Analysis of gc83uk's Donor - 2nd & 3rd HST Procedures

[534623]

Well, I am the perfect candidate for a radically different and original case study with Gho's method: NW6, probably 7, typical AGA case ...

Nope. Unfortunately, you’re not. I think Dr. Gho has such candidates anyhow “in the work”, but for most of such candidates –even with HST- the biggest problem is still TIME & MONEY.

If I would be a NW 6 or even a NW 7 candidate, I think I would rather try a scarless removal of all transplanted hairs (small HT’s in the 90s) and to fix up my strip scars. Then I would shave down everything and move on, because not everybody is willing to have lots of procedures over too many years and to spend simply TOO MUCH for hair transplants. $20,000 perhaps, maybe even $30,000 to $40,000 for a “full” head of hair again. But many guys, even if money is not the issue at all – they simply do not want to spend this money for hair transplants. BUT …

If there would be something what could give realistically even a NW 6 or 7 candidate within 2-3 years or so at least a BIG PART of his hair back, and without a big loss of hair in the donor area or whatever, I think in this case, such guys would rather try it and would see more sense to spend money for hair transplants …

I think you would be rather a candidate for HST 3.0 …

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpost.php?p=100778&postcount=155

Anyway, as JJ suggests,
we should rather stay on topic – namely JJ’s excellent donor regeneration analysis. On the other hand, is there really much to add?

gc83uk, JJJJrS and I have already clear visible demonstrated what’s possible and what’s not with Dr. Gho’s (2.0) technique. But, sure, there will always be idiots who have useless shit to add …

[Vox]

For that, hairy man gc is an excellent candidate on one hand, a rather bad candidate on the other hand…

Well, I am the perfect candidate for a radically different and original case study with Gho's method: NW6, probably 7, typical AGA case as a result of aggressive diffuse hair loss, and stable since many years now. Only a few very sparse hair relics remain on my top. But I guess I would need a hefty amount of cash for this, right? Unless the clinic is interested to have a historical publication in Nature (the journal) and do this for free.

[534623]

It would be interesting to do a similar study of the reception area to see how many hairs that survive. This probably should be done after 12 months

For that, hairy man gc is an excellent candidate on one hand, a rather bad candidate on the other hand…

gc – the excellent candidate
He is an excellent candidate concerning former being SLICK BALD on top. That means, it’s, in fact, easy to count and to analyze every implanted HST graft, because there were not any pre-existing hairs – not even any tiny vellus hairs!
So everything what you can see and WILL see in future - and there is simply no room for trickery or BS whatever, are all 100% hairs of implanted HST grafts (more accurate implanted follicular stem cells) from gc’s donor area.

gc – the bad candidate
gc is NOT a normal AGA patient. According to his reports, he suddenly lost ALL hairs on top of his head when he was 8 years old or so. That means, the skin itself on top of his head didn’t contain any follicles/hairs (not even vellus hairs!) since around 22 years. It is well-known, that skin in general, which doesn’t contain follicles/hairs since a very long time, is not really the ideal environment for successful hair transplants – especially when there is SCARRING alopecia involved.
The latter is THE reason (besides gc’s former 2 small test procedures) , why they –in gc’s case- always used the stick & place method for implantation of the grafts. So in gc’s case, it’s rather like transplanting of grafts into strip scars (at least similar), and transplanting into scars, has always been a tricky thing concerning the success rate – aka “take rate”. So that’s the reason why he also is a rather “bad candidate” for recipient area studies. But so far, as mentioned, his 2 small test procedures were so far very convincing and promising.

[gc83uk]

Hi GC

Well done on your success.

Can I just ask, do you plan to keep your hair shaved or will you be able to grow it out? I have been a bit of a sceptic of Gho in the past, but would he be a good option for a receder, in your opinion? My hairline is receding but the hair on my crown has always remained pretty strong, so I'm wondering if he is a good option for hairline restoration

I am curious about the hair length as I never wear a buzz cut...it doesn't suit me.

Thanks mate

Cheers mate, I take it your a Spurs fan with a name like that, I'm a gooner so as long as we knick 4th place in the run in, I'll be happy with that!
But Bale is something else, think you'll struggle to keep hold of him tbh...

Yea going to keep my hair shaved to a zero for the next 3 or so months, then as the new hair grows out, I'll grow it to a number 1. After my next procedure later this year I may grow it out again to a more normal length, time will tell, but I don't see why there would be a problem, just having the option is nice enough!

Yes I think he is a good option for hair line work. He can get you a density of around 50 grafts per cm2, I'm aware other clinics can go higher than that, but a scarless procedure with regrowth in your donor is priceless IMO.

