The Ironman Procedure

[534623]

But on topic (although you don't seem to care about it), if HASCI doesn't even keep count of 1s, 2s and 3s, what makes you think they count the drill amount ? Did you notice them doing that ? We both know they didn't, so not sure why you're making such a fool out of yourself AGAIN ?

Why don't you ask Kristel, whether or not they do this?

And how do you know, that I don't know? Contrary to you - I know. So I don't know why you don't know. ah, I forgot - the crazy stuff you take ...

[Arashi]

ah, the drug addict from Holland is speaking ...

Hey drug addict,
why can't you ask Kristel a really simple question:

"I paid 1600 grafts for my ugly bald recipient area. How many drills did the technicians make in my ugly head to get these 1600 grafts I paid?"

I guess even Kristel's children are able to understand this simple question.

If she is asking you why you ask over and over the same (bull)shit - simply tell her the truth: the drugs you take do not work properly.

Hey Schweinhund !! Haha some people like JJJR's thought you wouldn't post anymore. I knew you would, because you don't have any life at all except your digital one, in here you are "Iron man", out there just an ugly social reject. It's kind of sad.

But on topic (although you don't seem to care about it), if HASCI doesn't even keep count of 1s, 2s and 3s, what makes you think they count the drill amount ? Did you notice them doing that ? We both know they didn't, so not sure why you're making such a fool out of yourself AGAIN ?

[Arashi]

I'm really not interested in arguing in circles again, because we had this exact conversation days ago. Up until now, gc83uk, has been the only case that provided a hair count of the donor area, other than Gho's published studies. If you don't see any value in documenting more than one case, that's fine, but most people would disagree.

I just find you very funny. First you say you don't even know for sure if hair's regenerate, but now you say you studied GC83UK's case. Didn't believe that one ? Then you said that short hairs in mine and Tobian's pictures didn't mean anything. Now you claim that they actually mean regrowth. You said scientifical arguments were needed but when one user asked on hairsite about failed extractions, you said a glance at the petridish and 3 lousy pictures of ironman's ugly misformed head were enough I just find your reasoning very funny, that's all

[534623]

Hehe...

ah, the drug addict from Holland is speaking ...

Hey drug addict,
why can't you ask Kristel a really simple question:

"I paid 1600 grafts for my ugly bald recipient area. How many drills did the technicians make in my ugly head to get these 1600 grafts I paid?"

I guess even Kristel's children are able to understand this simple question.

If she is asking you why you ask over and over the same (bull)shit - simply tell her the truth: the drugs you take do not work properly.

[JJJJrS]

So, just purely out of interest then, what did you learn from this case that you didn't know before ?

I'm really not interested in arguing in circles again, because we had this exact conversation days ago. Up until now, gc83uk, has been the only case that provided a hair count of the donor area, other than Gho's published studies. If you don't see any value in documenting more than one case, that's fine, but most people would disagree.

[Arashi]

I did an analysis of gc83uk's case before I ever joined the forums, a different area than Iron_Man analyzed, so I'm familiar with the process. Maybe one day I'll post that analysis.

Regardless, it's always nice to get as much documentation as possible.

So, just purely out of interest then, what did you learn from this case that you didn't know before ?

[JJJJrS]

Hehe, you didn't seem to care much about that before. But happy you finally seem to understand the concept and finally seem to believe regrowth is really happening, good for you !

I did an analysis of gc83uk's case before I ever joined the forums, a different area than Iron_Man analyzed, so I'm familiar with the process. Maybe one day I'll post that analysis.

Regardless, it's always nice to get as much documentation as possible.

[Arashi]

In addition to what Iron_Man said, you can often tell the regenerated hairs from the surrounding hairs just by observation. The regenerated hairs are much shorter than the surrounding hairs. For example, compare the length of hairs 76-82 to the surrounding hairs.

Hehe, you didn't seem to care much about that before. But happy you finally seem to understand the concept and finally seem to believe regrowth is really happening, good for you !

[JJJJrS]

@JJJJrS – damn good work! Thanks.
Now you know how “funny” (but also exciting!) such a work can be …

Glad you appreciate it.

