The Ironman Procedure

[JJJJrS]

I'm just trying to figure out how you guys are determining hair regeneration without actual numbers

Nobody is determining hair regeneration without actual numbers here. I'm not even sure what that means to be honest.

the idea that you suggest of performing the procedure on a very small clearly marked area with counts in both the donor and recipient is something that should have already been performed and shown through pictures before claiming anything but I have not seen that evidence.

It does not have to be very small, because that would increase trauma, but a reasonable area (5-10 cm^2) would be enough.

For the moment, evaluating the donor area should give us a decent enough idea. If hairs are showing up from the donor extraction sites at a high rate, then that is definitely a sign that something is occurring. Unless you believe every single graft that regenerates there is transected like in gc's case, which I personally find almost impossible looking at his recipient pictures.

Unfortunately, in this industry, there's a real lack of studies like that, and that includes both FUE and FUT.

For example, for a patient with a limited donor supply, you would think it would be in their interest to count the hair in the recipient in order to evaluate the yield of the procedure, especially if you're using body hair which is known to have questionable yield. Yet nobody has ever done that to my knowledge. So we have no idea if that case is a success either.

[topcat]

JJJJr I waited about 10 years before I had FUE and it was a very good decision to wait. I’m not interested in testing anything to see if it works and most certainly I’m not interested in someone with very little experience working on my head. If someone believes that is a good idea more power to them I will just watch.

I'm just trying to figure out how you guys are determining hair regeneration without actual numbers and the idea that you suggest of performing the procedure on a very small clearly marked area with counts in both the donor and recipient is something that should have already been performed and shown through pictures before claiming anything but I have not seen that evidence.

[JJJJrS]

I decided to try and count the number of extractions in c5000 day 0 picture showing the left side and part of the back. I would say this accounts for approximately 1/3 of his donor area.

I counted approx 460 ish, cba recounting, but its about that I think. This doesn't prove much, but c5000 might be interested! I can post the original larger image if needed because on this version some of the hairs look like extractions. Best I could do though!

Here is my analysis:

C5000 Hair Count

I counted around 575 extraction points. I think I was very liberal when counting. If I was unsure, I labelled it as an extraction point more times than not. Also I tried to include practically the whole area in the picture, including a rough estimate for the big globs of blood.

Anyway, here is the original photo for anyone with the extreme patience needed to count these hairs. Just zoom in to 200% on MS Paint and you can see which points I labelled as extraction points if you have my analysis side by side.

Original Photo

Please note that the hair count is completely unscientific. I did not double check it at all. But it's roughly similar to what gc saw, except I think I was more liberal and covered a larger area perhaps. What we did not see are thousands and thousands of extraction points, but anyone is free to check for themselves.

[Brock Landers]

c5000 hair count

GC -

Your count seems to make sense. What's more, it seems to actually kind of back up what c5000 was told about having only 80 missed extractions. It really doesn't look like that many were taken out, maybe 1/3 or 1/4 hairs. Maybe he wasn't lied to? I mean if there were really 5000 extractions, literally 1 out of every 2 hairs would be a red dot and that doesn't seem to be the case.

[JJJJrS]

I was counting extraction points as blood with existing hair, blood without hair and also some strange indentations which showing hardly any blood or no blood. I'm confident I'm within a 10% accuracy.

I'll try to do as detailed a count and post the results here.

[gc83uk]

I looked at his original photo and it's tough to tell which points are extraction points. With your and IM's photos, the photos were zoomed in close enough that you could clear see where the extraction points were. Here it's tough distinguishing between the different dots. Is it an extraction point, blood, an existing hair? Sometimes it's tough to tell.

I was counting extraction points as blood with existing hair, blood without hair and also some strange indentations which showing hardly any blood or no blood. I'm confident I'm within a 10% accuracy.

[Arashi]

If you decide to upload them, post the link and I can take a look at them eventually and see if I can notice something.

But I'm sure you've noticed, that unless the pictures are zoomed in and very clear, and the hair is kept short, its very difficult to count the hairs and do any type of analysis.




We're all at different levels. At this point, I'm happy to get any pictures that are clear enough to do any analysis on considering how few of them we've seen.

