Debunking HASCI´s regeneration claim - an open letter.

[crafter]

+1

If the regeneration happens as the pictures show, then we need to get on this ASAP. We need solutions NOW.

It's certainly the best evidence I have seen for it, especially when compared to another certain "Doctor's" claims.

I hope Dr Wesley does make progress with this in the trial next year, the only thing im dubious about is acell, as I've heard very mixed things about its ability.

[clarence]

... that guys like you don't even have the bucks for a 50 HST grafts test procedure - so that they finally would be able to back up such claims like yours with their OWN head, OWN camera, OWN photos etc etc.

Some guy(s) have asked for a 50 graft test and they have refused. At least the guy called Skywalker

[534623]

Dr Gho demonstrated regrowth ...

http://www.hasci.com/en/news-media/22-hairdressers-visit-maastricht-clinic/

Snippet from the article ...
*******************************
Presentation on HST by Dr Coen Gho, CSO

Dr Coen Gho presented a detailed description of HaarStamcel Transplantatie®. Besides the familiar characteristics, a great deal of attention was also devoted to the donor area. By literally and figuratively zooming in on the donor area, Dr Gho demonstrated that the claim regarding recovery and regrowth is entirely justified.
*******************************

So what more the hell do you guys want?? lol

Anyway, I wonder in which way exactly he demonstrated that and what material (labeled photos etc etc) he used during the presentation.

[caddarik79]

http://www.hasci.com/en/news-media/2...tricht-clinic/

Snippet from the article ...
*******************************
Presentation on HST by Dr Coen Gho, CSO

Dr Coen Gho presented a detailed description of HaarStamcel Transplantatie®. Besides the familiar characteristics, a great deal of attention was also devoted to the donor area. By literally and figuratively zooming in on the donor area, Dr Gho demonstrated that the claim regarding recovery and regrowth is entirely justified.
*******************************

So what more the hell do you guys want?? lol


Anyway, I wonder in which way exactly he demonstrated that and what material (labeled photos etc etc) he used during the presentation.

Funny, I was kind of wondering today if I would not just trust it again... no matter the bashing and keep refilling my head to be every year or every second year closer to a full head of hair!!!

They are still much more professionnal then Nigam who completely disappeard.


cause if 85% is real, it's a surgical cure at 85%!!!

GC resurrection is also helping it, I don't know, it's a very costy treatment...

The only real concern I have beside the real efficiency... is, am I screwing my eligibility for other future treatment by getting holes in my head now... should I wait or should I go?

Bridging with them and restoring fully with other cutting edge treatment to come in five- ten years...

[FearTheLoss]

http://www.hasci.com/en/news-media/2...tricht-clinic/

Snippet from the article ...
*******************************
Presentation on HST by Dr Coen Gho, CSO

Dr Coen Gho presented a detailed description of HaarStamcel Transplantatie®. Besides the familiar characteristics, a great deal of attention was also devoted to the donor area. By literally and figuratively zooming in on the donor area, Dr Gho demonstrated that the claim regarding recovery and regrowth is entirely justified.
*******************************

So what more the hell do you guys want?? lol

Anyway, I wonder in which way exactly he demonstrated that and what material (labeled photos etc etc) he used during the presentation.

I'd like to see the presentation.

[greatjob!]

http://www.hasci.com/en/news-media/2...tricht-clinic/

Snippet from the article ...
*******************************
Presentation on HST by Dr Coen Gho, CSO

Dr Coen Gho presented a detailed description of HaarStamcel Transplantatie®. Besides the familiar characteristics, a great deal of attention was also devoted to the donor area. By literally and figuratively zooming in on the donor area, Dr Gho demonstrated that the claim regarding recovery and regrowth is entirely justified.
*******************************

So what more the hell do you guys want?? lol

Anyway, I wonder in which way exactly he demonstrated that and what material (labeled photos etc etc) he used during the presentation.

I hope you are being sarcastic. This was a presentation at Gho's clinic to a bunch of hairdressers, really hairdressers. Well if someone who went to beauty school says the regeneration claims are entirely justified, then to borrow a line from you, I guess everything is in order...

[cocacola]

Thing is with gho so far, 85% regeneration seems like bs because of independent analysis on this forum and lack of nw7 to nw1 pictures.

0% regeneration seems like bs as well, because of the same independent analysis on this forum and gc's case.

Somewhere between 0% and 85% seems the most reasonable conclusion, the question is where?

[gc83uk]

Thing is with gho so far, 85% regeneration seems like bs because of independent analysis on this forum and lack of nw7 to nw1 pictures.

0% regeneration seems like bs as well, because of the same independent analysis on this forum and gc's case.

Somewhere between 0% and 85% seems the most reasonable conclusion, the question is where?

85% of extractions show some or full regrowth
50% donor regen (after deducting failed extractions etc)
35% net growth of hair vs FUE
20% actual net growth of hair overall

That's how I see it, Arashi will be doing small test in the next few months which should give us some concrete numbers.

[cocacola]

mm can you explain the logic behind the 35% and the 20%, maybe i missed something

[hellouser]

Thing is with gho so far, 85% regeneration seems like bs because of independent analysis on this forum and lack of nw7 to nw1 pictures.

0% regeneration seems like bs as well, because of the same independent analysis on this forum and gc's case.