[garethbale]

These are seriously impressive stats JJ, time to put your feet up now.

Now we have all these thinner hairs numbered I will take a photo again in say 3 months or so on and it might be the case that they grow thicker again.

I know that sounds like positive spin, but either way, I'm extremely happy with 80% regeneration, I don't think anybody could be unhappy with stats like this.

Hi GC

Well done on your success.

Can I just ask, do you plan to keep your hair shaved or will you be able to grow it out? I have been a bit of a sceptic of Gho in the past, but would he be a good option for a receder, in your opinion? My hairline is receding but the hair on my crown has always remained pretty strong, so I'm wondering if he is a good option for hairline restoration

I am curious about the hair length as I never wear a buzz cut...it doesn't suit me.

Thanks mate

[Ted]

Really great work JJ!! Tanks!

It would be interesting to do a similar study of the reception area to see how many hairs that survive. This probably should be done after 12 months

[gc83uk]

These are seriously impressive stats JJ, time to put your feet up now.

Now we have all these thinner hairs numbered I will take a photo again in say 3 months or so on and it might be the case that they grow thicker again.

I know that sounds like positive spin, but either way, I'm extremely happy with 80% regeneration, I don't think anybody could be unhappy with stats like this.

[JJJJrS]

Results from 3rd Procedure

#	Regen?	Quality	        	Times Extracted
1	Yes	Same	
2	Yes	Same	
3	Yes	Less hairs		Multiple
4	No	-			Multiple
5	Yes	Same	
6	Yes	Less hairs		Multiple
7	Yes	Same	        	Multiple
8	No	-	
9	Yes	Less hairs		Multiple
10	Yes	Less hairs		Multiple
11	Yes	Less hairs?	
12	No	-			Multiple
13	No	-	
14	Yes	Less hairs	
15	Yes	Same	
16	Yes	Less hairs, thinner	
17	No	-	
18	Yes	Less hairs		Multiple
19	Yes	Same	
20	Yes	Less hairs, thinner	
21	Yes	Same	
22	Yes	Thinner	
23	Yes	Less hairs, thinner	
24	Yes	Same	
25	Yes	Thinner	
26	Yes	Thinner	
27	Yes	Same	
28	Yes	Same	
29	Yes	Same	
30	Yes	Same	
31	No	-	
32	No	-	
33	Yes	Same	
34	Yes	Same	
35	Yes	Thinner	
36	Yes	Same	
37	Yes	Same	
38	Yes	Thinner	
39	No	-	
40	Yes	Less hairs	
41	Yes	Less hairs	
42	Yes	Same	
43	Yes	Same
44	Yes	Same
45	Yes	Same	
46	Yes	Same	
47	Yes	Thinner	
48	Yes	Same	
49	Yes	Same	
50	Yes	Same	
51	Yes	Same	
52	Yes	Same	
53	Yes?	Twisted	
54	Yes	Less hairs, thinner	
55	Yes	Less hairs, thinner	
56	No	-			Multiple
57	Yes	Less hairs, thinner	Multiple
58	Yes	Less hairs	
59	Yes	Less hairs	
60	Yes	Same	
61	Yes	Same			Multiple
62	No	-	
63	Yes	Same	
64	Yes	Less hairs	
65	Yes	Less hairs, thinner	
66	Yes	Same	
67	No	-	
68	Yes	Same	
69	Yes	Same	
70	No	-			Multiple
71	Yes	Same	
72	Yes	Less hairs, thinner?	Multiple
73	Yes	Same	
74	Yes	Same	
75	No	-	
76	Yes	Thinner	
77	Yes	Same			Multiple
78	Yes	Less hairs, thinner	
79	Yes	Less hairs	
80	Yes	Same	
81	Yes	Thinner	
82	No	-	
83	Yes	Same	
84	Yes	Thinner	
85	Yes	Less hairs		Multiple
86	Yes	Same	
87	No	-	
88	Yes	Less hairs	
89	Yes	Same	
90	Yes	Same			Multiple
91	Yes	Same	
92	No	-			Multiple
93	Yes	Same	
94	No	-	
95	No	-	
96	Yes	Same	
97	No	-			Multiple
98	Yes	Same			Multiple
99	Yes	Same	
100	Yes	Same	
101	Yes	Same	
102	Yes	Thinner	
103	Yes	Same	
104	Yes	Thinner	
105	Yes	Same	
106	Yes	Same	
107	Yes	Same	
108	Yes	Same	
109	Yes	Less hairs	
110	Yes 	Same	
111	Yes	Less hairs?		Multiple
112	No	-	
113	Yes	Same	
114	No	-	
115	Yes	Same	
116	Yes	Less hairs?	
117	Yes	Twisted	
118	No	-	
119	No	-	
120	Yes	Less hairs?	
121	Yes	Less hairs	
122	No	-	
123	Yes	Same	
124	Yes	Same			Multiple
125	Yes	Same?	
126	Yes	Thinner	
127	Yes	Same

