Debunking HASCI´s regeneration claim - an open letter.

[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]

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?

[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 TransplantatieŽ. 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...

[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 TransplantatieŽ. 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.

[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...

[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 TransplantatieŽ. 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.

[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

[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.

[hellouser]

ok, so i've just watched the Pilofocus video and at 22 minutes Dr Wesley talks about regeneration, and the video shows evidence for it and Dr Cooley has acknowledged it has happened to, so why are we not more excited by this? both are reputable doctors.

+1

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

[crafter]

ok, so i've just watched the Pilofocus video and at 22 minutes Dr Wesley talks about regeneration, and the video shows evidence for it and Dr Cooley has acknowledged it has happened to, so why are we not more excited by this? both are reputable doctors.

[JJJJrS]

By the way do they still advertise anywhere the 85% figure? I'm sure they used to, but I can't see it anywhere unless I'm missing it! Maybe they took note?

Yup, you're right. It's gone now. No mention of the 85% figure.

Probably followed the discussion on the forums At least we're making somewhat of a difference

[JJJJrS]

Although I'm not even aware of the regrowth rate from IronMan, can you tell me what it was? And did he confirm the same findings?

I did an analysis for IM's procedure last year. Unfortunately, FileDen is gone now so the pictures are no longer online.

Without taking into account transections or failed extractions, around 70% of the extraction points regrew hair. He seemed to support my findings. Of course, the actual "regeneration rate" will be much lower in practice.

You can read more about it here.

There is so many ways to spin the results, but it's important to realise too that when you have FUE you're left with less hair on your head than what you started with probably -15%ish, that's my understanding of it, so it makes HST's 20% NET gain not too bad in direct comparison.

If that were the case, those would be incredible results, especially combined with the scarless aspect.

Any net gain of hair is enormous. You can always work on the technical issues to improve consistency.

I think it's frustrating though, that we still have no concrete answers and HASCI still behaves so secretive about their procedure, even to the same patients that invested a lot, both financially and emotionally, to get a procedure done.

By the way do they still advertise anywhere the 85% figure? I'm sure they used to, but I can't see it anywhere unless I'm missing it! Maybe they took note?

Interesting. I'll take a look but last time I checked, which was a while ago, I remember seeing that 85% figure thrown around a lot.

[clarence]

If you're going to do a test like that, and want to learn as much about the procedure as you can, I'd strongly encourage you to limit the number of grafts. Anything above 50 grafts becomes a pain to analyze. Ideally, you'd want to place the grafts in one or two small, completely slick-bald areas to monitor the recipient growth.

In my opinion, you should either go all the way and get a full procedure or limit it to <50 grafts. In between is a waste.

I'm a bit in a hurry so don't have time to maybe properly reply right now, but
1. I really don't have extra money to put out on doing "tests" other than the one procedure
2. I'm a bit short of NW3 and there is almost no thinning anywhere, where there is hair, and the forelock thickness looks great-. 400-500 grafts is as full procedure for me as I am currently going need. NW2 is good enough for me
3. I work pro in the field of photography
4. Looks like it won't happen before 2015. Another patient, maybe then?

[JJJJrS]

I'm surprised anyone hasn't done this yet. A minor touch-up like that would shut some of mouths here, in one camp or another. I'm considering doing a 400-500 grafts of dark wavy hair, just in the temples, and lack of thinning areas elsewhere (where ever there is any hair at all) along with an untouched donor would satisfy every condition for proper documentation (okay, just one "but"; I'm on finasteride and maintaining)... but unfortunately there are too many "ifs" for me to start before summer 2015. Alot of you will want something to look at much much earlier, so I guess we'll just have to see what Arashi decides.

In my case I would definitely make the counting easier by having grafts taken from just some part of the donor (ie. just back of the head, not sides, or vice versa). It's MY donor, so what reason does HASCI have to say no, we won't do that? But you do whatever is the most cosmetically pleasing in your own case!

If you're going to do a test like that, and want to learn as much about the procedure as you can, I'd strongly encourage you to limit the number of grafts. Anything above 50 grafts becomes a pain to analyze. Ideally, you'd want to place the grafts in one or two small, completely slick-bald areas to monitor the recipient growth. It would be easier to do that with a micro procedure.

In my opinion, you should either go all the way and get a full procedure or limit it to <50 grafts. In between is a waste.

[gc83uk]

To be fair I agree with pretty much all of that.

Although I'm not even aware of the regrowth rate from IronMan, can you tell me what it was? And did he confirm the same findings?

As for your question on what the average person would think on these forums, I would guess that most would be hugely suspicious and probably put off until more solid evidence is presented. However I reckon some people are so desperate that they'll try anything and take the risk, so in a way I think it's a great service by documenting results letting people know the reality of the procedure.

I don't think there is anything wrong in saying on these forums that we believe there to be less than 85&#37;. In my case around 50%, but overall in comparison to FUE it's more like (equivalent) 35% because of the recipient being thinner.

Put another way for every 200 hairs extracted I calculated 239 regrowing on my head including the recipient. So really that is a 20% net gain, that is mainly due to only having 1.4 hairs per graft AVG in the recipient unfortunately.

There is so many ways to spin the results, but it's important to realise too that when you have FUE you're left with less hair on your head than what you started with probably -15%ish, that's my understanding of it, so it makes HST's 20% NET gain not too bad in direct comparison.

By the way do they still advertise anywhere the 85% figure? I'm sure they used to, but I can't see it anywhere unless I'm missing it! Maybe they took note?