HASCI - -How well does it work? Now we'll be able to find out!

[Arashi]

Hey everybody, almost 2016! It's been 7 months since my HASCI. And in case you all were wondering, just recently I got one step further and now the extracted grafts are all marked out on my "before" pictures. The job still needs to be one last time checked for errors, or someone *MIGHT* offer a little help with checking for errors, and then we're getting very close to knowing the grafts lost in the donor area.

For the 800 grafts they supposedly got, they made around 1400 or more donor holes. That means for 800 grafts, we have at least 1400 holes to compare between the "before"-pics and the "after"-pics. (However, some of these are certainly superficial wounds.) I wonder what the ratio has usually been in previous cases.

My own ratio was about 20 drills for 12 extractions, so that's pretty much the same as your result. It's of course a key in the HASCI regrowth fable, people like Ironman on this site had mistaken failed extractions for the magic regrowth that HASCI promises.

[AlmostUndone]

Hey everybody, almost 2016! It's been 7 months since my HASCI. And in case you all were wondering, just recently I got one step further and now the extracted grafts are all marked out on my "before" pictures. The job still needs to be one last time checked for errors, or someone *MIGHT* offer a little help with checking for errors, and then we're getting very close to knowing the grafts lost in the donor area.

For the 800 grafts they supposedly got, they made around 1400 or more donor holes. That means for 800 grafts, we have at least 1400 holes to compare between the "before"-pics and the "after"-pics. (However, some of these are certainly superficial wounds.) I wonder what the ratio has usually been in previous cases.

[AlmostUndone]

Ok. Well personally I don't care too much. We've seen the patient photo's where it was 100% certain that they took out the whole graft, unlike the story they're always telling of how they're splitting it and are supposed to leave stem cells behind. That's obviously not happening, so no regrowth is possible. We've seen Dean Saunders who had a depleted donor after 3 sessions and had a body hair transplant done because his donor was gone. So there's no doubt in my mind as to what the result will be. However it would have been nice to also prove this way that it's all a lie.

Anyway, thanks for your time.

Right now I really really need to be concentrating on other things..... *Sigh* If you get sick of waiting, you can always try do your own analysis.

[Arashi]

Sorry. That's gonna have to wait for the, possibly a very distant, future if you're counting on me to do it. I haven't given it much thought, besides my intention to compose the rest of the material around the 1 year mark.

Ok. Well personally I don't care too much. We've seen the patient photo's where it was 100% certain that they took out the whole graft, unlike the story they're always telling of how they're splitting it and are supposed to leave stem cells behind. That's obviously not happening, so no regrowth is possible. We've seen Dean Saunders who had a depleted donor after 3 sessions and had a body hair transplant done because his donor was gone. So there's no doubt in my mind as to what the result will be. However it would have been nice to also prove this way that it's all a lie.

Anyway, thanks for your time.

[AlmostUndone]

Did you do any such counting of donor loss already ?

Sorry. That's gonna have to wait for the, possibly a very distant, future if you're counting on me to do it. I haven't given it much thought, besides my intention to compose the rest of the material around the 1 year mark.

[Arashi]

So recipient should be fully grown out at the 1 year mark, huh? That's 7 months to go. Anyways, here are the pictures as I promised. Hopefully there aren't any mistakes in need of correction.

Extractions:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_extractions97.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_extractions97.jpg

3< months after:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_3months97.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/..._3months97.jpg

Great work ! You're the type of guy that gets things done, I appreciate that. I was thinking, one interesting ballpoint figure might be this: we've seen that HASCI transplants way lower hairs/graft than others. In fact 1.3 hairs/graft seems to be about the average per session. I dont have any data on variance per patient, but an interesting prediction based on this number might be that you've lost 1.3 * your number of grafts, 800 in your case, hairs. So my prediction is that if you count just your donor loss, you'd have lost about 800 * 1.3 hairs = 1040 hairs !

Did you do any such counting of donor loss already ?

[AlmostUndone]

Nice !! Really looking forward to this. However keep in mind that HASCI just seems to split current FU's (which we confirmed via patient photo's) AND they have a lot of failed extractions usually (also verified several times in several patients). So you will see a lot hair grow back in the donor because of that combo of failed extractions + split FU's. This means it's impossible to conclude anything at all without having analysed both donor as recipient: only when we count how much hairs were lost in the donor and how much new hairs this yielded in recipient, we can form a conclusion.

