Hasci (Gho) patient with videos

[Kiwi]

If gho is booked up for that long then in another years time we should have some pretty amazing picture proof from his clinic. If not then we know it's just more marketing BS... if in which case that were to happen then I'd ban the letters GHO from this site forever )

[NeedHairASAP]

http://www.scissorboy.com/video/index/122/-1/all/40

http://scissorboylive.com/category/hair-restoration-techniques/

Open for discussions. But what i say is, clinics should get in touch with Gho for Clarification reasons

can anybody find recent pictures/video of him? his blog hasn't mentioned the hair transplant since march 29th or something....

[NeedHairASAP]

how can I be the only one interested in these results..... or gho in general



bioregenerative sciences isn't going to do shit

trx9 is a joke... just another thing that gets people wishing and hoping and saying, " ya its definitely making my hair thicker but not sure about regrowth"... sorry guys but I think it may be time to throw the trx towel in and put some effort into figuring out whats up with gho

[HairTalk]

Perhaps I'm being dense, but I don't see how this procedure is so very different from F.U.E. What prevents loss in the donor area? Even on Gho's Web site, it's stated there's "little," not "no," loss in the region.

It seems to me, the idea is simply to perform F.U.E., except to do so using smaller-than-usual (i.e., .5mm, rather than maybe .7mm) incisions. Calling the excisions "stem cells" rather than "follicular units" certainly makes things sound appealing and new, but could someone (knowledgable) please explain to me how what is being done truly is different from what Dr. Woods began trying before the 21st century?

Altogether, this seems simply like an attempt to perform in-vivo hair multiplication using transection with F.U.E. I'm not suggesting it's a terrible idea that must be abandoned, but that it isn't the novel, ground-breaking concept as which it's being marketed. I believe Dr. Bernstein is trying out the method, as well; I'd rather wait to hear his results than pin any hopes to Gho and what I feel is his sensationalism and gimmickry.

[NeedHairASAP]

Let The Gho Frenzy Begin

well.... let the HST frenzy begin

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=2133218843886

[NeedHairASAP]

I post the most important video on this entire website. Probably the most important video ever on the damn site. and nobody cares.... they're busy talking about how they've had massive sheds on trx2 (where's trx1?) and that they have lost their temple hair but "peach fuzz" aka that-shit-was-there-before-hair-but-your-hope-has-blinded-you-hair has sprouted on the top..... wow... wake up guys trx2 is a joke.... if you think that shit is going to grow you a full head of hair hit me up because i just invented trx3 and this shit is potent I swear and its only 75% the price of trx2 so just call me guys I swear it'll work. we'll be posting results as soon as yall buy up the remainder of the sugar pills I made.

[HairTalk]

I post the most important video on this entire website. Probably the most important video ever on the damn site. and nobody cares.... they're busy talking about how they've had massive sheds on trx2 (where's trx1?) and that they have lost their temple hair but "peach fuzz" aka that-shit-was-there-before-hair-but-your-hope-has-blinded-you-hair has sprouted on the top..... wow... wake up guys trx2 is a joke.... if you think that shit is going to grow you a full head of hair hit me up because i just invented trx3 and this shit is potent I swear and its only 75% the price of trx2 so just call me guys I swear it'll work. we'll be posting results as soon as yall buy up the remainder of the sugar pills I made.

First, you just posted the video to-day; how can you already complain of no one's caring?

Second, I still should like an explanation of how Dr. Gho's "H.S.T." is substantially different from F.U.E. As far as I can tell, the method is F.U.E., only with the intent to transect follicles with the hope they'll re-grow in the donor area and will grow in the recipient.

Other than by Dr. Gho — whose paper was based on a whopping five subjects — there's not been any research into this. Yet, Gho is offering "H.S.T." not only without any attached disclaimer, but at significantly greater price than a patient might pay for F.U.E. under the hands of many other competent, established surgeons.

