The 50 Graft Test Procedure

[Arashi]

it looks like there is no new hairs created...no net gain

Yeah good spot man. There isn't any regrowth at all. HASCI are scammers and they will go bankrupt tomorrow. Time to purchase your ticket to India, Didi !

[gc83uk]

I think you're confusing things GC. Yes, according to HASCI the non extracted hair will regrow 100%. That also makes sense.

However, in his research JJJJRS didn't differentiate between transected hairs and extracted follicles. He simply concluded that about 65% of the hairs regrow. 65% of ALL hairs. Hence IF you're using HIS number (that 65%) you'll have to look at ALL hairs.

Hehe I'm not confused, but I know what your saying, I was just using Didi's prediction of 65% of 250 hairs to summarise it in a calculation.

Whereas you believe based on JJJJrS analysis, that 65% of all 400 hairs will regrow.

So 0.65 * 400 = 260
260 hairs - the 150 hairs which MUST regrow because they were transected anyway, leaves just 110 hairs which are genuine regrowth in the donor. Right?

So your basically saying 110 hairs out of 250 grow and the other 150 trasected out of 150 will regrow.

So the overall regeneration including the transections is indeed 65%
but the genuine regrowth (the miracle hairs) is a regen rate of 44%

This is what your saying right?

[Arashi]

Hehe I'm not confused, but I know what your saying, I was just using Didi's prediction of 65% of 250 hairs to summarise it in a calculation.

Whereas you believe based on JJJJrS analysis, that 65% of all 400 hairs will regrow.

So 0.65 * 400 = 260
260 hairs - the 150 hairs which MUST regrow because they were transected anyway, leaves just 110 hairs which are genuine regrowth in the donor. Right?

So your basically saying 110 hairs out of 250 grow and the other 150 trasected out of 150 will regrow.

So the overall regeneration including the transections is indeed 65%
but the genuine regrowth (the miracle hairs) is a regen rate of 44%

This is what your saying right?

Almost. What I'm saying is that indeed I am expecting to see 260 hairs appear on the extraction sites. This means there are now 140 hairs less than before in his donor. I'm also saying that I'm expecting 250 hairs in recipient. So in this case, James will have sacrificed 140 hairs in donor, but got 250 in recipient.

[Arashi]

But again, maybe we're just seeing something wrong. I just cant imagine that Kristel will say all of a sudden "AAAAH you guys were talking about HAIR regrowth in stead of graft regrowth. yeah sure that's about 50% less" LOL.

She seemed very confident about all this. I'm waiting for her answer to hear what she has to say on all this.

[Arashi]

I've edited my post, dont think my regrowth calc was correct. Gotta hit the gym now, back later here for more

[gc83uk]

But again, maybe we're just seeing something wrong. I just cant imagine that Kristel will say all of a sudden "AAAAH you guys were talking about HAIR regrowth in stead of graft regrowth. yeah sure that's about 50% less" LOL.

She seemed very confident about all this. I'm waiting for her answer to hear what she has to say on all this.

I know mate, it would be a complete joke if that happens. At least we will actually get some answers from Kristel followed by conclusive photographic answers. Won't be long now.

[didi]

What exactly did you ask kristel?

[didi]

they gonan tell you there are 200 extracted grafts = 250 hairs...

50 doubles, 150 singles....

the BIG question is..why singles look like doubles?

[gc83uk]

I've edited my post, dont think my regrowth calc was correct. Gotta hit the gym now, back later here for more

Yea I noticed lol! I actually think it was pretty much correct, bit late for the gym innit?

[gc83uk]

they gonan tell you there are 200 extracted grafts = 250 hairs...

50 doubles, 150 singles....

the BIG question is..why singles look like doubles?

I think he has asked, basically why is there 500 hairs in the petri? Some kind of explanation on what has been extracted in terms of hairs and what we can expect to grow in the recipient etc

[Arashi]

What exactly did you ask kristel?

Well, what I asked her in my first mail, I wrote a few pages back in this thread. She didn't seem to understand what I was saying, maybe I didn't express myself correctly.

What I did then in my 2nd mail, I've cut out the 2 'groups' of grafts you see slightly left above the '1' number in the petridish picture. I've sent her that cut out picture and asked if she could explain what we're seeing there. I said, to me it looks like there are only 2 usable grafts there, since we see only 2 bulbs, one in 1 each group. However there seem to be at least 6 hairs there. How is this possible and how would you explain this ?

I still think she'll has an explanation that makes sense. Like said I really can't imagine that it really turns out that hair regrowth is only 40%-45% (or possibly even worse, if not all hairs grow in recipient).

Anyway, really out of here for now, back later for more

[didi]

Im worried abt iron man..hope he doesnt hang himself..

even star like him is running out of explanations abt petri...

First, he was thought HASCI wont be able to find 50 usable grafts? How accurate was that

Second, all these extra hairs in petri are just telogen hairs..70% of them..

Iron man -for president!!

[gc83uk]

Im worried abt iron man..hope he doesnt hang himself..

even star like him is running out of explanations abt petri...

First, he was thought HASCI wont be able to find 50 usable grafts? How accurate was that

Second, all these extra hairs in petri are just telogen hairs..70% of them..

Iron man -for president!!

lol, to be honest I reckon Iron Man thinks we are all idiots who doesn't know anything and he is the only normal person here.

[elgorvanelsinki]

50 grafts had to be enough. why did they harvest more then that?
MISSION FAILED... one more time

[hellouser]

50 grafts had to be enough. why did they harvest more then that?
MISSION FAILED... one more time

Um, I'd say 50 would be on the low end. You don't take statistics based on low numbers.

The 250 grafts is great, gives us a much better picture.