HST needs improvements- suggestions?

[FearTheLoss]

Yes, you're just wrong - if HST works as claimed then every other procedure is unadulterated $__t by comparison.

The main reasons HST hasn't taken off is that HT doctors don't believe/ don't want to believe it works - they have a nice little earner going - and because the HST growth boosters applied to the extracted part of each graft are not FDA approved. This means if it took off US HT doctors would be shafted.

It's been proven and proven over and over again

[Skywalker]

It's been proven and proven over and over again

I agree that the evidence is very very strong now.

[JJJJrS]

Speeding up the time required is the big one for me. If they could do that than theoretically you wouldn't even need Tsuji-Lab or Lauster.

Some people bring up the healing issues but I think that's a bit overstated. For example, here is an isolated area from gc83uk's donor after his 2nd procedure:

After 2 days:


After 9 months:


More than half of the follicular units in the area were extracted. The majority of extractions were right next to each other. gc only had a 700 graft procedure so there was more than enough space to extract elsewhere. Regardless, the area seemed to heal up just fine.

That doesn't mean that I don't think healing is an issue. I'm sure it is but I think there's definitely room to increase the size of the procedures. For example, I see no reason why 2.5k grafts can't be the "standard" procedure in the future rather than the 1.2-1.4k graft sessions that are most common now.

[hellouser]

For example, I see no reason why 2.5k grafts can't be the "standard" procedure in the future rather than the 1.2-1.4k graft sessions that are most common now.

What does it take to get a 2.k graft session done? I mean, suppose you have the money ready and you say to Gho 'I want this much, take my money' why would he say no?

[didi]

also young people heal faster, for example 25 yo will heal much faster than 55 yo but currently they are both have to wait 9 months which is crap, healing time can be adjusted depending on age, also non smoker heals faster than smoker

Right now Gho put 60 yo smoker in the same bag as 25 yo perfectly healthy non smoker


Point is theres absolutaly no need for younger patients to wait 9 months

and also he could increasy sessions according to patients age, i.e younger guys get more grfts since their healing is faster

[hellouser]

also young people heal faster, for example 25 yo will heal much faster than 55 yo but currently they are both have to wait 9 months which is crap, healing time can be adjusted depending on age, also non smoker heals faster than smoker

Right now Gho put 60 yo smoker in the same bag as 25 yo perfectly healthy non smoker


Point is theres absolutaly no need for younger patients to wait 9 months

and also he could increasy sessions according to patients age, i.e younger guys get more grfts since their healing is faster

Bollocks, im 28 yrs old, I'd like a 5,000 graft session.

[FearTheLoss]

essentially this is the cure to hairloss, the technique just needs to be perfected...because this can turn a nw7 into a nw1 full head of hair.

[FearTheLoss]

granted that it would take quite a bit of time, that's what needs to be perfected..

[534623]

More than half of the follicular units in the area were extracted. The majority of extractions were right next to each other.

After 9 months:

Your numbers 86, 87, 88 and 89, for instance,
are my numbers 48, 49, 50 and 51 …


These very close extractions are rather an extreme exception rather than the rule.

I think the main problem is NOT how close together extractions are made; it’s rather THE SUM in general of extractions in the donor area. 2500 or 3000 extractions cause simply MORE holes and darmage than just around 1500.

The human body isn’t like a mouse or rabbit body, which simply has a far better biology “integrated” concerning wound healing and self-regeneration (survival in the nature etc) – and that’s the problem, I think. Furthermore, some people have better healing characteristics than other people and so on.

For example, your extraction site #87 (aka #49) is also such an “immortal follicle”, which has been already extracted and regenerated multiple times. When you look at it just after 2 or 3 weeks, you might think you can already extract it once again. Indeed, but if you would do it, it would be the last time of the possibility to extract; without any doubts, this graft would NOT regenerate anymore.

In the first Gho/Kobren interview, Dr. Gho mentioned that they already tested this; for example extractions again just after 3 month, and he found out, that 3 month is simply too short. This would have the same effects as involved with Trichotillomania, namely a depletion of not completely and/or a fully expanded number (in vivo/in the skin) of follicular stem cells. That’s the problem.

And there is another problem:
Let’s assume you do it indeed just after 3 month – how about the recipient site??
It would be also rather risky to implant again into recipient areas, which are still in the process of formation of new hair producing follicles.

In my opinion, to overcome of all the mentioned problems and to fulfill patients’ desires (especially higher NWs), an even lesser damage to the donor area, but at the same time an increase of implantation sites would be required – and something like “HST 3.0” would accomplish that. But, as with many other things – easier said and described than done. But IF it works, you would indeed not need Tsuji-Lab or Lauster anymore.

