HISTORY of gc83uk's former slick bald recipient area

[gc83uk]

Gaz, I already said yesterday, if these boundaries are like you claim them to be (and again, I said I have no reason to think you're lying), then the area could very well be 100 cm2.

ok good, you also said yesterday that it is noway bigger than 60cm2. I don't know why you just don't wait for the facts sometimes. For example look at your last post in the other thread.

[Arashi]

He says things like he wants Gho to go bankrupt.

Touche. Ok forget about that remark.

Anyway, yes I agree, the area's close to your original hair are denser and thus the average will probably be a bit above 50 hairs/cm2. Which would make sense because that's why I was aking how many grafts you've got. You say it were 4900. I think I remember I saw an average of 1.25 hairs/graft. So that would total to 6125 hairs. In my case I saw 97% hairs grew. If the same goes for you (and it probably will be), you'd have 5941 hairs. That almost 1000 hairs difference could be explained by that extra area where they've put 300 hairs and with the fact that that area's next to your hairline are a bit denser.

[Arashi]

Hmm actually I think it wasn't 1.25 but 1.22 hairs/grafts. Would have to do another count though.

[Arashi]

1.22*4900*0.97-300 = 5498.66 hairs, which is pretty close to my 5000 figure. The 10% difference might be explained that indeed that area's closer to your hairline are denser.

[gc83uk]

Touche. Ok forget about that remark.

Anyway, yes I agree, the area's close to your original hair are denser and thus the average will probably be a bit above 50 hairs/cm2. Which would make sense because that's why I was aking how many grafts you've got. You say it were 4900. I think I remember I saw an average of 1.25 hairs/graft. So that would total to 6125 hairs instead of 5000. In my case I saw 97% hairs grew. If the same goes for you (and it probably will be), you'd have 5941 hairs. That almost 1000 hairs difference could be explained by that extra area where they've put 300 hairs and with the fact that that area's next to your hairline are a bit denser.

Look yea, I just wanna say this for the record, I don't take anything personal, maybe my style seems that way, but I actually enjoy the engagement and challenge that the analysis poses, it's ****ing difficult and I love it because of that. So if you think I'm being over aggressive I apologise, but I'm just standing up for what I believe so take it with a pinch of salt. HST is not perfect that is for sure.

What I would like to see from someone is show me a sample of say 300 grafts maybe showing which are 1 and 2 hair grafts. Perhaps it is 1.25 in my case too but I believe it's closer to 1.4 The reason why nobody has done this is because it's not simple. It is however easier to call

What I have noticed in particular, is sometimes I will see a 1 hair graft but if I take another photo a day later that same graft is a 2 hair graft. These hairs just love to stick together you know.

I think if you're comparing my case in future with FUE, then I believe it is unfair to say I could have had 2.5 hairs per graft, I think 2 is about right from a good FUE doctor. I would need as many 3 hairs grafts extracted as 2 hair grafts just to get an avg of 2 hairs per graft.

[Arashi]

Look yea, I just wanna say this for the record, I don't take anything personal, maybe my style seems that way, but I actually enjoy the engagement and challenge that the analysis poses, it's ****ing difficult and I love it because of that. So if you think I'm being over aggressive I apologise, but I'm just standing up for what I believe so take it with a pinch of salt. HST is not perfect that is for sure.

What I would like to see from someone is show me a sample of say 300 grafts maybe showing which are 1 and 2 hair grafts. Perhaps it is 1.25 in my case too but I believe it's closer to 1.4 The reason why nobody has done this is because it's not simple. It is however easier to call

What I have noticed in particular, is sometimes I will see a 1 hair graft but if I take another photo a day later that same graft is a 2 hair graft. These hairs just love to stick together you know.

I think if you're comparing my case in future with FUE, then I believe it is unfair to say I could have had 2.5 hairs per graft, I think 2 is about right from a good FUE doctor. I would need as many 3 hairs grafts extracted as 2 hair grafts just to get an avg of 2 hairs per graft.

I agree that in some cases it's difficult to distinguish between 1's and 2's. Sometimes the hairs are at such a distance that it could either be 2 singles or one double. But in lot's of cases it's clear that it can't be anything else than a single. That 1.22 figure seems to be quite consistent among HASCI cases. If you look at the 2 50 graft tests they did for example, if I look at your case, if I look at mine ... they all seem to have in common that the hair/graft ratio is just slightly below 1.25.

[gc83uk]

Touche. Ok forget about that remark.

Anyway, yes I agree, the area's close to your original hair are denser and thus the average will probably be a bit above 50 hairs/cm2. Which would make sense because that's why I was aking how many grafts you've got. You say it were 4900. I think I remember I saw an average of 1.25 hairs/graft. So that would total to 6125 hairs. In my case I saw 97% hairs grew. If the same goes for you (and it probably will be), you'd have 5941 hairs. That almost 1000 hairs difference could be explained by that extra area where they've put 300 hairs and with the fact that that area's next to your hairline are a bit denser.

I'm hoping for closer 7000 hairs from those 4900 grafts, but I think it will be a bare minimum of 6100 as you have calculated above.

