Dr Nigam agrees to doubling slick NW6/NW7

[gc83uk]

We've all got different ideas it seems, however I would suggest something like this:

1) Hair must be buzzed down ALL OVER before each set of photos. No blade is required as Arashi rightly pointed out from the Tom photos. Probably around 1mm. Will check on that when I re-buzz my own hair in a weeks time. The shaver I was using after my 3rd HST is meant to cut at 0.5mm, basically no guard - Grade 0.


2) This is the most important part IMO......Because we're only looking at a horseshoe hair style which will be shaved down to hopefully 0.5mm - 1mm, then we'll need macros photos from ear to ear. Each photo should be perfectly in focus to zoom in and see how many hairs per FU. Each photo will probably cover an area of around 500 FU's (you will not need to count all 500 grafts per photo unless you really want to)....If done properly, you would only need about 5 photos from ear to ear, join the 5 photos together if you wish (not essential). This should be done 1 week before any extractions are taken from the donor....This gives sufficient time to ensure the pre-photos are of high enough quality. Without these photos, the test will not be conclusive.

No other work from us will be needed at this point. This is the beauty of this test, we will not be telling Dr Nigam which areas we will be monitoring! So Arashi this is for you, he won't be able to cheat, confirm?

Surely that's all that matters pre-op, right?

Everything else is secondary until then.

3) My final suggestion is in relation to his 3 methods which he wants to test, invivo, invitro and I can't remember the 3rd one. Shouldn't we just concentrate on the invitro? He's even admitted the invivo is around 50% regrowth, so lets forget that one. Thoughts?

[clandestine]

Please hire a professional photographer. That is my suggestion.

[gc83uk]

Please hire a professional photographer. That is my suggestion.

Yes that should be a given.

I'd go one further, we find the photographer for Dr Nigam, must be plenty of quality photographers in Mumbai. Hellouser knows his stuff on that. Get the photographer in the forum too so we can tell him to take another shot or whatever.

[One]

Perfect Gc. We can send e-mail at 2-3 photographers in Mumbai, saying what we are doing and what they need to do to validate the experiment. At the end the proof is in their hands, for which the photographer is critical!

Let's show a couple of pictures report Hasson and Wong, Rahal, Koray (like the example I showed you before me). So they must know how to take pictures.

It should be simple in the end, is not it?

So we are sure that this time the photographic evidence is finally being done in a serious way.

Ps: if dr nigam has already a photographer (and does not want to fire him) it is good you talk with him and understand what to do, before starting the whole thing.

[JJJJrS]

We've all got different ideas it seems, however I would suggest something like this:

1) Hair must be buzzed down ALL OVER before each set of photos. No blade is required as Arashi rightly pointed out from the Tom photos. Probably around 1mm. Will check on that when I re-buzz my own hair in a weeks time. The shaver I was using after my 3rd HST is meant to cut at 0.5mm, basically no guard - Grade 0.


2) This is the most important part IMO......Because we're only looking at a horseshoe hair style which will be shaved down to hopefully 0.5mm - 1mm, then we'll need macros photos from ear to ear. Each photo should be perfectly in focus to zoom in and see how many hairs per FU. Each photo will probably cover an area of around 500 FU's (you will not need to count all 500 grafts per photo unless you really want to)....If done properly, you would only need about 5 photos from ear to ear, join the 5 photos together if you wish (not essential). This should be done 1 week before any extractions are taken from the donor....This gives sufficient time to ensure the pre-photos are of high enough quality. Without these photos, the test will not be conclusive.

In my opinion, you should keep the test as simple as possible. The more complexity and requirements you add, the less likely the test will be completed successfully.

Counting is totally unnecessary in this case. Not only is it unreasonable to expect a mapping of someones donor, but what can be done with those photos really? You think someone will actually count 5-7k grafts?

A NW6/7->NW2/1 transformation is enough. No hair transplant surgeon has ever really done that. If the donor and recipient is shaved, any scarring or donor depletion would be immediately apparent with decent photos. I am very, very skeptical that Dr. Nigam will be able to achieve this but I hope to be proven wrong. This plus the Dr. Mwamba visit will tell you all you need to know. There is no point to add any more complexity.

[clarence]

Counting is totally unnecessary in this case. Not only is it unreasonable to expect a mapping of someones donor, but what can be done with those photos really? You think someone will actually count 5-7k grafts?

Of course you should do some counting. Why? Because you can do some counting without all the effort involved in what you are describing. Choose a random sample area of say, 2X2 cm, in the donor, and count the density. Then choose similarly a random sample in the slick bald recipient. Count the density. Repeat to make the outcome of the sampling more accurate. Oh, and don't forget to do this a couple of times before the procedure.

This should give us a fairly good idea, provided sampled areas are taken from the safe zone of the donor, and provided that the patient has significant areas in the recipient which are, in fact, slick bald.

[gc83uk]

In my opinion, you should keep the test as simple as possible. The more complexity and requirements you add, the less likely the test will be completed successfully.

Counting is totally unnecessary in this case. Not only is it unreasonable to expect a mapping of someones donor, but what can be done with those photos really? You think someone will actually count 5-7k grafts?

