Debunking HASCI´s regeneration claim - an open letter.

[gc83uk]

Ok, never really studied their papers. On the one hand I don't think they'd go as far as lying in those papers (though there are numerous examples in history where people just did that and got away with in the beginning). I rather just trust my own eyes and study an independent patient case.

True, but you need more cases and the paper shouldn't be ignored.

I'm not the ideal patient, you know that for reasons that's not worth repeating again. I'm probably the least normal person when it comes to hairloss you'll ever know.

[Arashi]

No, no. I was just surprised that in the actual paper they mention failed extractions and one guy had 1 in 3 failed.

I'm not talking about what might be the best situation, more about what they have already admitted from the outset. That's all

Ok, never really studied their papers. On the one hand I don't think they'd go as far as lying in those papers (though there are numerous examples in history where people just did that and got away with in the beginning). I rather just trust my own eyes and study an independent patient case.

[gc83uk]

You mean that in some patients + the best technician the ratio might be 1:3 instead of approx 1:2 ? I don't doubt that's possible. Or are you trying to say anything else ?

No, no. I was just surprised that in the actual paper they mention failed extractions and one guy had 1 in 3 failed.

I'm not talking about what might be the best situation, more about what they have already admitted from the outset. That's all

[Arashi]

No forget me for a moment. Did you even realise that, honestly?

You mean that in some patients + the best technician the ratio might be 1:3 instead of approx 1:2 ? I don't doubt that's possible. Or are you trying to say anything else ?

[gc83uk]

From my own observation during my own HST and what was confirmed by HASCI, the rate is influenced by:

1) The skill of the specific technician
2) The area on the scalp
3) The patient's hair

Patient was the same (you). We've spread out (or going to spread) out the number over your whole scalp. And the major part was done by Rolf. So if anything, the number is even too optimistic.

No forget me for a moment. Did you even realise that, honestly?

[Arashi]

I was also having a close look at the peer reviewed paper last night. Did you realise that one of the 5 patients had 1 in 3 failed extractions?

From my own observation during my own HST and what was confirmed by HASCI, the rate is influenced by:

1) The skill of the specific technician
2) The area on the scalp
3) The patient's hair

Patient was the same (you). We've spread out (or going to spread) out the number over your whole scalp. And the major part was done by Rolf. So if anything, the number is even too optimistic.

[gc83uk]

I was also having a close look at the peer reviewed paper last night. Did you realise that one of the 5 patients had 1 in 3 failed extractions?

[Arashi]

Yes I think I know which two photos you're talking about. What I did was to use the better picture as a guide, but put all circles on one picture. Probably better to spread that section out over two pictures.

Yep. It's almost weekend so I have time soon

[gc83uk]

The rate you calculated for day 2 was a bit better. I'll verify that for you cause when I was doing my counting I found that it was very hard to see the grafts in the unfocused parts of the picture (which you used to count) and it was better to switch to another picture. I'll do it that way and we can then calculate a grand total for the 2 days. That seems to be fair, agreed ? It might be that the number is slightly better and we can then use that for our calculations.

Yes I think I know which two photos you're talking about. What I did was to use the better picture as a guide, but put all circles on one picture. Probably better to spread that section out over two pictures.

[Arashi]

You do realise it was not just Rolf who made the extractions on day 1?

Day 2 it was just Rolf.

The rate you calculated for day 2 was a bit better. I'll verify that for you cause when I was doing my counting I found that it was very hard to see the grafts in the unfocused parts of the picture (which you used to count) and it was better to switch to another picture. I'll do it that way and we can then calculate a grand total for the 2 days. That seems to be fair, agreed ? It might be that the number is slightly better and we can then use that for our calculations.

[gc83uk]

I don't see how this is bashing. It's just facts, that anybody can check and verify. There's no speculation. The only assumption that's being made is that the failed-to-total extraction rate is pretty much equal among sessions. I think that's a fair assumption, especially since Rolf, who's their best technician, did the extractions in the last session. If he couldn't do a better ratio, why would it have been totally different in the session before ? It seems highly unlikely.

You do realise it was not just Rolf who made the extractions on day 1?

Day 2 it was just Rolf.

[Arashi]

And then there's of course the statistical uncertainty in the sample that jjjrs studied. It's been a while since I had my statistical analysis classes at university, not sure anymore how to calculate the sample size to get a 99% certain prediction, but intuitively I think jjjjrs studied enough extraction sites to come up with a valid number (that 65%). And even if it's not 99% certain, it's close to that anyway. So while we have to live with those uncertainties, they are really small and it seems fair to speak of a very accurate prediction of the regeneration rate. And if HASCI disagrees, they can always increase the sample size by analyzing more extraction points in the photo's and show us we're wrong. I'm confident they can't.

[Arashi]

He said that they stopped taking bashing into consideration

I don't see how this is bashing. It's just facts, that anybody can check and verify. There's no speculation. The only assumption that's being made is that the failed-to-total extraction rate is pretty much equal among sessions. I think that's a fair assumption, especially since Rolf, who's their best technician, did the extractions in the last session. If he couldn't do a better ratio, why would it have been totally different in the session before ? It seems highly unlikely.

[caddarik79]

I have received an answer from Pierre, he will forward my e-mail and the link to the open letter to Dr Gho so that he decides if it's worth an answer.

He said that they stopped taking bashing into consideration, they have opened 5 new rooms in Maastricht and Pierre himself did a procedure last June for 1401 grafts.

I said I hope Dr Gho or someone from HASI will take the time to answer every point.


There we are.

[JJJJrS]

They all can "switch" wherever they want - NOTHING of all these "camps" will help neither them nor you - at least not within the coming 5 - 10 years or so.

BUT ...

I will try to "support" each and every "legit" doc out there with "good intentions" to get 2 hairs from 1 procedures more popular in general and -the most important thing- to get it improved and finally well WORKING at all, because a real well-working 2 follicles from 1 procedure can be for MANY guys out there considered as real "cure".

Very good post IM