About FUE, am I wrong saying 80% is not unusual for yield? I'm happy to be corrected on that, I did a bit of research before coming out with that comment. It seems people still claim FUT has a big hold over FUE still because of the yield, however I've not seen any real evidence on whether fue is e.g 100% or 80% just what people say!

[gc83uk]

Oh and the comment you made about I have basically counted hairs which originated outside that 1cm2, I don't think I did tbh. Maybe there is 1 or 2, but nothing significant, but tell me otheriwse, which ones?

[Arashi]

Oh and the comment you made about I have basically counted hairs which originated outside that 1cm2, I don't think I did tbh. Maybe there is 1 or 2, but nothing significant, but tell me otheriwse, which ones?

It's hard to see which ones exactly but most of the hairs on top seem to originate outside the box.

It's a much more accurate way to do it like I suggested: use the photo's where you've put the ruler against your scalp, mark a 1 cm thin line in windows paint and use that to create a 1 cm2 box. Of course stay close to the ruler and try to find such a part where the angle is the least.

[Arashi]

I'm hoping for closer 7000 hairs from those 4900 grafts, but I think it will be a bare minimum of 6100 as you have calculated above.

About FUE, am I wrong saying 80% is not unusual for yield? I'm happy to be corrected on that, I did a bit of research before coming out with that comment. It seems people still claim FUT has a big hold over FUE still because of the yield, however I've not seen any real evidence on whether fue is e.g 100% or 80% just what people say!

That's an interesting remark. I'm not sure what an average yield is for FUE nowadays. They indeed used to say the FUT yield always was much better than FUE. I was happy to see at least in my case about 97% hairs grew which is pretty good in my opinion.

[gc83uk]

It's hard to see which ones exactly but most of the hairs on top seem to originate outside the box.

It's a much more accurate way to do it like I suggested: use the photo's where you've put the ruler against your scalp, mark a 1 cm thin line in windows paint and use that to create a 1 cm2 box.

Perhaps that is a better way, but it's not perfect either.

What would be cool is some kinda net cap that all has 1cm squares lol, doubt it exists.

Just checked that image, only 1 is 'possibly' originates outside that square. Top right corner (or top left depending on how your viewing it). Others are all inside, you can see where they go into the scalp

[Arashi]

Perhaps that is a better way, but it's not perfect either.

What would be cool is some kinda net cap that all has 1cm squares lol, doubt it exists.

Just checked that image, only 1 is 'possibly' originates outside that square. Top right corner (or top left depending on how your viewing it). Others are all inside, you can see where they go into the scalp

I thought some were originating outside the box. It's hard to tell. If your point is that the density closer to your hairline is higher than the other parts, I totally agree, like I said. But I'm also sure there are parts with even less than 45 hairs/cm2. And that are 45 hairs, not grafts.

[gc83uk]

That's an interesting remark. I'm not sure what an average yield is for FUE nowadays. They indeed used to say the FUT yield always was much better than FUE. I was happy to see at least in my case about 97% hairs grew which is pretty good in my opinion.

Just google FUE vs FUT yield. There is shit loads about it. I suspect the likes of H & W don't do FUE because they believe FUT gives a better yield.

The 97% figure is encouraging, it could well be one of the best aspects of HST. I've always thought mine was close to 100%, I did some early graft counts when I had 700 a couple of years back and counted very close to that figure.

[gc83uk]

I thought some were originating outside the box. It's hard to tell. If your point is that the density closer to your hairline is higher than the other parts, I totally agree, like I said. But I'm also sure there are parts with even less than 45 hairs/cm2. And that are 45 hairs, not grafts.

Yes 100%, there is an area of my scalp bang in the center where its at it's worst. But I complained that I want higher density around the edges, because I didn't want an obvious cut off point of my natural hair next to my HST hair. Now it isn't as obvious, in fact it blends almost perfectly around the edges, but the downside to that is the loss of extra hairs I could have had in the center.

This is why I have to go back for one more, but maybe only 1000 or so and I wouldn't want any more grafts taken from the sides, just the back, plus I want to get some in my scar too at the back. By then I'll know what the situation is with Nigam too, I can rebuild my donor with Nigam lol

[Arashi]

Yes 100%, there is an area of my scalp bang in the center where its at it's worst. But I complained that I want higher density around the edges, because I didn't want an obvious cut off point of my natural hair next to my HST hair. Now it isn't as obvious, in fact it blends almost perfectly around the edges, but the downside to that is the loss of extra hairs I could have had in the center.

This is why I have to go back for one more, but maybe only 1000 or so and I wouldn't want any more grafts taken from the sides, just the back, plus I want to get some in my scar too at the back. By then I'll know what the situation is with Nigam too, I can rebuild my donor with Nigam lol

All in all, I don't know what to think of all this. What I am 100% sure of, and willing to bet a huge chunk of money on, is that at least in your case regrowth is less than half of what HASCI claims it is. Yet, there's still the possibility that you have SOME regrowth. Mwamba claimed he could get 20-30% regrowth himself, even before visiting Nigams. It could have happened in your case too. From all this, it's pretty much impossible to tell. Could be some regrowth, could be none. But it's nowhere near the 80% HASCI claims it is.