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

[Arashi]

It takes quite a while for the hair to shed, after the anagen phase has terminated. So when taking photos, the amount of missing hairs should not be quite as high as 10%, and certainly not 20%.

If 5% is dormant now and in 1 year, when you will do the comparison, another 5% is dormant, thats 10% difference. And that's only the mean, it might be 10+10=20% if your hair spends 2 years instead of 6 years in Anagen.

[AlmostUndone]

It takes quite a while for the hair to shed, after the anagen phase has terminated. So when taking photos, the amount of missing hairs should not be quite as high as 10%, and certainly not 20%.

Regardless, I'd love for you to do this and compare this, would be really cool to see !

I will ! Hoping to have a representation of all the extraction points in the following, weeks, maybe? You were right, it's tons of work.

[Arashi]

Hey, correct me if I'm wrong but the difference in follicle positions when shooting "before" and "after" photos would be somewhere between 0-20%, not 20% like you say. The probability of a 0% difference is equal to the probability of 20%, and the probability of anything in between.

So is 20% the percentage of unseen hairs or hair follicles in the resting phase? Jus' wondering, how many weeks throughout the resting phase do hairclubs still stay latched to the skin? Either way, I might as well shoot two sets of "after" photos, and I'd say we'll get very close to home. Just need to keep all this counting from getting too impractical.

There's quite a bit of variance in data. But I think this is accepted to be quite common: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_hair_growth

Here they state that Anagen is 2-6 years. Quite a variance, but let's go with the mean, 4 years. Telogen state is noted to be 1-4 months, let's go with the mean again, 2.5 months. So on average that would then be 2.5/48= 5% in Telogen state. So that then would be a 10% difference and not 20%. However other sources, when you google, talk about 10-20% in telogen state, I guess that's really varies per person and really boils than: is your hair 2, 4 or 6 year in Anagen ?

Either way, it really complicates the research. You're going to wonder: was this follicle here before, was it extracted or is this just a follicle that was in the resting state ?

Regardless, I'd love for you to do this and compare this, would be really cool to see !

[AlmostUndone]

But yeah of course a case like this will be interesting to follow. The photo's he shot are the best we've ever seen. Yet even on these kind of photo's it's going to be extremely hard to do an analysis, mostly caused by the 20% difference in follicle positions now and next year, ONLY caused bye the dormant follicles already.

Hey, correct me if I'm wrong but the difference in follicle positions when shooting "before" and "after" photos would be somewhere between 0-20%, not 20% like you say. The probability of a 0% difference is equal to the probability of 20%, and the probability of anything in between.

So is 20% the percentage of unseen hairs or hair follicles in the resting phase? Jus' wondering, how many weeks throughout the resting phase do hairclubs still stay latched to the skin? Either way, I might as well shoot two sets of "after" photos, and I'd say we'll get very close to home. Just need to keep all this counting from getting too impractical.

[Arashi]

An intervention of Gaz would be more than welcome to.

It would certainly be nice to see Gc's result. But it surely wouldn't proof anything at all. Like I showed, the average person could have 6 times a 1600 HST transplant without getting to donor depletion. Sure, GC's donor was below average but he did get into donor depletion after the 4th HST already. I know you have a different opinion on that, you thought his donor still looked good after 4 times. But that's of course the key here. It can never proof anything beyond doubt cause we don't know exactly how many hairs he had to begin with and we don't know how many hairs he's ending up with, unless we count them all. But since we don't know his begin situation, even counting them all won't yield any valid conclusion.

I know Arashi has done a lot of work and I am not saying that it does not matter.

It's 100% proof HASCI does not work, simple as that. They claim to leave part of the follicle behind and that part is supposed to regenerate into a new follicle. I showed you that's false and that they take the WHOLE follicle away. Nothing to regenerate, so it's just a FUE. So that's all you need to know. Really, it boils down to that. I'm not sure why some people seem to have such a hard time accepting that.

But yeah of course a case like this will be interesting to follow. The photo's he shot are the best we've ever seen. Yet even on these kind of photo's it's going to be extremely hard to do an analysis, mostly caused by the 20% difference in follicle positions now and next year, ONLY caused bye the dormant follicles already.

[caddarik79]

Guyz please, let's not deviate as asked by Almostundone.

He is willing to give us another well illustrated case, let's not re-enter in the debate we had so many times.
You are not trolling anything, but we have a thousand posts where you freely demonstrated your points.

Let's just reset here, and try again.

An intervention of Gaz would be more than welcome to.

I know Arashi has done a lot of work and I am not saying that it does not matter. But let's not be redundant. New page, let's see what Almostundone brings here without presuming or arguing.

Gaz, if you read me, are you planning a sixth one? could you upload some pics of your donor and recipient piost 5 HST?

See you guyz

[joachim]

He asked you a very simple question: how can a follicle regenerate if the follicle is fully extracted ? This simple question has a very simple answer: it can't.

In their thesis, HASCI pointed out:



Then they even say:





Where we clearly see that in the completely intact follicalr unit, the bulbs are completely in tact. In the figure B1 we see what they claim to do, a follicle where parts of the bulbs (containing stem cells) are left behind.

