Misleading Claims about Dr. Gho's HST technique...

[534623]

So, this thread is all about the misleading claims in this field by doctors, hair loss forum users, patients etc etc about Dr. Gho's HST technique.

After so many discussions since a very long time, interviews, videos, patient reports etc etc - and yeah, even after lots of very detailed analyses
- all these claims are based on - what exactly?
And what are these claims at all?

The following 3 very detailed photos, as example, should serve as "basis" for all these claims:

GREEN numbered dots show extraction/REGROWTH sites from a previous HST procedure.
BLUE numbered circles show the new extraction sites.

Blue circles with a green dot in it show multiple extraction sites from a previous and the new HST procedure;
That means, already extracted, regrown and extracted once again sites.

Below: Day 0 (one day BEFORE having HST extractions)
*Full Size* http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/12...ay%200.jpg

So the pic above shows the situation simply "as is" shortly before having HST extractions.
That means, with such a BEFORE-photo, everybody knows what exactly (graft type etc) HSCI doctors and/or HSCI technicians extracted from the patients' donor area if you also have a photo after the extraction part.
So what did they extract? Let me look...

Below: Day 2 (two days after having HST extractions)
*Full Size* http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/12...%20-%203rd.jpg

So, now I know what exactly they extracted...
...if I compare each and every extraction site (labeled with numbers to find them) with the Day-0 BEFORE photo.
So what type of grafts (1-hair, 2-hair, 3-hair grafts etc) did they extract?
Are there still any hairs/hair shafts left within extraction sites - aka "Gho is splitting follicular units"?

Below: Day 24 (24 days after having HST extractions)
*Full Size* http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/12...8/Day%2024.jpg


Anyway, and now try to imagine how the patients' donor area would look like,
if every labeled extraction site would have experienced normal FUE...
pffffffft... the patients' donor area would be almost slick bald!

And finally, the real good question:


*FULL SIZE* http://www.fileden.com/files/2012/12...8/DSCN1524.JPG

When there are so many and clearly visible regrowth sites in the patients' donor area
(the donor area looks still ALMOST untouched if you compare the Day-0 versus Day-24 photo)
- where do all the new hairs in a former slick bald recipient area come from??

[FearTheLoss]

Regeneration!!!!!

[didi]

Ok, by now black and green areas are fully grown

Could GC take photo of these 2 areas and we will analize them..before you upload photos
if you could please circle HST1 (700 grafts)area in with black and HST2 (700 grafts)area with green, just like it has been done in the pic above

I was looking at GCs other picture he uploaded a few weeks ago and it appears that
HSt1 has more multihair grafts than HST2, it could be due to HST1 being 6 months 'older' than HST2..its difficult to analize as I dont know exactly where borders are and not sure if Im looking at the right area..I dont wanna jump into conclusions without good pic and circled areas

[534623]

I was looking at GCs other picture he uploaded a few weeks ago and it appears that
HSt1 has more multihair grafts than HST2, it could be due to HST1 being 6 months 'older' than HST2..its difficult to analize as I dont know exactly where borders are and not sure if Im looking at the right area..I dont wanna jump into conclusions without good pic and circled areas

Why don't you go to the normal hair transplant results section and analyse the results in general over there
and whether or not the mentioned type and amount of the from A to B grafted hairs grew in the recipient area??

Here is, for example,
such a nice and brand new result for you in this section with almost 8,000 super-duper golden standard grafts:

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=11699

[hellouser]

Regeneration!!!!!

Did anyone else read this in the voice of the Quake III Arena narrator?

[534623]

Misleading claim#1: The split-ting of FU’s story…



So what is “splitting of follicular units” at all?

The following pics are based on Dr. Rassman’s explanations about FUE versus FUT…

http://www.baldingblog.com/2012/06/01/fue-vs-fut-which-is-better/#more-10968

The pics (step 1-3), provided by Dr. Rassman on his website, show rather a splitting of real Follicular Units scenario
and not a real, typical (horizontally) TRANSECTION scenario of one or more single follicles within a true follicular unit configuration during extraction with a normal FUE punch (>0.8 mm diameter).

