Dr Nigam agrees to doubling slick NW6/NW7

[Boldy]

@ thom,

|I think its very good what mwamba is doing. He has a big name to keep (top surgeon in the world). He must play safe and check if the results are reproducible on at least 5 patients, before he starts selling it.

Its a wise decision. also better for us, to know that the results are reproducible. (or not). But Im sure it is.

[crafter]

can someone PLEASE explain whats going on? Has Dr Wamba managed to do Nigam's technique?

so lost with it all.

[hellouser]

its not essential indeed

wrong, between 80 and 100% according to mwamba and he is one of the best in the world..

Which is still way more than enough to get to a NW0!

[JJJJrS]

I said as much a couple of pages back, if the extracted hairs are all 2 hair FU's then with De-novo you should be able to get 200 hairs in recipient and 60% of the donor repaired, equating to a loss of 40 hairs in the donor, net gain of hair on head = 160

It's also worth noting that Mwamba has told Tom that yields can be as low as 80% in the recipient, so this would have to be taken into account.

Sounds incredible if true...

I see a lot of doctors throwing these numbers around with donor regeneration (30%, 60%, 80%, etc.) and I always wonder where they come from? If you didn't pull the numbers out of your ass and actually did some actual analysis, then share the results with everybody. So far, no doctor has been to conclusive prove that their getting donor regeneration, but all of them are throwing these numbers.

But to get back on topic, what always worried me about these 50 graft tests is the documentation and photos. You have to be able to take pictures that are good enough that we count the number of hairs in each follicular unit. Even for a pro, something like that isn't easy.

[hellouser]

Sounds incredible if true...

I see a lot of doctors throwing these numbers around with donor regeneration (30%, 60%, 80%, etc.) and I always wonder where they come from? If you didn't pull the numbers out of your ass and actually did some actual analysis, then share the results with everybody. So far, no doctor has been to conclusive prove that their getting donor regeneration, but all of them are throwing these numbers.

But to get back on topic, what always worried me about these 50 graft tests is the documentation and photos. You have to be able to take pictures that are good enough that we count the number of hairs in each follicular unit. Even for a pro, something like that isn't easy.

Trust me, its easy taking photos of a 50 graft area.

[gc83uk]

Trust me, its easy taking photos of a 50 graft area.

Yea I would have to agree. I take all my photos with a Mobile phone lol and not many people complain about the quality.

I'm not kidding I could do this with my eyes closed. I'm not trying to downplay it, but 50 grafts really is so easy to photograph!

[JJJJrS]

Trust me, its easy taking photos of a 50 graft area.

Yea I would have to agree. I take all my photos with a Mobile phone lol and not many people complain about the quality.

I'm not kidding I could do this with my eyes closed. I'm not trying to downplay it, but 50 grafts really is so easy to photograph!

I'm not a photographer by any stretch, so I'm hardly an expert on the topic.

But I wasn't really referring to getting clear photos of the 50 graft area. Lots of people have shown that before. But photos that are clear enough that I can know exactly how many hairs are in each follicular unit, with minimal guessing involved? Even with some of your photos that I used in the previous analysis gc, it was hard to know exactly how many hairs were in the follicular unit. The only time I saw photos like that were the microscopic photos HASCI took for the first 50 graft test, but those could only cover a small area. You guys don't think this would be an issue?

[gc83uk]

I'm not a photographer by any stretch, so I'm hardly an expert on the topic.

But I wasn't really referring to getting clear photos of the 50 graft area. Lots of people have shown that before. But photos that are clear enough that I can know exactly how many hairs are in each follicular unit, with minimal guessing involved? Even with some of your photos that I used in the previous analysis gc, it was hard to know exactly how many hairs were in the follicular unit. The only time I saw photos like that were the microscopic photos HASCI took for the first 50 graft test, but those could only cover a small area. You guys don't think this would be an issue?

I was going to suggest using one of those microscopic usb cameras, I think Iron Man tried it and it was quite impressive, don't know if you remember.

I will admit, some of the early photos I did, inlcuding HST3 were all taken with a digital camera, however since using my Samsung Galaxy mobile phone on HST4, I'm confident I can shoot good photos good enough to be able to see if it's indeed a 1/2/3 hair graft. I share your concerns on that, but whoever the subject maybe, it would be wise to test their photography skills before even going to India.

[gc83uk]

A user here by the name of JDW, he seems to know his stuff when it comes to photography, he seems like a possible candidate (reading between the lines).

However if Arashi is indeed funding this initiative then it's his baby, I just hope we can make something happen sooner rather than later.

[JJJJrS]

I was going to suggest using one of those microscopic usb cameras, I think Iron Man tried it and it was quite impressive, don't know if you remember.

A USB camera would be good, but I don't think it would be able to cover the whole 50 graft area. Ideally, you'd like to get the whole area in one shot to simplify the analysis.

I will admit, some of the early photos I did, inlcuding HST3 were all taken with a digital camera, however since using my Samsung Galaxy mobile phone on HST4, I'm confident I can shoot good photos good enough to be able to see if it's indeed a 1/2/3 hair graft. I share your concerns on that, but whoever the subject maybe, it would be wise to test their photography skills before even going to India.

Your pictures have always been great gc. I haven't examined the newer photos you took in great detail though. After all the controversy surrounding HST about 3-hair grafts in the recipient and the splitting theory, I just think it's critically important to take photos that are good enough to confidently characterize the individual FUs. Maybe, I'm exaggerating the difficulty of taking those photos though.

[JJJJrS]

Looking back, I think Dr. Mousseigne did by far the best job with his documentation. All doctors should look at that case as an example of how to document donor and recipient growth.

Too bad Mousseigne and Mathieu never got back to us though. I suspect they had some difficulty getting growth in the recipient but maybe they'll surprise us in the future.

[gc83uk]

A USB camera would be good, but I don't think it would be able to cover the whole 50 graft area. Ideally, you'd like to get the whole area in one shot to simplify the analysis.



Your pictures have always been great gc. I haven't examined the newer photos you took in great detail though. After all the controversy surrounding HST about 3-hair grafts in the recipient and the splitting theory, I just think it's critically important to take photos that are good enough to confidently characterize the individual FUs. Maybe, I'm exaggerating the difficulty of taking those photos though.

I hear you, I can only speak from taking my own photos and it's been a breeze (to identify the number of hairs in each FU). Ideally the test subject is a photographer. Not asking for much are we lol

[gc83uk]

Looking back, I think Dr. Mousseigne did by far the best job with his documentation. All doctors should look at that case as an example of how to document donor and recipient growth.

Too bad Mousseigne and Mathieu never got back to us though. I suspect they had some difficulty getting growth in the recipient but maybe they'll surprise us in the future.

yea, that was the best photo/documentation I have seen.

[JJJJrS]

yea, that was the best photo/documentation I have seen.

I still think yours are even clearer but it's very good work, especially compared to some of the other doctors who just throw numbers around.

Even with those photos though, I can't confidently say exactly how many hairs are in each FU.

The only time I could do that was the microscope photo HASCI released for the second 50 graft test.

If you could fit the 50 graft area with a photo of that quality, then you completely simplify the analysis.

[cp9]

Does Dr Mwamba have a website in English? I can't read German =/ Google translate's not translating everything either.