (just for example) discuss and report about “cutting-edge research”?

As long as someone produces something REALISTIC and USEFUL – I wouldn’t even have a problem to “hype” (or at least to cite/quote) even losers like Dr. Rassman & XXX. To know and to understand whether or not something is “realistic and useful” – you must be smarter than around 800 researcher groups in this field out there, and, in addition, you must be fully aware not just about THEIR work specifically in the “hair research field”. It’s not so unusual, that sometimes complete outsiders have far more profound knowledge about a specific research field, than “just well-known insiders”. I prefer to be the complete outsider – makes more fun. I theory, YOU can formulate it like this: “I say what has the potential to work – and what doesn’t” – including a profound explanation about the reasons. But there is always a problem involved:
Who is the one who is able to judge about these so-called “profound explanations”? You? Nigam? There are actually just 2 individuals out there, I would allow them to judge: The first guy is me - and the other guy is definitely not Dr. Nigam. TODAY, not even guys like Dr. Gho. Like all this or not – I don’t care. I’m just the mentioned outsider.

[534623]

As long as someone produces something REALISTIC and USEFUL – I wouldn’t even have a problem to “hype” (or at least to cite/quote) even losers like Dr. Rassman & XXX. To know and to understand whether or not something is “realistic and useful” – you must be smarter than around 800 researcher groups in this field out there, and, in addition, you must be fully aware not just about THEIR work specifically in the “hair research field”. It’s not so unusual, that sometimes complete outsiders have far more profound knowledge about a specific research field, than “just well-known insiders”.

Here is another example ...

http://youtu.be/3njZkP_3N48

Guess who is the producer of such videos ... I produced this video. So you should rather ask - why?

The only one -so far- who has been really "useful" in this context (to get THE "visible" answers I'm looking for), has been Dr. Jerry Cooley. Today I know, what THIS kind/type of "ECM" is able to do and what this stuff is simply unable to do - context-specific.

[garethbale]

hmmm – interesting question …

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpost.php?p=99563&postcount=122

YOU tell me …

Just because someone like me is fully aware about the work of an individual …

http://www.hasci.com/default2.aspx?id_menu_item=e62e845e-3cdd-4539-88cc-52726601fe25&special_type=0

… and reports about his work, that doesn’t necessarily mean, that this person “is working for this individual” – or do you also think, I work for Dr. Lauster …

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=10995

… just because I report what he is doing? Why don’t guys like “Spex” or “Jotronic” (just for example) discuss and report about “cutting-edge research”?

As long as someone produces something REALISTIC and USEFUL – I wouldn’t even have a problem to “hype” (or at least to cite/quote) even losers like Dr. Rassman & XXX. To know and to understand whether or not something is “realistic and useful” – you must be smarter than around 800 researcher groups in this field out there, and, in addition, you must be fully aware not just about THEIR work specifically in the “hair research field”. It’s not so unusual, that sometimes complete outsiders have far more profound knowledge about a specific research field, than “just well-known insiders”. I prefer to be the complete outsider – makes more fun. I theory, YOU can formulate it like this: “I say what has the potential to work – and what doesn’t” – including a profound explanation about the reasons. But there is always a problem involved:
Who is the one who is able to judge about these so-called “profound explanations”? You? Nigam? There are actually just 2 individuals out there, I would allow them to judge: The first guy is me - and the other guy is definitely not Dr. Nigam. TODAY, not even guys like Dr. Gho. Like all this or not – I don’t care. I’m just the mentioned outsider.

good answer, i'll take that as a yes then...

[534623]

good answer, i'll take that as a yes then...

"yes" - what? I'm working for Gho? Who knows ...

[534623]

good answer, i'll take that as a yes then...

By the way ...

"Minoxidil can regrow lost hair although it is pretty ineffective."

Can you please explain me the logic behind such a sentence like this sentence?

How about the following sentence:

"IronMan is working for Dr. Gho, although he is not effectively working for Dr. Gho".

Yup, the logic behind this sentence is similar - I think.

[Breaking Bald]

How about this sentence? 'Ironman is a massive bell end'. Makes perfect sense to me.

[534623]

How about this sentence? 'Ironman is a massive bell end'. Makes perfect sense to me.

For someone like YOU - no doubts ...

Let me guess ...


Someone like you can even see in such a pic a "massive twat" - or now you edited it to "massive bell end" ...

[Breaking Bald]

Yeah I thought 'massive bell end' was more fitting for someone like you No need to thank me.