On the other hand, Dr. Rassman’s pics show actually BOTH scenarios:

- a splitting of FU’s scenario;
- a partially “longitudinal transection” scenario of at least 1 (or perhaps even 2) follicles within a normal 3-hair follicular unit configuration.

Anyways, is what Dr. Umar claims and Dr. Rassman shows with pics exactly what Dr. Gho is doing with HST?
The answer is definitely – NO!
This is what Dr. Gho is doing instead of…

Dr. Gho only extracts FOLLICLE TISSUE – and not small skin grafts from a patients’ donor area,
as, in fact, all FUE doctors out there are doing that.

Additionally, Dr. Umar’s claim that “a lurking hair in telogen might regrow” in the extraction site
and that “all this culminate into the appearance of donor hair regrowth”.

Wow – I could never ever see so many telogen/anagen transitions within normal FUE extraction sites as I could see them in Dr. Gho’s HST extractions sites
– and all these transitions at the same time and just within 1-2 weeks!
And guess what:
All these telogen/anagen transitions just happen within extraction sites!! – and practically nowhere else in the donor area!!
– at least, according to gc’s analyzed photos (see 1st post in this thread).

CONCLUSIONS about these misleading claims:

- plain incompetence
- “innocent mistake out of ignorance and not a deliberate attempt to mislead”
- intentional falsehood to mislead interested patients

[didi]

This is the pic I was talking about




IM/GC

Can you pls circle HST1 area so we can have a good look of whats going on



And this one pls circle HST2 area, pics are quite good

http://www.fileden.com/files/2011/9/20/3198745/whatever3%20007.JPG

IronMan
Pls visit

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=11723

[534623]

I was looking at GCs other picture he uploaded a few weeks ago and it appears that
HSt1 has more multihair grafts than HST2, it could be due to HST1 being 6 months 'older' than HST2
..its difficult to analize as I dont know exactly where borders are
and not sure if Im looking at the right area..I dont wanna jump into conclusions without good pic and circled areas

And how about HST1 just after 5.5 month...

http://www.fileden.com/files/2011/9/28/3202143/aaaa.jpg

or HST1 just after 9 month?

http://www.fileden.com/files/2011/9/28/3202143/day%205%20-%202nd%20treatment%20013.JPG

Are there more multi-hair grafts or singles?

btw - these photos show that, of course, the shorter the hairs,
the more it is difficult to judge whether or not the grafts produced singles or multi-hairs.
Because the closer the hairs are to the skin's surface (pore), the more the hairs "stick together" - at least most of them.

But the real reason why YOU can see more multi-hair grafts from the 1st HST:
It's because Dr. Gho splittet the FU's in gc's 1st HST and left 1 or 2 hairs behind in every extraction site
- as explained in detail in my previous post.
So everything what Dr. Gho could extract and implant during the 2nd HST,
were all the left behind single hairs from the 1st HST...
In other words, Dr. Gho couldn't find any multi-hair grafts anymore in gc's donor area...

[clarence]

Regarding Umar's, need more claims than that to legitimize transplanting all the hairs of your ass on top of your head?

[didi]

GC looks much better with shaved head,
if he wants to grow his hair long he will have need more grafts, too thin to grow..mismatch

buzzcut suits him better

[JudeL]

And how about HST1 just after 5.5 month...

http://www.fileden.com/files/2011/9/28/3202143/aaaa.jpg

or HST1 just after 9 month?

http://www.fileden.com/files/2011/9/28/3202143/day%205%20-%202nd%20treatment%20013.JPG

Are there more multi-hair grafts or singles?

btw - these photos show that, of course, the shorter the hairs,
the more it is difficult to judge whether or not the grafts produced singles or multi-hairs.
Because the closer the hairs are to the skin's surface (pore), the more the hairs "stick together" - at least most of them.