In the petridish photo's we saw complete intact bulbs (see my website). So really, how is this all possible NeedhairASAP ? Tell me, how is this not 100% proof that it doesnt work ? If they claim that they need to leave a part behind to regenerate a new follicle and then just take a away the whole follice then how exactly should we see a new follicle appear ?

hey arashi, i had a thought. do you know the BBC documentary series? if not, check it on youtube. some of their documentaries are very good and investigative. they have the courage to reveal such scams. what do you think? wouldn't it be good to pitch them the whole story so that they can investigate that stuff and draw an objective conclusion?

[joachim]

i still don't get it how people still believe in hasci and dr. gho.
arashi has put so much effort into the whole hasci topic. he clearly proofed they are cheating for more than a decade now. go back to all the recent topics where we discussed about hasci on many pages. you will find the evidence yourself.
hasci is a scam and one day the truth will get public.

[Arashi]

yes this is right


to clarify my last comment.... I am somewhat skeptical of gho--- so arashi may be right. However, arashi's website does not provide a strong argument.

Thus, I really look forward to this analysis. thanks again.

He asked you a very simple question: how can a follicle regenerate if the follicle is fully extracted ? This simple question has a very simple answer: it can't.

In their thesis, HASCI pointed out:

"The aim of the extraction is to remove only a part of the follicle unit, containing follicle and connective tissue from several hair follicles, and leave sufficient follicle unit tissue behind to regenerate hairs"

Then they even say:

"We illustrate the difference between a complete follicular unit (Figure 3A1) and a partial longitudinal follicular unit (suitable grafts) (Figure 3B1)

Where we clearly see that in the completely intact follicalr unit, the bulbs are completely in tact. In the figure B1 we see what they claim to do, a follicle where parts of the bulbs (containing stem cells) are left behind.

In the petridish photo's we saw complete intact bulbs (see my website). So really, how is this all possible NeedhairASAP ? Tell me, how is this not 100% proof that it doesnt work ? If they claim that they need to leave a part behind to regenerate a new follicle and then just take a away the whole follice then how exactly should we see a new follicle appear ?

[AlmostUndone]

I'm busy matching the extraction holes to the "before" pictures, for curiosity's sake. We'll take a look at the regrowth later. I won't be shaving my donor again, as long as there is still redness and gaps.

[NeedHairASAP]

Nice post and awesome photos!! I haven't fully researched HASCI, but I do have a question if I may ask... Throughout this procedure, it is expected that the donor will grow back? How exactly is this possible if the entire hair bulb is removed? Are they trying to leave just enough behind in assumption that the stem cells will proliferate into a new, functional follicle?

yes this is right


to clarify my last comment.... I am somewhat skeptical of gho--- so arashi may be right. However, arashi's website does not provide a strong argument.

Thus, I really look forward to this analysis. thanks again.

[jamesst11]

Nice post and awesome photos!! I haven't fully researched HASCI, but I do have a question if I may ask... Throughout this procedure, it is expected that the donor will grow back? How exactly is this possible if the entire hair bulb is removed? Are they trying to leave just enough behind in assumption that the stem cells will proliferate into a new, functional follicle?

[NeedHairASAP]

@ Arashi
Whatever evidence you got, my opinion is that people need something more "tangible". I need something more "tangible".

It's tons of work, for me. The rest of you're in for the easy part. There are marker lines all over the scalp in my "before" photos. There are also added markers, which I made in a paint program. I took great effort to secure the continuity of the photos. And I'm hoping to throw big money on massive camera lenses for the "after"-photos to capture all the hairs on my head with a minimal amount of pictures. Just relax.

(Hmm... Some of the sample pictures I posted are relatively weak in quality. I probably have somewhere around 500 pictures, so I didn't always have time to pick the best ones for display.)

arashi's evidence is pretty poor thb

I look forward to your analysis

[AlmostUndone]

@ Arashi
Whatever evidence you got, my opinion is that people need something more "tangible". I need something more "tangible".

It's tons of work, for me. The rest of you're in for the easy part. There are marker lines all over the scalp in my "before" photos. There are also added markers, which I made in a paint program. I took great effort to secure the continuity of the photos. And I'm hoping to throw big money on massive camera lenses for the "after"-photos to capture all the hairs on my head with a minimal amount of pictures. Just relax.

(Hmm... Some of the sample pictures I posted are relatively weak in quality. I probably have somewhere around 500 pictures, so I didn't always have time to pick the best ones for display.)

[Arashi]

The color of the links are very dark on this forum (ie. the word "this" is supposed to be the link), so I'll post the links once more:
Photo of extraction holes http://postimg.org/image/mtkj46yjn/
Reference points, ie. lines: http://postimg.org/image/uddm68rqb/
Back of my head, hours after surgery: http://postimg.org/image/sa36ykrxf/

Wow your photo's are indeed good ! And your donor seems about perfect. Well still tons of work but I guess with those kind of photo's it's doable ! On the one hand I think it's kind of useless, cause we've seen the petridish photo's, we know already it doesnt work. On the other hand, some people here still seem to have some believe in HASCI. But then again, if the petridish photo's doesnt convince them, why would your case ?

Nevertheless, good luck mate !