The 50 Graft Test Procedure

[gc83uk]

Because you know, at this point I'm so frustrated with all of this, that I'd be willing to put in great effort to finally solve the puzzle. I mean I'm spending WAY too much time on these damn forums already. Just need to know how good this work and move on.

Well I'm in the exact same boat. I have spent too much time here the last few weeks, but it's a crucial moment especially when I you consider the cost of HST, we're talking between 10-50k$, so don't beat yourself up about it, we just need to come to some definite solid conclusions and then of course move on.

[gc83uk]

I told her that we figured these would be the reasons for the discrepancy. She confirmed.



I'd doubt that. I have tons of single hairs in recipient too. But also in donor, so to me it just makes sense.

But most importantly: am I right that we have everything we need to make a good analysis on your case ? I mean we have good pre-op photo's right? So all that's needed now is (a lot of) time to research ?

Sure, we have almost everything, but what exactly do you want to analyse?

Recipient areas or back to the donor? I think JJJJrS and Iron Man have covered everything from the donor.

[Arashi]

Because you know, at this point I'm so frustrated with all of this, that I'd be willing to put in great effort to finally solve the puzzle. I mean I'm spending WAY too much time on these damn forums already. Just need to know how good this work and move on.

[Arashi]

Arashi, do you remember that comment I made last night about the local anaesthetic injections in the donor creating small piercing marks which could be mistaken as extraction sites?

I told her that we figured these would be the reasons for the discrepancy. She confirmed.

My other point. I'm almost sure that Iron Man said that Hasci don't extract single hairs.

I'd doubt that. I have tons of single hairs in recipient too. But also in donor, so to me it just makes sense.

But most importantly: am I right that we have everything we need to make a good analysis on your case ? I mean we have good pre-op photo's right? So all that's needed now is (a lot of) time to research ?

[gc83uk]

That's a good point. And actually I'm just thinking, we can find out, can't we ? We have everything. Good pre-op photo's, good post-op photos' and since his recipient is as perfect as can be for counting, namely perfectly bold, we can even get a count, or at least a very good estimate of recipient growth. Or am I missing something ?

I started doing a count recently with a new photo from hst1 and hst2, but I realised I made some mistakes and need to take another photo of the recipient.

What is for sure though, is the number of hairs is somewhere between 1.3 to maybe 1.5, which isn't great. However before I start talking about doing a new photo, I'd like to mention a couple of things.

Arashi, do you remember that comment I made last night about the local anaesthetic injections in the donor creating small piercing marks which could be mistaken as extraction sites? Well either Kristel reads these forums or it's a coincidence that they used this very reason as an 'excuse' to cover up the extra drills in the email to you today.

My other point. I'm almost sure that Iron Man said that Hasci don't extract single hairs. But I have plenty of single hairs growing in my recipient. I also have plenty of single hairs in my donor. I'm just hoping that they extracted some genuine single hairs and placed them in the recipient... Might be time to revisit some of those old photos and see if that actually happened or not.

[Arashi]

Did GC have these needle prick holes?Do they keep count of these 'transections'

That's a good point. And actually I'm just thinking, we can find out, can't we ? We have everything. Good pre-op photo's, good post-op photos' and since his recipient is as perfect as can be for counting, namely perfectly bold, we can even get a count, or at least a very good estimate of recipient growth. Or am I missing something ?

[didi]

They come accross as totaly clueless when it comes to proving HST

http://www.baldingblog.com/2009/08/11/gho-clinic-says-their-fue-allows-the-donor-hair-to-regrow/

I just chaired the session at the annual ISHRS meeting in Amsterdam and had Dr. Coen Gho as one of the speakers. I had lost my voice, so I could not comment as the chair of that session, but considering that you asked me about him, I will use this as a forum to speak my opinion on what I heard.

Dr. Gho reported that he did 1500 patients with his “cloning” procedure. If I had to give a score to the material he presented using a 1-10 scale for scientific credibility, I’d score it a 1, with 1 being the lowest possible. His science was pathetic, with slides that were blurred and blackened out so that there was really nothing to see. He claimed that his FUE technique cut the follicular units in half longitudinally, and that the part that remained regrew hair, but there was no proof of this in any of the material he showed. He did not show any patient results and certainly was never reviewed by any credible agency or physician.

[FearTheLoss]

how did I know that somehow this test would get f****d up

[didi]

Arashi

..Kristel confirmed that the discrepancy between the 203 extracted graft and that number would be a combination of needle pricks for sedation and transected hair'

300-350 holes in Jamses head, 203 are extractions the rest are needle pricks/transected hairs


Did GC have these needle prick holes?Do they keep count of these 'transections'

[didi]

enlighten us 54362, what happen here


how did this test gone so wrong?

[534623]

... it appears to me, and IF I'm not totally wrong, that you have been indeed a "test-candidate" - no, NOT for some (useless) forum goers; instead of, just a TEST CANDIDATE for the HSCI. That's what I think.

In addition...

I've emailed Kristel and asked if it was possible to do a new test. Just keep it at 50 grafts and get a professional photographer to do the macro photo's. Yes, they said they would make professional photo's this time around too, but this was a misunderstanding: they made professional microscopic photos', of which I've posted an example a few pages back...

...that explains a lot too.

[534623]

150 single and 50 double grafts were taken from the donor area. You can count them in the bottle. Pictures were taken, both microscopical and normal.

The single grafts were placed on the front corners:
90 grafts on the right and 60 grafts on the left corner.

Due to my observations of all so far provided facts, that they, for example...

- placed so many "single grafts" into your (rather big) temple corners (absolutely no reason for "single hair" implantations within these areas);
- practically ALL these "single hairs" in the petri-dish (section 1) look like this...

http://www2.picturepush.com/photo/a/12643640/img/12643640.jpg

... it appears to me, and IF I'm not totally wrong, that you have been indeed a "test-candidate" - no, NOT for some (useless) forum goers; instead of, just a TEST CANDIDATE for the HSCI. That's what I think.

[Arashi]

I've emailed Kristel and asked if it was possible to do a new test. Just keep it at 50 grafts and get a professional photographer to do the macro photo's. Yes, they said they would make professional photo's this time around too, but this was a misunderstanding: they made professional microscopic photos', of which I've posted an example a few pages back, but no macro photo's. Unfortunately these microscopic photo's won't help us, since they cover only a small area.

I hope they're willing to do another test and this time around indeed with just 50 grafts and macro photo's shot by a professional photographer. If they don't feel like doing another test, it's their good right of course, but it would be a huge disappointment, I think to everybody here.

[Arashi]

Looking at the photo's some more, I think it's not going to work. Yes, we can pinpoint some grafts and we can see if extractions were failed or if they're just needle pricks, but that's about it I'm afraid. What do you guys (no, thats not you Didi) think ?

[Arashi]

But then again, although we surely can at least pinpoint some grafts, if this is what we're going to need to go by, then I think a complete analysis is definitely out of the question.