But the real reason why YOU can see more multi-hair grafts from the 1st HST:
It's because Dr. Gho splittet the FU's in gc's 1st HST and left 1 or 2 hairs behind in every extraction site
- as explained in detail in my previous post.
So everything what Dr. Gho could extract and implant during the 2nd HST,
were all the left behind single hairs from the 1st HST...
In other words, Dr. Gho couldn't find any multi-hair grafts anymore in gc's donor area...

All these technical terms and multiple posts here... I'm so confused. Can anyone put this all in layman's terms? Is this pro-Gho or no-Gho ^_^ :P

[534623]

Misleading claim#2 …

“Dr. Gho’s preservation medium is ultimately proved as an ILLUSION…”

7)The claim that stemcells are extracted and implanted after soaking in preservation medium to multiply follicle stemcells is ultimately proved as an ILLUSION.

Excuse me, but where is the "ultimate proof" of this "ILLUSION" you're TALKING about?
Where is your proof for your incompetent and fraudulent claims?

But let me explain you (again) how stupid and incompetent you are...

EVERYBODY out there - even laymen! - know, that if you pluck, I mean, if your really PLUCK out an anagen hair with out fingers or tweezers or similar "tools" - it grows back...


So what part of this don't you understand?

Furthermore, researchers out there know since DECADES, that follicular stem cells are still attached to PLUCKED hairs...

The scientific evidence for that is simply there since DECADES ...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15149497

Anyway, if there are follicular stem cells attached to the plucked hairs - where do these MISSING follicular stem cells come from, when the hair follicle completely regenerates itself and its hair shaft grows back??

WHERE DO THE MISSING FOLLICULAR STEM CELLS (due to hair plucking) COME FROM??
Definitely not from Dr. Nigams "FDA certificated stem cells Lab"...

So what part of this don't you understand?

Completely the same for the recipient area,
IF you try to IMPLANT plucked hairs:

A portion of the hair follicle stem cells are attached to the plucked hairs, and if this plucked hair regenerates COMPLETELY also in the recipient area - WHERE THE HELL DO THE MISSING FOLLICULAR STEM CELLS COME FROM??

In simple words:
What exactly multiplies the missing follicular stem cells in the implantation site of plucked hairs??

Right - such a procedure is called IN VIVO HAIR FOLLICLE STEM CELLS MULTIPLICATION.

An implanted HAIR SHAFT, with sufficient attached hair follicle stem cells (see pic above), has basically the same potential to regenerate a completely intact HAIR FOLLICLE again; same as the follicle in the donor site, whose HAIR SHAFT, with the attached stem cells, has been removed due to plucking it out from the follicle.

So everything you have to do is "to mimic the same regeneration environment & conditions" for the IMPLANTED hair shaft in the recipient site. In other words, you simply have to mimic the same situation & conditions as this happens by nature (without "simply adding ANY stem cells") to a hair follicle, whose HAIR SHAFT has been plucked out.

So how can I tell the hair shaft with the attached (but insufficient) stem cells, to multiply its attached stem cells ON ITS OWN to create finally a brand new whole and intact hair follicle? - as this happens also on its own in the donor site - you know, the reason why a plucked hair grows back on its own - and without Dr. Nigams "FDA certificated stem cells Lab"...

Yeah, doing this, telling the HAIR SHAFTS with the attached follicular stem cells to multiply its attached stem cells ON ITS OWN in the skin - this is called "rocket science" - or sometimes "Illusion" by idiots in this field ...

And here, for example, is such a "rocket science" I was talking about ...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130417092134.htm

Essential snippets from this new article ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"the process doesn't require other kinds of cells or agents to artificially support cell growth and doesn't activate cancer genes.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Furthermore...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"These exciting findings provide a rationale for using CD47 blocking therapies to increase stem cell uptake and survival in transplanted organs, matrix grafts, or other applications," said Mark Gladwin, M.D., professor and chief, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Pitt School of Medicine.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Competent guys like Dr. Gho are aware about this "rocket science" and these guys KNOW that doing this ...

