-
-
Exactly. Always cracks me up when I hear doctors talk about 80%, 60%, 30% donor regeneration. When you ask them where these numbers came from, you never get a straight answer. Obviously, if you didn't pull those numbers out of your ass, you'd have some type of analysis that would be worth sharing with the community. Not a single ****ing surgeon has even documented any donor regeneration conclusively and apparently these docs are all just sitting on it.
Comment
-
This one is quite hilarious too. Compare the shape of his skull (forehead) :
Even Dr Nigams was then smart enough to see that, look how he presented the photo later:
Hehe. What a clown.Comment
-
Dr cole came out on one of his videos(think response to you jjjjrs) where he said he witenessed hair regeneration, that was long time ago and so far nothing to support the claim.
Most of these numbers come out of their assesComment
-
First photo looks like he had better results. WTF.This one is quite hilarious too. Compare the shape of his skull (forehead) :
Even Dr Nigams was then smart enough to see that, look how he presented the photo later:
Hehe. What a clown.Comment
-
And that was the end, guys. Dr Nigams just closed down the directory. It's not browseable anymore. The links still work though (the files are still there).
Of course I have everything. It's 3.8 GB in total so not something to upload somewhere quickly, hehe.Comment
-
This is a classic too: In just 4 months, Dr Nigams grew hair that must be at least 10 cm long: http://drnigams.net/images/Savio/B-A/Large/3.jpg
Only in India !!
Comment
-
Anway from what I've seen most interesting stuff has been posted here. Proof of failure of his doubling test, proof he can (and did) shoot stellar photo's of pretty much the highest possible quality. Proof he changed persons in before-after photo's. Proof he applied photoshop in tons of pictures. And maybe the most interesting proof is in what the was not there: proof of ANY kind of success.Comment
-
I really wonder what Mwamba thinks of the fact that mr Nigam's doubling failed. I just asked him that question in 'that' other place. Really interested to hear what he thinks !Comment
-
Hey Ironman !! You're backSorry, but just because you're unable to read and to understand - it doesn't mean "HASCI failed".
Oh, just in case you still don't understand:
So what part of table 1, page 4 (including detailed explanations of table 1), you still don't understand?
You come here and try to tell others in a sensational way the story that you "debunked HASCI" and that "they mostly need more drills to get the suitable grafts for implantation" - in fact, those grafts, a patient finally pays.
Wow - great news! ...but your "sensational news" are as old as scientifically published by Dr. Gho himself in 2010 (up to 31% "failed extractions" etc - at least in this study).
Sorry I missed your post earlier today man. Well we've had that HASCI discussion over and over. I've shown that HASCI's claims were not true for GC. There's NO proof of regeneration at all, anywhere. They've never shown us anything. They deliberately messed up the 2 50 graft tests. No celebrity ever went there more than 3 times. They don't have any showcase of a patient who had like 10k grafts. They tell people with good donor not to densify the temples. All you have is that paper. A paper containing statements that never could be verified or reproduced by anybody else. And I think you know that if something is not reproducable, it may per definition not be called science at all.
If HASCI really had something, wouldn't you think it would be in their best interest to showcase it ? Nah you probably wouldn't think that. Regardless of all facts and evidence, you'll keep supporting HASCI for the rest of your life. Just as JarJarBinx will always support mr Nigam, regardless of the huge pile of evidence against him. Whatever, as long as you're happy with your results man.Comment
-
Absolutely wrong. Aren't you the one who "verified" the failed extraction part in that paper in sensational way and who thought he "debunked HSCI"?? lol
Or in simple words - Does it mean that you always thought that when you buy 1000 HST grafts that they will only make 1000 extractions? lol
That's just because 1) I can't post in realtime and 2) I guess you couldn't see it anymore within the flood of your own posts.Hey Ironman !! You're back Sorry I missed your post earlier today man.Comment
-
I should have highlighted to people that it was possible to access all of the images on the website earlier. Dr Nigams website naming and numbering of the photos was a mess. I would not want to be maintaining the website with a naming system like that. I did not know which photos he has shared and which ones he has not. It would be a risk for Dr Nigam that if he had photos he did not plan to share in the same location with similar names that he may accidentally link to the wrong image.
Histogen also have access to some of the images and there downloads on their website http://www.histogen.com/downloads/. I doubt any of these files have not been seen before. Change downloads to images and there are the image files.Comment
-
Yeah seriously all kinds of doctors are now claiming they're seeing some regeneration. Dr. Cole comes on here almost once a month and says he's getting 60% or whatever. After Dr. Mwamba started investigating Nigam he all of a sudden said he too was seeing regeneration with fue. Next strip doctors are going to start claiming regeneration....Exactly. Always cracks me up when I hear doctors talk about 80%, 60%, 30% donor regeneration. When you ask them where these numbers came from, you never get a straight answer. Obviously, if you didn't pull those numbers out of your ass, you'd have some type of analysis that would be worth sharing with the community. Not a single ****ing surgeon has even documented any donor regeneration conclusively and apparently these docs are all just sitting on it.Comment
-
Eh, that's was you, bud. You just looked at all extraction points, saw that in 80% of the extraction points hair grew back and then concluded that regrowth was 80%. While in fact, after taking into consideration that most of the times these were just failed extractions, and thus no regeneration at all, it turned out that the BEST case scenario was roughly 30%. But that was without looking at the recipient. And if you look ar Mr Nigam's case (where most grafts 'regenerated' in donor but pretty much nothing grew in recipient), even you must now realize that you can't only look at donor. Therefore it's assumable that if we take that into account too, there's no regrowth at all going on, not even that 30%.
[incendiary commentary removed]Comment
-
It was brought to my attention that 'magically' the pictures I've uploaded were removed. The links are dead.
Here they are again. Ignore the circles, they don't match (as always in mr Nigam's documentation, he just draws some random circles around any hair he sees). You see that after 290 days, only 3 hairs grew (while he lost at least that in donor).
Day 1, showing the slits, just before graft insertion: http://cdn.imghack.se/images/e460113...ba8123c4d8.jpg
(this slit picture is best used for comparison to day 290)
Day 1, right after everything was done:
Day 290: http://cdn.imghack.se/images/0ccbc92...d2740f376b.jpg
Also admire the stellar picture quality in the slits photo. If you zoom in (click on the picture) you can see the most tiny hairs in perfect detail. If only he showed quality pictures like that to us, eh. Instead he chose a picture which is WAY more difficult to interpret.Comment
Tweet
Comment