[NeedHairASAP]

first, i did just post it today and expected at least one or two responses from the people that check this thing religiously (like yourself). I don't think its that crazy to expect some response within the day on this forum.

second, not sure anybody is claiming that HST is substantially different from fue so I'm not sure why you're looking for that answer. The differences are

1. less scarring
2. donor regrowth (they literally claim you can harvest the same donor hair follicle/folicular unit many times. They are outright blatently lieing if this is a false statment. Usually when you are scaming and also in the limelight and succeptable to lawsuits you will make outragous claims that are lies... but you will do so by beating around the bush or making the claim vague so your lawyer can beat the case. Gho and whoever I spoke to at their sales dept. have been pretty explicit and very exact in the wording of their claim: you can reharvest the same follicle that was harvested already.)
3. faster recovery
- apparently some follicles don't fall out after surgery only to regrow; which is often the case in FUE (you get surgery, hairs are there for first weeks/months but than fall out, then regrow between 6-12 months or something like that?)


thirdly, you yourself said that wood has done this. Some other doctor had done this too. And now Gho has taken it to the next leve and marketed it I guess. If the hair stem cell at the sides of the stem cell are whats needed to produce a hair follicle than it only makes sense that you can take some and leave some behind after which you will have a follicle grow in the recipiant area and the donor area. Gho is making an If, Then claim. If ghos "if" is true: that the hair stem cells found on the sides of the follicular unit are what is actually generating the new hair in FUE or any other hair transplant procedure/technique and you only need a limited amount of these hair stem cells to reproduce in the recipiant area....... THEN his conclusion is probably (or logically must be) true: taking half the follicle out and leaving half behind will most likely produce a hair in the recipient and the left behind stem cells will regenerate in the donor area.


Ghos entire claim is built on the idea that these stem cells fromt he side of the follicle are what is actually needed in hair tansplant surgery.Disprove that stemcells from the side of the hair are what grows the hair in the recipiant (or that a hair will grow with only half the stem cells from a follicle in the donor area) and you have effectivly disproved Gho's claims. Otherwise you're just talking non sense and need to go kick rocks.



Its 6 bucks a graft or something depending on what you get. How cheap are other people doing FUE? If you actually get donor regrowth I'd say the 2 dollar increase per graft is worth it. Plus, this shit just came out obviously the guy isn't going to undercut the price of the shittier, less time consuming, less labor intensive, older, FUE technique..... that would be retarded... it would also be retarded to assume gho would do that.....


My guess is Gho will be booked this year. The price of HST will stay high for the next year. Over the next 2-3 as more and more doctors rip off and or pay gho to learn the technique we'll see a decrease in the price. I'm thinking of going to gho for a treatment in the next year just because I'm desperate. Then hopefully 9-12 months after that there will be doctors offering it in the states at much cheaper prices than this initial price.





I'm sure Gho was extra careful with scissorboy as he is with all celebs/people with shows etc. but I think the procedure worked well for him.

[Gubter_87]

IF the follicles have actually regenerated in the donor region (even if it was only 80 % of them) then this is huge. The problem is that there is no proof and all we can do is to take Dr. Gho's word for it.

I have read his studies and I must say that I was pretty impressed by some of the pictures shown. BUT, Dr. Gho have not given enough information for someone else to replicate his findings - therefore no one else can actually confirm his findings.

I really hope that some surgeon will take him up on the offer he did in the interview with Spencer about showing this to another surgeon, but until then his word isn't enough for me to spend all this money.

Dr. Bernstein is doing a huge study on hair transplant techniques and A-cell and transected follicles is one of the techniques included. At the moment I am awaiting his results, but if Gho's findings can be confirmed by someone else then I would do it in a heart beat.

Another impressive result by GHO is the footballer Wesley Sneijder's. But again no actual proof of regenerated donor.

[HairTalk]

first, i did just post it today and expected at least one or two responses from the people that check this thing religiously (like yourself). I don't think its that crazy to expect some response within the day on this forum.

second, not sure anybody is claiming that HST is substantially different from fue so I'm not sure why you're looking for that answer. The differences are

1. less scarring
2. donor regrowth (they literally claim you can harvest the same donor hair follicle/folicular unit many times. They are outright blatently lieing if this is a false statment. Usually when you are scaming and also in the limelight and succeptable to lawsuits you will make outragous claims that are lies... but you will do so by beating around the bush or making the claim vague so your lawyer can beat the case. Gho and whoever I spoke to at their sales dept. have been pretty explicit and very exact in the wording of their claim: you can reharvest the same follicle that was harvested already.)
3. faster recovery
- apparently some follicles don't fall out after surgery only to regrow; which is often the case in FUE (you get surgery, hairs are there for first weeks/months but than fall out, then regrow between 6-12 months or something like that?)


thirdly, you yourself said that wood has done this. Some other doctor had done this too. And now Gho has taken it to the next leve and marketed it I guess. If the hair stem cell at the sides of the stem cell are whats needed to produce a hair follicle than it only makes sense that you can take some and leave some behind after which you will have a follicle grow in the recipiant area and the donor area. Gho is making an If, Then claim. If ghos "if" is true: that the hair stem cells found on the sides of the follicular unit are what is actually generating the new hair in FUE or any other hair transplant procedure/technique and you only need a limited amount of these hair stem cells to reproduce in the recipiant area....... THEN his conclusion is probably (or logically must be) true: taking half the follicle out and leaving half behind will most likely produce a hair in the recipient and the left behind stem cells will regenerate in the donor area.