IM,

To make the bisection regeneration still better and even creating new follicle I inject seperately source DP Cell, Growth Factor, Progenerative Stem Cells into the implantation site of incomplete bisected follicle both at recipient and donot. Automatically better regeneration and new follicle will regenerate.

As on today without any boasting this is the most advance technique of Donor Regeneration. We are still trying to improve with injection of DP Culture and Multiplied Stem cells after 6 weeks.

... IS NOT REQUIRED! - and has rather the potential to activate cancer genes - just as side note.

Anyway - now you guys know too what's "the most advanced technique";
It's definitely NOT what Dr. Nigam says or what he claims to do.

[The Alchemist]

“Dr. Gho’s preservation medium is ultimately proved as an ILLUSION…”




And here, for example, is such a "rocket science" I was talking about ...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130417092134.htm

Essential snippets from this new article ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"the process doesn't require other kinds of cells or agents to artificially support cell growth and doesn't activate cancer genes.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Furthermore...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"These exciting findings provide a rationale for using CD47 blocking therapies to increase stem cell uptake and survival in transplanted organs, matrix grafts, or other applications," said Mark Gladwin, M.D., professor and chief, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Pitt School of Medicine.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Competent guys like Dr. Gho are aware about this "rocket science" and these guys KNOW that doing this ...


... IS NOT REQUIRED! - and has rather the potential to activate cancer genes - just as side note.

Anyway - now you guys know too what's "the most advanced technique";
It's definitely NOT what Dr. Nigam says or what he claims to do.

So, are you suggesting that Dr. Gho is using the "rocket science" quoted in the the science daily article? If so, please provide evidence to support your claim.

[534623]

So, are you suggesting that Dr. Gho is using the "rocket science" quoted in the the science daily article?

No, that is neither what I "suggested" nor what I said.

The new science daily article is just about "a" method to artificially support cell growth without the usage of other kinds of cells or agents - but Dr. Nigam calls the usage of other kinds of cells or agents "the most advanced technique" without, of course, providing evidence to support his claim and he calls other techniques and methods, as mentioned one of them in the article, as "ILLUSION" and just "marketing gimmick".

In simple words - it's all about methods, techniques and the existence of the possibility in general, to do something, WITHOUT using more complicated (and rather risky) methods and/or lesser successful methods - as, for example, such a method:

To make the bisection regeneration still better and even creating new follicle I inject seperately source DP Cell, Growth Factor, Progenerative Stem Cells into the implantation site of incomplete bisected follicle both at recipient and donot. Automatically better regeneration and new follicle will regenerate.

...because who says that you will get "automatically better regeneration" if you use such a (useless) method??

So THIS is what I call bold claim and "marketing gimmick" - or simply "ILLUSION".

[drnigams]

Dear Members,

I had to come to this thread because IM has quoted me and started this thread which is connected to me. I will have to defend my claim.

I hope it is fair for all to have counter argument against the title of this thread. Let discuss whether misleading claim 2 is misleading or is it true?


Preservation medium is an Illusion.

You have given your defense saying that even plucked hair of which you have shown the picture which have follicular stem cells. You are correct there is no dispute.



Counter claim:-

1. Then plucked hair can be used for doubling why to use invasive methods like hollow needles or triple way needles. Dr. Cooley, Dr. Cole have experimented with plucked hair with partial success. We have also started our experiment with addition of stem cells, dp cells, growth factor, ECM and will post the test results next month.



2. Since inherent (you have not done anything to them) stem cells are already present in a plucked follicle / in-vivo bisected follicles & in-vitro bisected follicles including FUT & FUE follicles and since you have already agreed in another thread, that the technical name of this technique is perpendicular partial longitudinal bisection of follicle in-vivo follicular doubling and hence the claims stem cells hair transplant will definitely be consider misleading.



