3rd Procedure with Gho

[maxhair]

[QUOTE=JJJJrS;101959]Decided to finish it up today instead.

These are pictures from gc83uk's second procedure:

Day 2:


Day 15:


Month 9:


The donor regeneration in the small area that I monitored is 80%. I will expand the donor area to include the entire shaved area from gc83uk's 15 day pictures.

Click these links to see exactly where the area is from gc83uk's original pictures:

Day 15

Month 9

Where is the shot of this part of the donor region prior to the procedure?

Gho could just be wounding healthy follicles in the back to make it look like he's extracted at least a part of the hair. Please tell me you have pictures.
And also, what about the recipient area? We need proof.

[Gandolf]

Gho could just be wounding healthy follicles in the back to make it look like he's extracted at least a part of the hair. Please tell me you have pictures.
And also, what about the recipient area? We need proof.

This is one of the things that scares me about the procedure, I've read several members stories about having surgery and they are drilling 3-4x for each successful follicle harvested, so maybe most of those regrowth hairs weren't proper grafts. And yes, all the research appears only to focus on donor regrowth, where are the pictures analyzing the recipient area. If they aren't yielding well, or just don't look that great, all the donor regrowth doesn't mean much.

[Gandolf]

Where is the shot of this part of the donor region prior to the procedure?

Another very good question. With a significant proportion of hairs in the telegen phase, it really does make these pics which attempt to view individual hairs very difficult to analyze and quantify.

[Gandolf]

Jesus christ, thats a solid analysis. And bam, open and shut case. Ghos procedure works like promised which is exactly why I am booking an appointment August 2013.

edit: though to be fair does it seem like the regenerated hairs are thinner? or is it just me

Be careful about looking at a few pictures and thinking it's that clear cut. We can see 80% regrowth, but what if a large number of the drills didn't result in a viable follicle.

And that's another good point about the hairs being thinner. I had never even thought about it but now that you mention it, they do seem to be thinner on average than the hairs that weren't touched as part of the procedure.

[maxhair]

Dear Dr Gho,

Where are the photos of the donor area before extraction?

And where are the recipient site photos?

If it's verifiable its worth millions to you, and you just haven't quite managed to take the photos and load them here, despite having time to do interviews?

What, you can't afford the $500 to get a helper to take the right photos and upload the images for you?

You're flying around, setting up businesses in multiple countries, but you can't organize some proof, despite being ready to claim proof?

If I had a hair multiplication surgery technique, I'd have it rolled out in no time. I'd have pictures which prove to investors, like fellow HT surgeons, that it works - but you don't seem to have bothered with that most fundamental of prerequisites for investment. Just your smiling, not entirely believable face saying it works.

Dude, if you do actually have the ability to do what you say you can, and you still haven't managed to present it, then you need to sack all your PR people, and all your advisers, and hire Mickey Mouse instead to do a better job.

For this reason, I am out.

[JJJJrS]

Where is the shot of this part of the donor region prior to the procedure?

I really think you should take the time to actually read the post. The analysis isn't complete yet and I'm going to be including the exact same area spanning multiple procedures. The "Month 9" picture is actually a before shot gc83uk took before his 3rd procedure, which will all be included in the final analysis.

Gho could just be wounding healthy follicles in the back to make it look like he's extracted at least a part of the hair. Please tell me you have pictures.

Here is a picture of gc83uk's entire donor area from the 2nd procedure. If you want you can count all extraction points. There's no more than 700.

2nd Procedure - Day 1

It is inconceivable to me that 80% of the extraction points are transections. Google "GC83UK 4 recip pics" and "GC83UK - 2 recip pics top view" for recipient pictures shortly after his 2nd procedure.

There is no way all of the regenerated extraction points are transections, considering the recipient yield gc got on his 2nd procedure

And also, what about the recipient area? We need proof.