Ghos entire claim is built on the idea that these stem cells fromt he side of the follicle are what is actually needed in hair tansplant surgery.Disprove that stemcells from the side of the hair are what grows the hair in the recipiant (or that a hair will grow with only half the stem cells from a follicle in the donor area) and you have effectivly disproved Gho's claims. Otherwise you're just talking non sense and need to go kick rocks.



Its 6 bucks a graft or something depending on what you get. How cheap are other people doing FUE? If you actually get donor regrowth I'd say the 2 dollar increase per graft is worth it. Plus, this shit just came out obviously the guy isn't going to undercut the price of the shittier, less time consuming, less labor intensive, older, FUE technique..... that would be retarded... it would also be retarded to assume gho would do that.....


My guess is Gho will be booked this year. The price of HST will stay high for the next year. Over the next 2-3 as more and more doctors rip off and or pay gho to learn the technique we'll see a decrease in the price. I'm thinking of going to gho for a treatment in the next year just because I'm desperate. Then hopefully 9-12 months after that there will be doctors offering it in the states at much cheaper prices than this initial price.





I'm sure Gho was extra careful with scissorboy as he is with all celebs/people with shows etc. but I think the procedure worked well for him.

Those who "check religiously" just follow an automatically-sent link through their e-mail if they receive notification there's been an update. It's a bit neurotic of you to be annoyed about not receiving an outpour of replies within the same day you posted a link to someone's video diary of his procedure.

How in the world can Dr. Gho's clinic claim with any confidence the donor area can be harvested several times over? There's simply not yet a substantial body of research on this, and it's at best misleading to make such a statement based on one trial, which involved just five subjects.

You've either misinterprested something I've said, or are trying to manipulate it (I'll not guess to which). I've never said Dr. Woods has tried to multiply follicles with transection; I said only that he pioneered F.U.E.

It seems to me to be closer to $10.00/graft (converted from euros to U.S. dollars), with Dr. Gho, depending on the number of grafts harvested.

A huge problem with proving or disproving the attempt to preserve the donor area by transecting follicles is determining whether there indeed has been loss of hairs, and, if there has been, to what extent. It's hard enough trying to figure exactly how many hairs that were transplanted came in; it's extremely damned difficult to count what was lost and what wasn't, in the donor zone.

[NeedHairASAP]

Those who "check religiously" just follow an automatically-sent link through their e-mail if they receive notification there's been an update. It's a bit neurotic of you to be annoyed about not receiving an outpour of replies within the same day you posted a link to someone's video diary of his procedure.

How in the world can Dr. Gho's clinic claim with any confidence the donor area can be harvested several times over? There's simply not yet a substantial body of research on this, and it's at best misleading to make such a statement based on one trial, which involved just five subjects.

You've either misinterprested something I've said, or are trying to manipulate it (I'll not guess to which). I've never said Dr. Woods has tried to multiply follicles with transection; I said only that he pioneered F.U.E.

It seems to me to be closer to $10.00/graft (converted from euros to U.S. dollars), with Dr. Gho, depending on the number of grafts harvested.

A huge problem with proving or disproving the attempt to preserve the donor area by transecting follicles is determining whether there indeed has been loss of hairs, and, if there has been, to what extent. It's hard enough trying to figure exactly how many hairs that were transplanted came in; it's extremely damned difficult to count what was lost and what wasn't, in the donor zone.

nothing wrong with checking religiously... even through e-mail links... I was just saying that I notice richard dawkins, UK, and several others post almost daily if not more.


yes, I am neurotic.



I want to say that I heard Gho or heard somewhere that he had trials or whatever with more than 5 people. I think that he only published 5. Fair warning I have no citation for this and can't recall where I may have heard this.