You know what, if Iron Man hasn't responded in 3 weeks AND if for whatever reason GC83UK's case isn't just perfect (really, I KNOW it is going to be), then I'll not only release all the pictures in one big rar, I'll get a GOOD camera too and shave the donor down again and shoot tons of new pictures. I'm currently wearing my hair at 3 mm only, so it's really not a problem.

[JJJJrS]

What do you make of that picture I just posted? Reckon I've missed many extractions from that image?

I looked at his original photo and it's tough to tell which points are extraction points. With your and IM's photos, the photos were zoomed in close enough that you could clear see where the extraction points were. Here it's tough distinguishing between the different dots. Is it an extraction point, blood, an existing hair? Sometimes it's tough to tell.

[JJJJrS]

These are only 2 pictures. I can understand your points but I came to them by literally taking hundreds of pictures. I could upload them in one big rar file and you can skip through them and verify my analysis if you care, I'm sure you'll come to the conclusion that my analysis is right.

If you decide to upload them, post the link and I can take a look at them eventually and see if I can notice something.

But I'm sure you've noticed, that unless the pictures are zoomed in and very clear, and the hair is kept short, its very difficult to count the hairs and do any type of analysis.

I understand your points of concern, but again, if you sit down a few hours and work through all of the pictures, there's really no denying that it's regrowth. Maybe that's why I'm not interested in IM's pictures, because I *KNOW* regrowth occurs. I'm passed that. At this point I just want to know: are these just failed extractions or not ?

We're all at different levels. At this point, I'm happy to get any pictures that are clear enough to do any analysis on considering how few of them we've seen.

[gc83uk]

At first glance, they look like a really good indication. And that's all we need, we don't need an EXACT number, 10% more or less is just great. Do you have pictures to complete the whole donor ?

haha no sorry, do you have any idea how long that taken me! It would seem c5000 from that photo had approx 1400 extractions.

Perhaps I'm missing something. I'm not doubting the guys story at all, I just don't understand how I could have missed so many other extracted areas.

[Arashi]

What do you make of that picture I just posted? Reckon I've missed many extractions from that image?

At first glance, they look like a really good indication. And that's all we need, we don't need an EXACT number, 10% more or less is just great. Do you have pictures to complete the whole donor ?

[gc83uk]

What do you make of that picture I just posted? Reckon I've missed many extractions from that image?

[Arashi]

But I do care and I think everyone else seems to care also. IM's pictures were the best pictures I've ever seen taken for any procedure. I've already said multiple times why I feel the analysis would be very useful. If others care, try to be respectful of that.

Anyway, I feel like a babysitter trying to supervise children from hell. I don't think I can repeat myself any longer so that's enough from me. IM, I hope you reconsider and post your pictures somewhere.

You've made your point, I've made my point, let's drop this discussion, we're only moving in circles indeed.

[Arashi]

Honestly, it's hard for me to see regrowth because I have no idea where the extraction points were made.

If you had taken a picture of that same area:

1. Before the procedure so we can see the untouched donor area
2. Right after the procedure so we can see exactly which hairs were extracted
3. After a number of days/weeks so we can see how the hairs regenerated and in what configuration

And kept the hairs short then an analysis of the regrowth would have been easy, especially with the marks you had which would have served as a nice reference point.

Based on what you showed though, I don't see much at all. Yes, it looks like some hairs are sprouting but that's about it. Not very objective at all though.

These are only 2 pictures. I can understand your points but I came to them by literally taking hundreds of pictures. I could upload them in one big rar file and you can skip through them and verify my analysis if you care, I'm sure you'll come to the conclusion that my analysis is right. I understand your points of concern, but again, if you sit down a few hours and work through all of the pictures, there's really no denying that it's regrowth. Maybe that's why I'm not interested in IM's pictures, because I *KNOW* regrowth occurs. I'm passed that. At this point I just want to know: are these just failed extractions or not ?

[JJJJrS]

Again, I really don't care if he posts his pictures or not for the reasons I've outlined, they're useless IMHO if he doesn't supply ALL the info needed. But I don't see how I'm actually discouraging him to come back. I really couldn't care less.

But I do care and I think everyone else seems to care also. IM's pictures were the best pictures I've ever seen taken for any procedure. I've already said multiple times why I feel the analysis would be very useful. If others care, try to be respectful of that.

Anyway, I feel like a babysitter trying to supervise children from hell. I don't think I can repeat myself any longer so that's enough from me. IM, I hope you reconsider and post your pictures somewhere.