A NW6/7->NW2/1 transformation is enough. No hair transplant surgeon has ever really done that. If the donor and recipient is shaved, any scarring or donor depletion would be immediately apparent with decent photos. I am very, very skeptical that Dr. Nigam will be able to achieve this but I hope to be proven wrong. This plus the Dr. Mwamba visit will tell you all you need to know. There is no point to add any more complexity.

No offense but you must have misunderstood me. I even said you wouldn't need to do any counting.

You would only need to take a sample area and analyse 50-100 grafts, Nigam wouldn't even know which area we were picking until long after the procedure is done.

These sample areas just help to make the test conclusive imo. But as I said in the previous thread before approaching Nigam with my suggestion, it would be plain to see after TWO procedures and after extracting 10-12k FU's from the donor area whether this has worked or not. Even if they only partially regrown in the donor, it will be easy to see.

But having photos where we can analyse areas (more than 1 imo, 3 areas would be best) helps to make this conclusive.

No need to count shit.

[gc83uk]

JJJJrS. I think the part you misunderstood was the reference I made to the 5 pre op macro photos from ear to ear.

Nobody will need to analyse each graft in this area, it's just for our reference for later on.

[Arashi]

In my opinion, you should keep the test as simple as possible. The more complexity and requirements you add, the less likely the test will be completed successfully.

In a perfect world we shouldn't need to count. Agreed. Nigams should just get a NW7 and turn his scalp into a scalp full of hair with at least 30 grafts/cm2. If that would happen, we wouldn't even need any donor photo's at all ! Just the end result should tell us enough.

However this is Dr Nigams. I'm expecting it's not going to happen like this. I'm expecting an end result with coverage all over his head but it's just going to be rather thin. And then what ? Did the test fail or is this a success ? Sure we can ask Nigams to do another procedure but that's going to take at least another 9 months.

That's why I'm suggesting to shoot good pre-op photo's of the donor, as a backup. I think you misunderstand the way it needs to go down JJJJrs. You don't have to map and match the pre and postop photos. Just count all of the hair in his donor. How much hair can that be for a NW7 ? Let's say his donor area is 20 cm long and 8 cm high. Let's assume he has 70 grafts per cm. so That's 11.200 grafts in total. We just have to count those. If you have a picture of the donor you can make blocks of 100 grafts, cross them out and do the next block. Even if you only count 1 graft per second, this amounts to only 3 hours of counting. I'd have no problems to do that. Even if it would take a full day. And then of course another round for the end result.

And again, yes, in theory this shouldn't be necessary. But this is Dr Nigams.

[Arashi]

Or it could even be done a lot quicker. Just do it via statistical analysis. Mark 3 blocks of 5 cm2, randomly in the donor. Count the grafts. Calculate an average density. Then do the same for the recipient. Maybe areas could be used that are between moles or other skin marks.

As long as we have the photo's stuff like this is possible. If we don't ... well I have a feeling somehow we'll still know nothing when the test ends.

[gc83uk]

In a perfect world we shouldn't need to count. Agreed. Nigams should just get a NW7 and turn his scalp into a scalp full of hair with at least 30 grafts/cm2. If that would happen, we wouldn't even need any donor photo's at all ! Just the end result should tell us enough.

However this is Dr Nigams. I'm expecting it's not going to happen like this. I'm expecting an end result with coverage all over his head but it's just going to be rather thin. And then what ? Did the test fail or is this a success ? Sure we can ask Nigams to do another procedure but that's going to take at least another 9 months.

That's why I'm suggesting to shoot good pre-op photo's of the donor, as a backup. I think you misunderstand the way it needs to go down JJJJrs. You don't have to map and match the pre and postop photos. Just count all of the hair in his donor. How much hair can that be for a NW7 ? Let's say his donor area is 20 cm long and 8 cm high. Let's assume he has 70 grafts per cm. so That's 11.200 grafts in total. We just have to count those. If you have a picture of the donor you can make blocks of 100 grafts, cross them out and do the next block. Even if you only count 1 graft per second, this amounts to only 3 hours of counting. I'd have no problems to do that. Even if it would take a full day. And then of course another round for the end result.

And again, yes, in theory this shouldn't be necessary. But this is Dr Nigams.

Arashi, that's all great, but tell me what's wrong with just taking a sample area? Counting all the pre op grafts and mapping isn't necessary IMO. Care to explain?

I can only assume you want to know the exact net gain of hairs on the head.

[Arashi]

Arashi, that's all great, but tell me what's wrong with just taking a sample area? Counting all the pre op grafts and mapping isn't necessary IMO. Care to explain?

I can only assume you want to know the exact net gain of hairs on the head.

Yeah that's what I suggested in my post just above yours It's way faster and should yield a good indication. But really, we DO need good photo's.

[gc83uk]

Yeah that's what I suggested in my post just above yours It's way faster and should yield a good indication. But really, we DO need good photo's.

Yea I suggested this about 2 pages back

[Pentarou]

But remember, we have only 1 or 2 years before Indian Parliament also passes law regulating stem-cell research and therapy.

If this is true, it's no wonder Dr Nigam seems so gung-ho about testing so many theoretical concepts in such a short space of time...

[Arashi]

Yea I suggested this about 2 pages back

Hehe, ok missed that. All in all, we really need to get good photo's of donor. Cause this is Dr Nigams