The 50 Graft Test Procedure

[Arashi]

They do 1 test in 10 years and they manage to fck it up and they happen to get guy whos hair is too thick to extract 3 hair grafts.

HST is cursed..noone can ever get to the bottom of it

Yep, and you know already that they don't have any pictures themselves and that they're all scammers anyway and that they're going bankrupt tomorrow. Thanks for you contribution to this thread Didi.

[didi]

They do 1 test in 10 years and they manage to fck it up and they happen to get guy whos hair is too thick to extract 3 hair grafts.

HST is cursed..noone can ever get to the bottom of it

[Arashi]

Yeah, we gonna send him over again... and HASCI is going to tell us, sure, whatever didi says!

Yeah, of course, everybody just does things because Didi tells them to

Seriously, I doubt if HASCI would even want to do this again. But let's stay positive, Kristel said they shot tons of pictures, so let's hope there will be some good ones there.

[Arashi]

There might still be some value left in all of this. However I agree that it's going to be extremely difficult, if not impossible since:
1) We don't have a good pre-op picture. The one we have is WAY too blurry
2) Too many grafts to keep track of
3) Implants into the scar, which might not only endanger regeneration there but create a difficulty in itself, since now donor and recipient are mixed, thus even harder to mark everything
4) No good after pictures. I think the after pictures might be usuable, IF we're going to combine them all (some focus on different area's.

Of course this doesn't mean it necessarily ends here. IF hasci shot good pictures themselves, then this might all still be ok. Hopefully I'll know more about that tomorrow.

[clarence]

doesnt matter since james is local we can send him over agian in a few weeks time....this time rules shd be strictly followed

Yeah, we gonna send him over again... and HASCI is going to tell us, sure, whatever didi says!

[hellouser]

His brother should have stopped hasci from extracting more than 50. I stressed importance of 17/17/17....even 25/25 would be ok...150/50 spead over large area is crazy...

doesnt matter since james is local we can send him over agian in a few weeks time....this time rules shd be strictly followed

You know, something tells me that even if they did 50 you'd come back to the thread and say something like 'the results are inconclusive, we need 200 grafts'

But you and others seem to think a smaller sample size is more guaranteeing than a larger one. This is illogical and your complaints have no place.

[didi]

His brother should have stopped hasci from extracting more than 50. I stressed importance of 17/17/17....even 25/25 would be ok...150/50 spead over large area is crazy...

doesnt matter since james is local we can send him over agian in a few weeks time....this time rules shd be strictly followed

[Arashi]

thats why I wanted someone to supervise....superviser wouldnt allow such thing to happen

James' brother supervised the whole procedure and checked everything. Gho himself too was present by the way.

Anyway, 200 grafts is great in itself IF the quality of pictures are high enough. Current quality is just not high enough therefore I'm PRAYING James is shooting some more. Also I'm praying HASCI themselves have some good usuable ones, Kristel said they made tons, so that sounded hopeful.

[didi]

Why hasci decided to do 200 when they were told many times what it is all abt?
if they really wanted to give james free grafts they could have waited and give him in next procedure.
What can i say, 50 grafts would have been perfect and I knew they gonna screw up thats why I wanted someone to supervise....superviser wouldnt allow such thing to happen


So we are looking for 400+ hairs in donor and 250 in recipient.
Good luck

[gc83uk]

In practice, although at this point, I'm not sure if we'll be able to verify this.

We know from gc's case that the real regeneration rate was calculated as ~65% for his procedure. In that analysis however, we didn't account for transections at all so the real regeneration was probably much, much lower. This is especially the case when you consider how many grafts were transected in a controlled, limited procedure like this one, compared to a standard procedure where time is more of an issue.

The only way we can verify it is to find EVERY extraction point, not an easy task in itself.
We also still need to count the number of hairs in the petri, but let's say it was 400, meaning 150 transections.
Count all the hairs in each extraction point, only after we get past the first 150 hairs we start calculating the % regrowth.

So for example, if we only find 160 hairs regrowing in the donor, that really means we have only had 10 hairs of regrowth out of a possible 250.

I think it will be just about doable.

[Arashi]

James, can you maybe try to even get the camera a bit closer ? And then just make like 3 photo's of 3 several sections of the donor ? Like left, middle right ?

I'm trying to work with the pictures you've shot but I still think they're not clear enough for analysis

[JJJJrS]

True but the larger count allows for a more accurate analysis. We've got a bunch of guys sifting through the pictures and grafts, I wouldnt worry about it being tedious.

I've done a 100+ graft analysis of just gc's donor, and trust me it's very tedious and time-consuming. GC took fantastic pictures as well and we didn't even count anything in the donor. Now, for this procedure, we're looking at 400+ hairs in the donor and ~250 in the recipient we have to count. All I can say is, good luck to whoever tries to monitor all that.

50 graft was a nice compromise and that was the agreed amount. I have no idea why HASCI decided to over-complicate things though and extract 4x as many.

[JJJJrS]

So, in our example: let's say we find 400 hairs in the petridish. 250 hairs are usuable according to HASCI (we still have to verify but I'm pretty damn sure we'll find 250 hairs with bulbs in the petridish). Hence in donor we should expect this amount of hair growing from the extraction sites: 150+ 0.8*250= 350 hairs. So 350 out of the 400 hairs should regrow. Hence James should have lost about 50 hairs in donor and gained about 250 new hairs in recipient.

In practice, although at this point, I'm not sure if we'll be able to verify this.

We know from gc's case that the real regeneration rate was calculated as ~65% for his procedure. In that analysis however, we didn't account for transections at all so the real regeneration was probably much, much lower. This is especially the case when you consider how many grafts were transected in a controlled, limited procedure like this one, compared to a standard procedure where time is more of an issue.

[hellouser]

I don't know why HASCI decided to extract 200+ grafts when the whole point of the procedure was to provide a proof of concept. It's very difficult to take a single, clear photo of that many extraction points spread over such a large area. The analysis as well becomes very difficult because counting that many hairs is extremely tedious, especially if the photos are not crystal clear.

True but the larger count allows for a more accurate analysis. We've got a bunch of guys sifting through the pictures and grafts, I wouldnt worry about it being tedious.

[JJJJrS]

I don't know why HASCI decided to extract 200+ grafts when the whole point of the procedure was to provide a proof of concept. It's very difficult to take a single, clear photo of that many extraction points spread over such a large area. The analysis as well becomes very difficult because counting that many hairs is extremely tedious, especially if the photos are not crystal clear.