I believe gho said he has had people back for their 2nd or 3rd procedure and used the same donor area. Once again... zero citation. i think in one of the videos he put out or one of the videos he has done that was on tv or whatever he was asked if they pick a different area to harvest from on the later procedures and he says no we just use the same area. Again, no citation and even if i found it we'd be taking ghos word


I thought I heard spencer in the gho interview say that a Dr. wood came up with that same transection idea some time ago.... and also tried to keep it hush hush and charge some kind of fee to teach it or something.... and nothing ever came of it. Maybe I'm mixing up doctors.



you're right it is about 10 bucks a graft




Gho needs to tattoo one super small circle on somebodies head and than regenerate all or most of the follicles enclosed in that circle

[UK_]

I post the most important video on this entire website. Probably the most important video ever on the damn site. and nobody cares.... they're busy talking about how they've had massive sheds on trx2 (where's trx1?) and that they have lost their temple hair but "peach fuzz" aka that-shit-was-there-before-hair-but-your-hope-has-blinded-you-hair has sprouted on the top..... wow... wake up guys trx2 is a joke.... if you think that shit is going to grow you a full head of hair hit me up because i just invented trx3 and this shit is potent I swear and its only 75% the price of trx2 so just call me guys I swear it'll work. we'll be posting results as soon as yall buy up the remainder of the sugar pills I made.

Is the TRX3 some vitamin tablets from the local pharmacy?

I'd take some but ive a draw full downstairs collecting dust since 1992

Might mail em to Whitfield with a note reading: "I FOUND CURE TOO".

[UK_]

http://www.scissorboy.com/video/index/122/-1/all/40

http://scissorboylive.com/category/hair-restoration-techniques/

Open for discussions. But what i say is, clinics should get in touch with Gho for Clarification reasons

Richard, Scissoryboy posted today on his Facebook update in response to a question regarding his donor, I read the entire post on HairSite that was started by Spanish Dude -

I think some of Spanish Dude's comments do hold some weight when we account for the following statement made by scissory boy.

Also, Iron_Man posted a picture of a guy from Hasci - the photos are in PDF format and he has a scar on the back of his head... my opinion on this is that you can still see faint thinning when you look at the picture.

here is the comment left by scissor boy:

"I can see no thinning in the donor area and no signs of thinning in that area... however that is not a part of my head that is easy to observe like the front of my head and my hair density there is very thick and very little hair was... extracted over a fairly large donor area so I can't give a really good answer on re-growth. I will take some up close pics of the donor and post them here shortly. My hair in that section is about an inch thick right now so I will try to part it when taking the pictures. I think it will be hard to see anything with a normal camera even with closeups but I will take them anyway. I was suggested to get a dino microscrope to look close but they are $500-900. If you have any other suggestions for verification please let me know."

http://www.facebook.com/#!/video/video.php?v=2133218843886&oid=6989857123&comments&notif_t=video_reply

[NeedHairASAP]

hairsite's layout is so bad.....


anyway I cant find the pdf of the guy from hasci with the scar any chance you can post it?

[NeedHairASAP]

"

http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/6449/hairstemcelltranplantat.jpg

this link seems to prove ghos theory.

there are two questions that should be asked.

1. are these stem cells (supposedly found on the side of a hair follicle) what is causing the regrowth in the recipient area during a NORMAL FUE/SCAR procedure.

If this is true, gho is safe thus far, and we move on to the next question

2. are these stem cells located far enough up the hair follicle to allow partial extraction (i.e. can you get enough stem cells to create a new follicle in the recipient area while still leaving enough stem cells to regenerate in the donor area)

If the stem cells are situated as GHO claims them (and as has been shown in the above graphic/pdf) than Gho is not a liar and this is a new technique (however similar to FUE it is)

these are the only two questions that need be asked. They are our questions and they are the premises to Gho’s conclusion. As with any deductive argument if you disprove the premise you disprove the conclusion. You have here two premises docter rassman. Please disprove either one of them an we can put the Gho mystery to rest (or not)


"




we literally have two questions we need to answer guys...... lets stop beating around the bush and find the answers




I say we compile as many experts answers to these questions as possible. If we find both of these questions true than we can logically assume Gho's procedure works.


here is ratman's (rassman's?) thoughts on question 1...

"there is no doubt that the stem cells in the FUE grafted hair probably causes the growth"
-dr. rat man



ok. so we have one guy who claims that the stem cells are what is causing the regrowth in normal FUE. We could use some other evidence to back this first claim past rassman's opinion. Once we have sufficient evidence to believe it is the stem cells causing regrowth in any transplant surgery we can move to the next question.



If anybody can find evidence that the stem cells are in the right position on the follicle to allow partial extraction (leaving enough behind to regenerate in the donor while taking enough to transplant in the recipient) then we can put this to rest. Gho's procedure would be logically possible.



you guys can thank me later for cutting through the forum/internet rhetoric. For now lets just try to prove or disprove these questions(to us)/premises(to gho).