Debunking HASCI´s regeneration claim - an open letter.

[Arashi]

Perhaps!

But we're talking about 2 Dr's here, both giving the same figures, seems unlikely that they wouldn't try that before suggesting a scalp reduction. It wasn't a 5 minute consultation.

Ok. Well I don't know Gaz Not sure why they told you that and what they did or did not see. But I do know that your recipient contains no tripples, and mostly singles. So in such case, 5000 grafts sounds a lot more than it actually is.

Of course I'll admit that regeneration for your first surgery might have been better. We simply don't know. And maybe it's also better for other patients. All we know is that in your 3rd procedure, most likely not a lot of regeneration happened based on the data we now have ... All the rest we just don't know and can only speculate on.

[gc83uk]

Ok. Well I don't know Gaz Not sure why they told you that and what they did or did not see. But I do know that your recipient contains no tripples, and mostly singles. So in such case, 5000 grafts sounds a lot more than it actually is.

Of course I'll admit that regeneration for your first surgery might have been better. We simply don't know. And maybe it's also better for other patients. All we know is that in your 3rd procedure, most likely not a lot of regeneration happened based on the data we now have ... All the rest we just don't know and can only speculate on.

Exactly, this brings me back to my first point, there are so many unknown variables. We've done the best with what we had to work with.

It may also be plausible that the avg hair count in the recip maybe higher in the first HST than the subsequent HSTs. Something that Didi noticed. Albeit the latter HST's hadn't had the same amount of time to develop.

I think had I gone for an FUE, two things would have happend (pure speculation of course), my avg hair per graft would have been about 1.8 and I'm not sure the yield of FUE in the recipient vs HST is up to much.

Yes the avg hair maybe 1.3 1.4 1.5, I think its closer to 1.5, but there maybe more 1.5's on my head than had I done a traditional FUE. There maybe a lot to be said for Gho's preservation medium.

Like I said, I'm trying to be positive.

[gc83uk]

Oh and 1 more very important thing. If I had even 2500 grafts extracted with FUE, then how would I cover up those scars. I couldn't have grown my hair out again, there wouldn't be much left. And I couldn't shave, I'd be like a human dot-2-dot lol

I really had no choice here, it was a no brainer.

And it's only cost me £4 per graft, I'm not sure how that compares to European FUE Dr's.

Actually the £4 per graft would have been even cheaper had I opted to have shaved my head earlier, I could have done more grafts in 1 day, thus saving extra days.

[Arashi]

Oh and 1 more very important thing. If I had even 2500 grafts extracted with FUE, then how would I cover up those scars. I couldn't have grown my hair out again, there wouldn't be much left. And I couldn't shave, I'd be like a human dot-2-dot lol

I really had no choice here, it was a no brainer.

And it's only cost me £4 per graft, I'm not sure how that compares to European FUE Dr's.

Actually the £4 per graft would have been even cheaper had I opted to have shaved my head earlier, I could have done more grafts in 1 day, thus saving extra days.

Don't get me wrong Gaz, I feel that the fact that HASCI's procedure is scarless is very important ! I just don't think they should advertise with 85% regrowth.

[gc83uk]

Don't get me wrong Gaz, I feel that the fact that HASCI's procedure is scarless is very important ! I just don't think they should advertise with 85% regrowth.

Perhaps, but you know what they have published a paper which claims it works. And works as it's advertised.

Who is to blame for that? How do you go about getting these results analysed, who over sees it?

[Arashi]

Perhaps, but you know what they have published a paper which claims it works. And works as it's advertised.

Who is to blame for that? How do you go about getting these results analysed, who over sees it?

Maybe it happened in one patient ? I don't know. All we have is your data from your 3rd case. It's good enough for me to plan my future treatments. And since it seems unlikely from your case that a lot of regrowth is happening, I'm holding back on future treatments, until I really need one

[gc83uk]

Maybe it happened in one patient ? I don't know. All we have is your data from your second case. It's good enough for me to plan my future treatments. And since it seems unlikely from your case that a lot of regrowth is happening, I'm holding back on future treatments, until I really need one

I think the paper refers to 5 test cases. There should be a regulatory body that says yes this works or no this does't work. If there is, then they have sanctioned it and if it doesn't work as described then they are equally liable.

Sure it's sensible to wait if you're not confident with it. You're not really in a desperate situation from what I can gather, you're hair looks pretty good to me. If I were in your shoes I'd wouldn't be the guinea pig, no chance, I'd wait for something concrete to come along.

For me it had to be now, at any cost. fcuk the future scenario.

[Arashi]

For me it had to be now, at any cost. fcuk the future scenario.

Of course, you did the right thing, without a doubt. And I'm sure you're happy with the results too, regrowth or not, it looks SO much better than before ..

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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]

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]

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.