Somewhere between 0% and 85% seems the most reasonable conclusion, the question is where?

GC's case is amazing. Looking at his before and after pics, it doesnt look like he had any follicles extracted AT ALL. The amount of coverage he's got is simply insane and he's still got plenty of hair in his donor area to make his head much denser. I cannot say with certainty that Dr. Gho's HST method is definitely 0% regeneration, it jut doesn't look like it at all.

[534623]

I hope you are being sarcastic. This was a presentation at Gho's clinic to a bunch of hairdressers, really hairdressers.

Of course hairdressers. I guess there are 2 reasons for that:

1) Hairdressers bring Dr. Gho their REAL clients into his clinic(s) simply by doing "word-of-mouth advertising" - you can't expect the same from his competitors (hair transplant industry/doctors).

2) At least since Dr. Gho's scientific publication of the HST technique in a reputable medical journal, the hair transplant industry in general, FUE doctors in particular, are either not interested such a presentation, or they are completely unable to verify at least Dr. Gho's donor regrowth claim, as described, even in detail (how he extracts the grafts, and what hollow needle and needle size he is using etc), in the mentioned medical journal.

Concerning 2), even Spencer Kobren mentioned during one of his radio shows a few month ago, that basically EVERY American hair transplant doc could simply do what Dr. Gho is doing - right?
So the BIG question remains:
Why don't THEY simply prove or disprove at least Dr Gho's donor regrowth claim??

For example, especially guys like Dr. Cole, who is easily able (due to his FUE tools company) to reproduce Dr. Gho's special sharp/blunt combined triple waved needle for the extraction of HST grafts. That's everything what is needed (if at all) to prove or to disprove at least Dr. Gho's donor regrowth claim.

So what's the problem?
Why don't THEY simply "debunk" Dr. Gho's donor regrowth claim???????
I mean, if Dr. Gho would be my biggest competitor, I would immediatly try to "debunk" him, simply by doing practically exactly the same what I do, as FUE doc, every day in my clinic. Again, I would immediatly try to grill him ... but it seems they love him - or simply don't want to make advertising for him...the only explanation I have...lol

[One]

GC's case is amazing. Looking at his before and after pics, it doesnt look like he had any follicles extracted AT ALL. The amount of coverage he's got is simply insane and he's still got plenty of hair in his donor area to make his head much denser. I cannot say with certainty that Dr. Gho's HST method is definitely 0% regeneration, it jut doesn't look like it at all.

+1

[JJJJrS]

Of course hairdressers. I guess there are 2 reasons for that:

1) Hairdressers bring Dr. Gho their REAL clients into his clinic(s) simply by doing "word-of-mouth advertising" - you can't expect the same from his competitors (hair transplant industry/doctors).

2) At least since Dr. Gho's scientific publication of the HST technique in a reputable medical journal, the hair transplant industry in general, FUE doctors in particular, are either not interested such a presentation, or they are completely unable to verify at least Dr. Gho's donor regrowth claim, as described, even in detail (how he extracts the grafts, and what hollow needle and needle size he is using etc), in the mentioned medical journal.

Concerning 2), even Spencer Kobren mentioned during one of his radio shows a few month ago, that basically EVERY American hair transplant doc could simply do what Dr. Gho is doing - right?
So the BIG question remains:
Why don't THEY simply prove or disprove at least Dr Gho's donor regrowth claim??

For example, especially guys like Dr. Cole, who is easily able (due to his FUE tools company) to reproduce Dr. Gho's special sharp/blunt combined triple waved needle for the extraction of HST grafts. That's everything what is needed (if at all) to prove or to disprove at least Dr. Gho's donor regrowth claim.

So what's the problem?
Why don't THEY simply "debunk" Dr. Gho's donor regrowth claim???????
I mean, if Dr. Gho would be my biggest competitor, I would immediatly try to "debunk" him, simply by doing practically exactly the same what I do, as FUE doc, every day in my clinic. Again, I would immediatly try to grill him ... but it seems they love him - or simply don't want to make advertising for him...the only explanation I have...lol

Of course if you transect a hair at the right point, there will be regrowth. That's not the issue. The question is whether you can transect a hair and achieve consistent growth, both in the donor and recipient. Basically, what Gho has to prove is whether he is multiplying hairs or redistributing them.

It's a very simple process to prove. All they have to do is completely document a relatively small procedure. HASCI seems completely unable to do that however, and instead are more interested in dealing with hair dressers and those that are easier to fool.

[534623]

Of course if you transect a hair at the right point, there will be regrowth. That's not the issue.

REALLY?
After around 15 years of "traditional FUE" - sorry, I'm not aware about any legit proof of your claim.

By the way - and just to let you know:
Concerning "transecting" or "splitting" follicles to get 2 follicles from 1, something like "transect at the right point" doesn't exist. Simply because the "right point" varies not only from patient to patient, it varies even in the same patient. That's also the reason why all those researchers, who investigate this issue, are always so "confused" and when they talk about "mixed results"...

"Splitting at the right point" ... yeah, sure ...

Oh, by the way - I heard Dr. Nigam is splitting FUE extracted follicles in vitro "at the right point" and under magnification. You should buy it! Works great! lol

[Arashi]

2) At least since Dr. Gho's scientific publication of the HST technique

something that's not reproducible per definition is not scientific.