Correct, as long as we include the regrown transections (Assuming they do regenerate) from the donor in the final hair count of whats in the petri dish.
I wonder how much of my regrowth was just transections and not genuine regrowth, this is what it comes down to for me.
This petri dish photo is a revelation.
I wonder how much of my regrowth was just transections and not genuine regrowth, this is what it comes down to for me.
This petri dish photo is a revelation.
But isn't it ALL about the ratio between sacrificing in donor vs getting new hairs in recipient ? How does it matter if a lot of hairs in donor were transected hair ? Yeah it would mean previous research was invalid, but forget about that. If James would see 200 hairs grow in recipient and he'd only have lost 40 in donor, then he has 80% true regrowth, right ?
Well, still scarless and I'd probably still go for it, but yeah, that would be a HUGE disappointment.

Comment