3. The website mentions, that with the help of the needle you extract stem cells and you implant stem cells.

Prove it, which is impossible, in fact you yourself have mentioned in this post that this technique is partial longitudinal follicle bisection and implantation with its inherent stem cells.

Please prove scientifically how the preservation medium multiplies follicle and show any scientific method / article proving that by soaking the graft in any possible culture medium, GF and any other stuff, can multiply follicular stem cells. (It may help in survival and better nutrition).

By the way stem cells in the donor area are already active unlike the stem cells in the MPB recipient bald area.



4. For stem cells to activate you need to loosen the cell membrane with enzymes and special CO2 incubation in a series of process with Growth Factor and proteins in the culture media to keep its tricogensity alive and work on sodium potassium pump on the cell membrane to promote the cell division,
the real stem cell multiplication which is only possible in a FDA certified lab with high sterile conditions like number of organism per 1000 cubic cm in the air of the lab. In normal procedure room or operation theater without laminar air flow, etc one organism is sufficient to spoil the sample of stem cell which is of now use.

Unless you isolate stem cells from the surrounding cells of even the follicle one cannot activate or multiply stem cells. Confirm the same from any independent bio-tech



Next misleading claim according to you:

Let the member and experts decide whether it is a misleading claim or true. This is what you have shown on your website.





Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/Drgh/DRGCT/Large/1.jpg

Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/Drgh/DRGCT/Large/2.jpg

Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/Drgh/DRGCT/Large/3.jpg

Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/Drgh/DRGCT/Large/4.jpg

Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/Drgh/DRGCT/Large/5.jpg

That you have bisected the follicle longitudinally and extracted the follicle. But why do we see follicle with bulb in your Petri dish.
We also see transected follicles which you count as 1 instead of 2 follicle per grafts. Why 80% regeneration at donor. Why wastage of some grafts? A follicle with a bulb is like an FUE implantation and recipient will always show growth.




Next claim

You yourself claiming that you give only 80% donor regeneration that means you sacrifice 20% grafts are less at the donor after the procedure.

Now you will have to decide, as I will mention few other technique of donor doubling which will be better.
1. In-vivo hair donor doubling with partial extraction of follicle transverse or longitudinal under the vision of ultra vision or fiber optic camera with addition of GF, ECM, DP Cells, Stem cells. We promise 100% regeneration at donor and 80 to 90 % regeneration at recipient. We can convert nw7 to nw2 in 10 days, ofcourse scarless.

2. Your blind technique of extraction of partial follicular unit longitudinally with wastage of few graft, multiple extraction sites at donor and extraction of follicle with bulb wherein it should have been extraction of follicle as shown in your pictures. Why we should not consider it as a splitting of 2 follicle into 1 as shown in the petri dish. Yes both of us is scarless. you claim 80% donor regeneration and X percentage of recipient regeneration. You can repeat procedure after 6 months and nw7 will takes years to become nw2.

We also offer in-vitro donor doubling wherein we grown 90 follicles from 23 follicle.

Shortly we will also offer pluck hair transplant with addition of stem cell, DP cells, GF to improve on the findings of Dr. Cole, Dr. Cooley.



Next Claim

You yourself say, that you have to use multiple drills or multiple extraction at the donor, We do not use multiple drills or multiple extraction at donor,
Then you decide which technique will be desirable.

Kindly also have a look at different possible types of graft extraction and decide which will be better.

Dr. Nigam's FUE extracted graft



Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/drgh/Follicles/Large/FUE.jpg

Dr. Nigam's FUT extracted graft



Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/drgh/Follicles/Large/FUT.jpg

Dr. Nigam's Plucked graft



Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/drgh/Follicles/Large/PLCK.jpg

Please understand we all are here to improve the present technique and get to the cure of MPB, that’s why we are debating, scrutinize.

I am always ready to improve on my technique, modify my technique and learn from others.

Same is expected from you Ironman, rather than you saying you are the best and hence there can be no other technique present or in the future.



