update HASCI, Arashi?

[gc83uk]

This whole thing about being able to go back to Hasci 25 times, that is bollocks.

There is even contradictory information from different people at Hasci. For example Gho claimed to skywalker (i think that's his ID) in the London office for a consultation, that sometimes the hair in the donor can regrow back twisted and make it difficult to successfully extract the same graft in future procedures, whereas his colleague (I don't know which colleague) seemed puzzled about this comment from Gho and disagreed or claimed not to have seen that.

I personally believe it's very difficult to successfully extract more than once from the same FU in subsequent procedures, not impossible! I noticed one of my FU's had been extracted no less than 3 times and it kept on growing back perfectly each time, it's probably likely that each time it was a failed extraction and the configuration under the skin of the follicles are too far apart or it's equally likely that it was successfully/partially extracted on the first HST, but subsequently regrown back in a different configuration under the scalp and made it impossible to successfully extract in later HST's and resulted in failed extractions from thereon. There will always be some tiny scarring under the skin which will alter the direction etc.

[Arashi]

This whole thing about being able to go back to Hasci 25 times, that is bollocks.

There is even contradictory information from different people at Hasci. For example Gho claimed to skywalker (i think that's his ID) in the London office for a consultation, that sometimes the hair in the donor can regrow back twisted and make it difficult to successfully extract the same graft in future procedures, whereas his colleague (I don't know which colleague) seemed puzzled about this comment from Gho and disagreed or claimed not to have seen that.

I personally believe it's very difficult to successfully extract more than once from the same FU in subsequent procedures, not impossible! I noticed one of my FU's had been extracted no less than 3 times and it kept on growing back perfectly each time, it's probably likely that each time it was a failed extraction and the configuration under the skin of the follicles are too far apart or it's equally likely that it was successfully/partially extracted on the first HST, but subsequently regrown back in a different configuration under the scalp and made it impossible to successfully extract in later HST's and resulted in failed extractions from thereon. There will always be some tiny scarring under the skin which will alter the direction etc.

I miss your point Gaz. First you say it's impossible to go 25x times (which would be true if regrowth were 80% and you COULD use FU's more than once) and then you say you think you CAN actually use FU's more than once, in which case that 25x would be correct !?! But again, if you could only use each FU only once and regrowth would be 80%, then you could still go 35.000/(1600 * 1.3) = 17x and that would then have brought back the average NW7 to NW1 with natural density all over the scalp (donor + recipient)

[gc83uk]

Agreed on the scarless part of course, but not on that 20%. Most FUE clinics nowadays have yields similar to FUT, at least that's what they claim. I can't prove that's not true and I doubt you can prove that 20% loss.

Well I'm just going by what Mwamba says. He was the messiah not so long ago Of course everyone else is going to say we have 100% growth.

Well that's how it looks like to me. It looks unnatural thin to me, just as my own HST placed recipient looks unnatural thin, which I confirmed by measuring the density. Again, it would be interesting if you would do the same for your donor, cause it would end that 'yes/no' game.

That's mainly down to doing the extraction in a thin strip area, something which they didn't advise, but I was adamant it was the only way. It's important not to ignore that fact. That's what gives it a slightly thinner appearance. Also note that the camera lies, in real life it looks so much better compared to when the flash is bouncing back off the scalp in the all important areas!

I think when doctors said that you couldn't miss more than 2500 grafts, they were talking about hitting the point of donor depletion. Which, again, I think you're past already. So I think HASCI gave you more than other doctors advised, depleting donor, something the other doctors wouldnt do. And that could very well explain that 1700 extra hair difference. Keep in mind on 200 cm2 donor that's just 8.5 hairs/cm2. So if your current donor density is at about 117 hairs/cm2 (I think it's possibly even lower), then that explained that 1700 hair difference already. No regrowth at all there in that case.

I don't know how many hairs per cm2, however even if I did measure, what good what that be without knowing what it was before we started, are you going off an average? Tell me, is 200cm2 the average donor size? Is that ear to ear right? and what is the depth normally?

[gc83uk]

I miss your point Gaz. First you say it's impossible to go 25x times (which would be true if regrowth were 80% and you COULD use FU's more than once) and then you say you think you CAN actually use FU's more than once, in which case that 25x would be correct !?! But again, if you could only use each FU only once and regrowth would be 80%, then you could still go 35.000/(1600 * 1.3) = 17x and that would then have brought back the average NW7 to NW1 with natural density all over the scalp (donor + recipient)

Regrowth isn't 80%.
You can't go 25 times.
Difficult to use FU's more than once, however not impossible, more a luck element.

[Arashi]

Regrowth isn't 80%.
You can't go 25 times.

Ok. Well I shouldnt have this discussion with you, but with Ironman, he still believes in 80%

[gc83uk]

Ok. Well I shouldnt have this discussion with you, but with Ironman, he still believes in 80%

Well Ironman will just say that the 80% includes failed and that's why he believes Hasci can get away with that claim because technically as dirty as it sounds, there is 80% regeneration of some form.