And yes, if you're not a patient person, counting all these hairs could drive you crazy But its definitely interesting to observe the regeneration process and of course a nice feeling when everything is done.

With everything healed up by day 7, i don't know how u can tell which hairs were which....?

In addition to what Iron_Man said, you can often tell the regenerated hairs from the surrounding hairs just by observation. The regenerated hairs are much shorter than the surrounding hairs. For example, compare the length of hairs 76-82 to the surrounding hairs.

[clandestine]

Super quality photographs.

[534623]

Great stuff cheers

Let's see ...

[Jairus]

I have just made (after washing the hair with head & shoulders) a new "ride" through my donor area with my video-microscope - as I'm doing this since day 3. Doing this, can be sometimes far more exciting, than watching an action movie ... and I also take, of course, lots of photos and/or short videos with the video-microscope.

I will pick some of them out, and will post a few of them here ...

Great stuff cheers

[534623]

What do you reckon the overall regeneration % is yourself?

I have just made (after washing the hair with head & shoulders) a new "ride" through my donor area with my video-microscope - as I'm doing this since day 3. Doing this, can be sometimes far more exciting, than watching an action movie ... and I also take, of course, lots of photos and/or short videos with the video-microscope.

I will pick some of them out, and will post a few of them here ...

[Jairus]

Simply via finding the exact same (extraction)position/site again.

For this, you can use different methods:

- making lines/connections between the not extracted FU’s/hairs (as JJJJrS partially did);

- simply first by looking at the not extracted hairs PLUS always comparing with an already labelled (doing this, is step #1 for an analysis!) day 0, day 1 or day 2 or day 3 photo etc;

For example:
The 3 vertically positioned extraction sites right above my right ear, with the numbers 76, 77, 78 – is it really that difficult to find them again in every after photo just via simply looking??

Anyway, such rather very easy to find extraction sites, can serve as start point (if you don’t have a marker, birthmark or something) for making an analysis/comparisons; from where you can start, and then simply move always from these (found again) extraction sites to the next (nearest/neighbor) extractions sites and so on. Thereby, of course, you must always compare with already labelled before photos (day 0, day 1 etc).
A given hair growth structure is like a fingerprint; you WILL find exactly the same structure, even the position of a certain FU, even 50 years later and more. A given follicular structure in the skin doesn’t change at all (besides cycling of individual hairs within a given follicular unit), at least not dramatically over time. It’s like your nose; the position of your nose will not change dramatically over time – you will always find your nose in the middle of your face – and not suddenly on your forehead 30 years later or so …

@JJJJrS – damn good work! Thanks.
Now you know how “funny” (but also exciting!) such a work can be …

Thanks for the hard work boss - are the red circles marker points for identifying extractions? What do you reckon the overall regeneration % is yourself?

[534623]

With everything healed up by day 7, i don't know how u can tell which hairs were which....?

Simply via finding the exact same (extraction)position/site again.

For this, you can use different methods:

- making lines/connections between the not extracted FU’s/hairs (as JJJJrS partially did);

- simply first by looking at the not extracted hairs PLUS always comparing with an already labelled (doing this, is step #1 for an analysis!) day 0, day 1 or day 2 or day 3 photo etc;

For example:
The 3 vertically positioned extraction sites right above my right ear, with the numbers 76, 77, 78 – is it really that difficult to find them again in every after photo just via simply looking??

Anyway, such rather very easy to find extraction sites, can serve as start point (if you don’t have a marker, birthmark or something) for making an analysis/comparisons; from where you can start, and then simply move always from these (found again) extraction sites to the next (nearest/neighbor) extractions sites and so on. Thereby, of course, you must always compare with already labelled before photos (day 0, day 1 etc).
A given hair growth structure is like a fingerprint; you WILL find exactly the same structure, even the position of a certain FU, even 50 years later and more. A given follicular structure in the skin doesn’t change at all (besides cycling of individual hairs within a given follicular unit), at least not dramatically over time. It’s like your nose; the position of your nose will not change dramatically over time – you will always find your nose in the middle of your face – and not suddenly on your forehead 30 years later or so …

@JJJJrS – damn good work! Thanks.
Now you know how “funny” (but also exciting!) such a work can be …