Any true regeneration can only be proved by independent monitoring of single, double or triple grafts extracted from donor and implanted with macro and videoscopic pictures of the regenerated grafts at donor and recipient including the petri dish pictures which should show every graft clearly.

We will not consider any telogen hair or failed extractions because we don’t take into consider the same when we do the patch test or in-vivo or in-vitro doubling.



Let me tell you your technique is superior to FUE no doubt but there are other in-vitro, in-vivo Hair Doubling, Hair Tripling, Hair Quadrupling, Stem Cells Hair Multiplication, DP Cells injection is much more superior to yours even today.



You are open to scrutinize independently and compare.



And lastly the link which you have posted is talking about pluripotent stem cell (iPS) and hair follicular stem cells are multipotent and not pluripotent,

and can become hair and skin not anything else and are much safer. Pluripotent stem cell can become neuron, cardiac, etc.

Don’t confuse people with half knowledge.

My present technique is the integration of partial / bisected follicle extraction and with addition of growth factors for repair which used by Histogen and others and autologus serum free stem cells solution used by Aderans, dermal cup sheath, outer root sheath stem cells,
The safety of which is already proven by the 1st phase of clinical trails submited to FDA USA. as first phase of clinical trial is safety trials.

Thanks for giving me access of this article by CD 47 which I will research further and may be incorporate in my technique and this is the power of forums and discussion and debates in the forum.



Don’t you think extracting follicle in-vivo blindly will give rise to multiple extractions, failed extraction, and you will never be perfect every time in extraction where you want to do. Don’t you think my method using fibro optic 0.3 mm wire inside the hollow needle where in I can see the needle where my needle is going and where I am bisecting. In-fact this wire can be used by other HT surgeons.



I am improving everyday in the forum and not sticking to old guns. There will be lot to come after my visit to Edinburg conference of hair research and investigative dermatology where I will meet Jahoda, Dr. Stenn, Dr. Kim, Dr. Fuchs, Dr. Gerd, Dr. Noughton, Dr. Costariles and many others.



The more you know ……..you come to know….. that you do not know enough. This is the sign of wisdom.

Only a empty half vessel …….can be filled up with more knowledge. A vessel is already full with his own ideas and thoughts can never be filled and any new knowledge will be overflows.



Power comes with …….not only from what you know…… but also what you do what you know.



Its when you say you do not know the difference better pluripotent stem cell and multipotent stem cells and bolding making a claim that ------- IS NOT REQUIRED (Stem cells activation and activation). Read the article again. Unfortunately a knowledge about bioengineering, bio-tech, stem cells is half and you pick up article from here and there and tell the forum members about it but not now Ironman because I am here.

Dr. Nigam's bisected hair follicle

IMG]http://www.drnigams.net/images/drgh/DRNCT/Small/1.png[/IMG]

Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/drgh/DRNCT/Large/1.png

Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/drgh/DRNCT/Large/2.png

Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/drgh/DRNCT/Large/3.png

Click the below link to enlarge the above pic

http://www.drnigams.net/images/drgh/DRNCT/Large/4.png

“Dr. Gho’s preservation medium is ultimately proved as an ILLUSION…”




And here, for example, is such a "rocket science" I was talking about ...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130417092134.htm

Essential snippets from this new article ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"the process doesn't require other kinds of cells or agents to artificially support cell growth and doesn't activate cancer genes.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Furthermore...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"These exciting findings provide a rationale for using CD47 blocking therapies to increase stem cell uptake and survival in transplanted organs, matrix grafts, or other applications," said Mark Gladwin, M.D., professor and chief, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Pitt School of Medicine.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Competent guys like Dr. Gho are aware about this "rocket science" and these guys KNOW that doing this ...


... IS NOT REQUIRED! - and has rather the potential to activate cancer genes - just as side note.

Anyway - now you guys know too what's "the most advanced technique";
It's definitely NOT what Dr. Nigam says or what he claims to do.