Answer me about that measuring your donor area, I'd like to do mine but just wanna get my head around it first. I doubt I had more than 20,000 hairs in my safe zone before starting HST, but just guessing. I had about 1000 (over 2 procedures) FUT years back which has eaten into my supply.

[Arashi]

Well Ironman will just say that the 80% includes failed and that's why he believes Hasci can get away with that claim because technically as dirty as it sounds, there is 80% regeneration of some form.

Hehe. If that's regeneration then he should go to the barber, he'll get 100% 'regeneration' there, exactly by that same definition. That's not regeration, that's just cut off hair growing back.

Answer me about that measuring your donor area, I'd like to do mine but just wanna get my head around it first. I doubt I had more than 20,000 hairs in my safe zone before starting HST, but just guessing. I had about 1000 (over 2 procedures) FUT years back which has eaten into my supply.

It's a bit difficult to do it accurately but what I did is take a cord and put it from below the temple to the other part around your head (the area where a NW7 still has hair). Then use that same cord again to measure the depth of the sides and the back (the part below the crown till your neck) and you can come to a number. It wont be 100% accurate of course this way but I guess it's within a 10-20% range at least.

[534623]

I'm not taking it personal, however when I'm stating facts and then people continue to say that FUE is just as good etc, then I'm wasting my time here. Makes it pointless. FUE is not scarless and will always result in a net loss of hair, probably around 20%.

... and remains CORRECT.

The following pic is a just scanned snippet from a out-of-print (and therefore high traded) medical textbook from THE inventor of "FUE", who published his findings and first hand experiences with this technique (by using the typical 1mm FUE punch for extractions) in 1996 ("Androgenetic Alopecia: Modern Concepts of Pathogenesis and Treatment"):



Around 15 years after Dr. Inaba's "FUE" publication (he called the technique either simply "Inaba Method" or more specific "Inaba's single hair graft or micrograft transplantation"):


"or so" remains correct: typically around 80% yield with FUE.
Concerning that "FUT provides a better yield" - that's, in fact, just a myth, because simply as with Dr. Inaba's comment (see 1st pic above) "Although no accurate data have been obtained on the rate of regrowth..." - still the same for FUT: no accurate date for "FUT provides a better yield" claims after more than 20 years FUT (follicular unit transplantation) - period.

[Skywalker]

...
There is even contradictory information from different people at Hasci. For example Gho claimed to skywalker (i think that's his ID) in the London office for a consultation, that sometimes the hair in the donor can regrow back twisted and make it difficult to successfully extract the same graft in future procedures, whereas his colleague (I don't know which colleague) seemed puzzled about this comment from Gho and disagreed or claimed not to have seen that.
...

This is broadly but not quite wholly correct, what Dr Gho said to me and one of his colleagues was that they generally grow back twisted after an extraction and so a second pass ON AVERAGE was a bit more difficult. This meant that ON AVERAGE the yield would be compromised a bit on the second pass - but not massively so.
His female colleague (who was in charge of my consultation) seemed a little nonplussed by this but said nothing the whole time and certainly didn't contradict him.

My 2 cents worth are that judging by the good work done here by you guys:

(i) There is some regeneration and the total number of hairs does increase on the head with HST - but it is nothing like 80% (more like 10-20% perhaps ?).

(ii) You get a poor 'bang for your buck' with HST in the recipient area.

(iii) It is close to scarless in the donor area and the least invasive "FUE-Type" procedure on the market.

Of course I could be wrong on these points - although the fact that Dr Gho will not do a 50 graft procedure for the 3,000 Euros that Arashi offered blows out my excuse for Dr Gho that perhaps he wouldn't do it for cost reasons.

In other words I think cost was perhaps a reason in my case but maybe isn't the only reason generally that he won't do it. I suspect now that Dr Gho doesn't want to do it because he is not confident he will get 80% regeneration - maybe there is another reason but I cannot think of a reasonable one...

[534623]

- maybe there is another reason but I cannot think of a reasonable one...

Besides thousands of other reasons:

ALL chairs in their clinics are fully booked out every day = no need for any useless stress; especially with a guy whose follicle configurations simply do not allow ideal HST extractions.

btw - did you guys know that just ...

"approximately 60% of patients are candidates" (see section "Conclusion") for traditional FUE procedures?
Sure, if some FUE doctors claim today that "practically every patient is suitable for FUE procedures", that just means that, of course, they are always able to cut out "something" from a given donor area.

Anyway, if just around 60% of patients are "suitable" for traditional FUE procedures even with the usage of a 1 mm punch (!! - see link/study above) - I think you guys can imagine that, in fact, this percentage dramatically decreases with HST. Or simply try to imagine a so-called "FOX test" for HST ...
They also say that "everybody can be a HST patient" - because they also know that they are always able to extract "something" from a patients donor.