[hellouser]

Is 'HST 3.0' something that Dr. Gho is actually working on, or is it just a rumor?

[534623]

Is 'HST 3.0' something that Dr. Gho is actually working on, or is it just a rumor?

Find it out ...

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpost.php?p=101078&postcount=167

[hellouser]

Find it out ...

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpos...&postcount=167

Has he said anything more about this? Maybe a time frame? Progress or discoveries?

[Vox]

Hard to say. I'm 28 years old and my hairline has obviously receded. It hasn’t gone so far back as to make it noticeable that I’m clearly balding since at my age and up most men WILL have their hairline recede by at least 1cm anyway, so its stronger than a mature hairline. However, my temples have gone bad and my scalp all over has thinned out drastically. I still have a lot of volume and can make the messy bed-head spiked look, but it starts to look pretty thin. I don’t have any bald spots so essentially, I’d need 2,000-3,000 grafts to give myself some fantastic volume. 900 grafts would be used on my hairline alone (27cm in length with a density of 30-35 grafts per cm2), with the remainder on my scalp and temples leaving 1,100-1,600 grafts. It’d do wonders. My case is a little less severe than Wesley Snejder’s.

I think you don't need to worry too much about it. That was for my generation (I started losing much hair in the end of 80's) when there was practically nothing to halt hair loss.

Today there are at least the means to keep your existing hair, and more are coming in the pipeline. Plus, the hair transplantation techniques are today much better and affordable if we talk about small procedures.

[Vox]

Find it out ...

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpos...&postcount=167

This is very interesting but at the moment, as far as I know, there is no evidence that something like that can indeed work. But if does, it will definitely overwhelm this filed. Just imagine an almost scar-less procedure that can generate 4000 grafts in one go while leaving 80% of the donor intact! It will transform a NW6 to a decent NW3 in two years with minimal donor loss.

[JJJJrS]

These very close extractions are rather an extreme exception rather than the rule.

I think the main problem is NOT how close together extractions are made; it’s rather THE SUM in general of extractions in the donor area. 2500 or 3000 extractions cause simply MORE holes and darmage than just around 1500.

The human body isn’t like a mouse or rabbit body, which simply has a far better biology “integrated” concerning wound healing and self-regeneration (survival in the nature etc) – and that’s the problem, I think. Furthermore, some people have better healing characteristics than other people and so on.

From the first Dr. Gho interview with Spencer Kobren, Dr. Gho justified limiting the number of extractions per session by stressing the need for a healing area. He used the cut example and mentioned that a small isolated cut on its own will heal perfectly but a number of small cuts which are very close to each other will not heal properly. We also know that HASCI will extract 2000-3000 grafts if you have a larger head and room in the recipient.

So I don't agree that it is the total number of extractions that are a problem. From everything HASCI has indicated, it's spacing that's an issue. The picture I showed though is a small area where more than half of the follicular units were extracted (!) that seemed to regenerate just fine.

I think they're probably afraid to push the procedure because it's still a new procedure which is developing and is only offered in one place. They know that if a couple of patients go online with scarring or no regeneration, it will cause a lot of harm to their reputation. So it's more of a precaution than anything else.

Even without "HST 3.0," I believe they can make 2.5k grafts a standard session in the future, possibly when the community is more accepting of the procedure.

For example, your extraction site #87 (aka #49) is also such an “immortal follicle”, which has been already extracted and regenerated multiple times.

If you look at the analysis from the third procedure, extraction site #87 from the second procedure, labelled as #94(87) in the third procedure, did not regenerate.

When you look at it just after 2 or 3 weeks, you might think you can already extract it once again. Indeed, but if you would do it, it would be the last time of the possibility to extract; without any doubts, this graft would NOT regenerate anymore.

In the first Gho/Kobren interview, Dr. Gho mentioned that they already tested this; for example extractions again just after 3 month, and he found out, that 3 month is simply too short. This would have the same effects as involved with Trichotillomania, namely a depletion of not completely and/or a fully expanded number (in vivo/in the skin) of follicular stem cells. That’s the problem.

And there is another problem:
Let’s assume you do it indeed just after 3 month – how about the recipient site??
It would be also rather risky to implant again into recipient areas, which are still in the process of formation of new hair producing follicles.

I agree that offering more procedures in less time is not a solution for the reasons you stated.

In my opinion, to overcome of all the mentioned problems and to fulfill patients’ desires (especially higher NWs), an even lesser damage to the donor area, but at the same time an increase of implantation sites would be required – and something like “HST 3.0” would accomplish that. But, as with many other things – easier said and described than done. But IF it works, you would indeed not need Tsuji-Lab or Lauster anymore.

How is the work with HST 3.0 going? Do you have any plans to post your findings in the future?