Nevertheless, keep up the good work, really looking forward to it !

So recipient should be fully grown out at the 1 year mark, huh? That's 7 months to go. Anyways, here are the pictures as I promised. Hopefully there aren't any mistakes in need of correction.

Extractions:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_extractions97.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_extractions97.jpg

3< months after:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Left_3months97.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/Right_3months97.jpg

[Arashi]

Hmm, time is sure going fast, when one is constantly occupied. There has been lots of work concerning the HASCI-photos, too. But I shall be interested to hear what's Arashi's take on the photo set, which will be published before this week closes.

Nice !! Really looking forward to this. However keep in mind that HASCI just seems to split current FU's (which we confirmed via patient photo's) AND they have a lot of failed extractions usually (also verified several times in several patients). So you will see a lot hair grow back in the donor because of that combo of failed extractions + split FU's. This means it's impossible to conclude anything at all without having analysed both donor as recipient: only when we count how much hairs were lost in the donor and how much new hairs this yielded in recipient, we can form a conclusion.

Nevertheless, keep up the good work, really looking forward to it !

[AlmostUndone]

Hmm, time is sure going fast, when one is constantly occupied. There has been lots of work concerning the HASCI-photos, too. But I shall be interested to hear what's Arashi's take on the photo set, which will be published before this week closes.

[AlmostUndone]

Interesting ! But just to make sure I understand: in the last picture you posted we see the immediate post-op and then in the same picture, the current situation in the lower 2 pics, right ?

Yup, that's right. The last picture I posted (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...omparison1.jpg) shows the immidiate post-op (May), with extraction holes, and then below, the current situation (September). Of course, this is just an example! I'll have to provide many more pictures pictures to complete the analysis.

How did you draw the red lines ? I mean, how did you link those pictures ?

Hmm, linking them was straightforward but very, very time-consuming. You can see in some pictures, there's ink on my scalp which I had made for reference. I also discovered a couple of permanent marks on my scalp, such as this bit of red tissue.



Yet, in many cases I had no references but to "step-walk" along the hairs (proceeding from the ear up, or in one case, from the "cowlick" in the crown). The red lines appear extremely accurate to me, but we still oughta be vary for mistakes !

I'd be willing to help you out, with whatever free time I have (not a lot lately).

Ok thanks. I'll post an update, where I'm at next week! At least all the red lines should be in place by then.

[Arashi]

Ok, some progress has happened during the past week, afterall. But I feel I can't do everything alone! Everything I have almost put in place, except circles for the extracted hairs.

You can now easily compare the donor area at three different points of time:
April before the procedure (the links in an earlier post), May shortly after the procedure and, finally, September, in this example (how do I use the zoom?): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...omparison1.jpg

Interesting ! But just to make sure I understand: in the last picture you posted we see the immediate post-op and then in the same picture, the current situation in the lower 2 pics, right ? How did you draw the red lines ? I mean, how did you link those pictures ? You don't seem to have any clear reference marks like birthmarks or scars (which were very useful in GC83UK's pics).

I'd be willing to help you out, with whatever free time I have (not a lot lately).

[AlmostUndone]

Ok, some progress has happened during the past week, afterall. But I feel I can't do everything alone! Everything I have almost put in place, except circles for the extracted hairs.

You can now easily compare the donor area at three different points of time:
April before the procedure (the links in an earlier post), May shortly after the procedure and, finally, September, in this example (how do I use the zoom?): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...omparison1.jpg

[AlmostUndone]

The job is done; we have visual. Making a before/after-comparison for the donor (3+ months post-op) is now fully possible.

First I think we should, as a reference, duplicate the red lines from the "before" picture. Then it will be comparably easy to make circles whereever they made the extraction holes (or at least exclude those follicular groups, which remained visibly untouched. There exist ≈200 photos or more of the extraction holes.) Finally we may count the difference.

It's uncertain now, if I have time to do any of this myself. Wheee.... Here are samples from the new photos, which I shot today:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-12-09%2010.43.31.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/2015-12-09%2012.39.01.jpg

[AlmostUndone]

the photos are awesome, but it is just hard to tell where exactly the extraction sites are when looking at the new photos. My question to you is, do you personally think you see regrowth?

I'd prefer to avoid any kind of speculation on that matter

[jamesst11]

the photos are awesome, but it is just hard to tell where exactly the extraction sites are when looking at the new photos. My question to you is, do you personally think you see regrowth?