Guys you really have to do the research and read through the posts because all of these photos have been posted. Anyway, here's gc's recipient photo immediately after the 3rd procedure:

Recipient After 3rd Procedure

The entire area was completely bald (!) before the procedure:

Before Any Procedures

[didi]

we really need to start focusing on recipient area

its good to see donor growing even after 3 procedures BUT 'what' exactly is growing in recipient is as important, imo we hardly touched that issue


if you look at Gcs midscalp area you will see many single hairs growing,
its possible that many double FUs grow as single as it makes no sense to use so many 1s all over the scalp

[gc83uk]

we really need to start focusing on recipient area

its good to see donor growing even after 3 procedures BUT 'what' exactly is growing in recipient is as important, imo we hardly touched that issue


if you look at Gcs midscalp area you will see many single hairs growing,
its possible that many double FUs grow as single as it makes no sense to use so many 1s all over the scalp

Didi, I don't understand why you didn't reply to my last post about a similar thing asking you to show me the 1's vs 2's. How about you zoom into the 2nd HST area in one of my latest recipient pics and detail as well as possible 2 hair grafts vs 1 hair grafts to see what the ratio is?

[gc83uk]

Dear Dr Gho,

Where are the photos of the donor area before extraction?

And where are the recipient site photos?

If it's verifiable its worth millions to you, and you just haven't quite managed to take the photos and load them here, despite having time to do interviews?

What, you can't afford the $500 to get a helper to take the right photos and upload the images for you?

You're flying around, setting up businesses in multiple countries, but you can't organize some proof, despite being ready to claim proof?

If I had a hair multiplication surgery technique, I'd have it rolled out in no time. I'd have pictures which prove to investors, like fellow HT surgeons, that it works - but you don't seem to have bothered with that most fundamental of prerequisites for investment. Just your smiling, not entirely believable face saying it works.

Dude, if you do actually have the ability to do what you say you can, and you still haven't managed to present it, then you need to sack all your PR people, and all your advisers, and hire Mickey Mouse instead to do a better job.

For this reason, I am out.

Dude, first of all why are you addressing Dr Gho, it's me you should be addressing regarding the before photo?

Secondly you and Gandolf I think has asked to see the before pic. The before pic, 12 hours before the actual procedure, is in this very thread. Are you telling me you can't find it? Come on!

I have only put on a couple of recipient photos immediately after the procedure, I'll be putting more on.

I think it would be good if you can take a look at the previous shot and come back with your thoughts, you too Gandolf.

[534623]

Secondly you and Gandolf I think has asked to see the before pic. The before pic, 12 hours before the actual procedure, is in this very thread. Are you telling me you can't find it? Come on!

Are you telling me it is their INTENTION to find something?
You're wrong.

I mean, such losers find always something, like the hairs in a soup, but -how bad- they simply can't find what they're looking for. No way. They can't find it. Impossible.

[gc83uk]

Another very good question. With a significant proportion of hairs in the telegen phase, it really does make these pics which attempt to view individual hairs very difficult to analyze and quantify.

Yes its difficult, but thanks to Iron Man and JJJJrS, this mistake won't happen because they have identified the exact FU's before and after the procedure. That's why they have mapped it out or numbered in Iron Mans case.

You can also do the same if you have any doubts.

[Gandolf]

Secondly you and Gandolf I think has asked to see the before pic. The before pic, 12 hours before the actual procedure, is in this very thread. Are you telling me you can't find it? Come on!

I have only put on a couple of recipient photos immediately after the procedure, I'll be putting more on.

I think it would be good if you can take a look at the previous shot and come back with your thoughts, you too Gandolf.

Where did I ask to see the before pic? Can you please point me to that post?

[gc83uk]

And that's another good point about the hairs being thinner. I had never even thought about it but now that you mention it, they do seem to be thinner on average than the hairs that weren't touched as part of the procedure.

Also which hairs are thinner, just give me a number from one of Iron Mans or JJJJrS's pictures?

[gc83uk]

Where did I ask to see the before pic? Can you please point me to that post?

Sure:

Quote:
Originally Posted by maxhair
Where is the shot of this part of the donor region prior to the procedure?

Then you said:
Another very good question. With a significant proportion of hairs in the telegen phase, it really does make these pics which attempt to view individual hairs very difficult to analyze and quantify.

Is that not you agreeing with Maxhairs question? Confused!

[Gandolf]

Sure:

Quote:
Originally Posted by maxhair
Where is the shot of this part of the donor region prior to the procedure?

Then you said:
Another very good question. With a significant proportion of hairs in the telegen phase, it really does make these pics which attempt to view individual hairs very difficult to analyze and quantify.

Is that not you agreeing with Maxhairs question? Confused!

Oh, you're right I forgot about that post. Regarding having the picture in this very thread as you say, this thread has over 200 posts and it's very possible I haven't read the whole thing in entirety. If you could point me in the direction of them I'd be happy to take a look and give my thoughts.