[JJJJrS]

Results from 2nd Procedure

#	Regenerated?
1	Yes
2	Yes
3	No
4	No
5	Yes
6	Yes
7	Yes
8	Yes
9	Yes
10	Yes
11	Yes
12	Yes
13	Yes
14	Yes
15	No
16	Yes
17	Yes
18	Yes
19	Yes
20	No
21	Yes
22	No
23	Yes
24	Yes
25	Yes
26	Yes
27	Yes
28	No
29	No
30	Yes
31	Yes
32	Yes
33	Yes
34	Yes
35	No
36	Yes
37	Yes
38	Yes
39	No
40	Yes
41	No
42	Yes
43	No
44	Yes
45	Yes
46	Yes
47	No
48	Yes
49	Yes
50	Yes
51	Yes
52	Yes
53	No
54	Yes
55	Yes
56	No
57	No
58	Yes
59	Yes
60	Yes
61	No
62	Yes
63	Yes
64	Yes
65	Yes
66	Yes
67	Yes
68	Yes
69	No?
70	Yes
71	No
72	Yes
73	Yes
74	Yes
75	Yes
76	Yes
77	No
78	Yes
79	Yes
80	Yes
81	Yes
82	Yes
83	Yes
84	Yes
85	Yes
86	Yes
87	Yes
88	No
89	Yes
90	Yes
91	Yes
92	Yes
93	Yes
94	No
95	Yes
96	Yes
97	Yes
98	Yes
99	
100	Yes
101	Yes
102	Yes
103	Yes
104	Yes
105	Yes
106	Yes
107	Yes
108	Yes
109	Yes

I think I didn't label point #99 in the second procedure

[JJJJrS]

Question on your analysis, you mentioned the hair thickness/number of hairs was reduced on 41% of the 80% which regenerated, is there any correlation of thinning in the non extracted surrounding hairs did you notice?

Does that make sense? Can explain further if necessary. Thanks

I understand your question. I did not really notice this, but I can't say I spent a lot of time comparing the surrounding area either. I'll post the results of the spreadsheet I used and maybe you can use that as a guide.

Update your cache for the latest results for the analysis. I realized I missed some points so I added those in earlier today to the pictures

[gc83uk]

I'm going to try to keep this thread on topic as much as I can so I'm not going to talk too much about Histogen. But overall, I think the analysis you have done of the photos is very fair. This is not a popular opinion, but I am not impressed with the pictures they have shown so far.

On the other hand, I don't think you should waste your time arguing with others about it. We'll all know soon enough whether Histogen's HSC works so there's no point getting these posters angry enough that they will try to ban you, especially now that they have all seen your analysis. It's better to focus on something productive like HST 3.0

Exactly this, #1 lets not rattle on about Histogen in this thread, #2 arguing with the likes of maxhair or perhaps histogen fan boys is like banging your head against a brick wall.

Question on your analysis, you mentioned the hair thickness/number of hairs was reduced on 41% of the 80% which regenerated, is there any correlation of thinning in the non extracted surrounding hairs did you notice?

Does that make sense? Can explain further if necessary. Thanks

[JJJJrS]

JJ, now with your experience in analyzing scalp hair, have you ever tried to analyze Histogen's "proof-results"?

I'm going to try to keep this thread on topic as much as I can so I'm not going to talk too much about Histogen. But overall, I think the analysis you have done of the photos is very fair. This is not a popular opinion, but I am not impressed with the pictures they have shown so far.

On the other hand, I don't think you should waste your time arguing with others about it. We'll all know soon enough whether Histogen's HSC works so there's no point getting these posters angry enough that they will try to ban you, especially now that they have all seen your analysis. It's better to focus on something productive like HST 3.0

[534623]

Of the follicular units that did regenerate, 41% regenerated with less hairs or were visibly thinner.

JJ, now with your experience in analyzing scalp hair, have you ever tried to analyze Histogen's "proof-results"?

http://www.histogen.com/downloads/sid_2012_HSC_Final.pdf

For example...
Just look at number 76 on top of the pics - what can you see?
Simply compare all grafts/FU's.

[534623]

I've been working on the analysis on and off for the past couple of weeks ...

Sorry, but you can't compare you or me with gc - who is able to do this in half the time!

[JJJJrS]

JJJJrS, thank you so much for your effort and time you have given, it must have taken you at least a day!

I will take a closer look this evening at the photos and comment on the specifics which you have concluded.

Thanks again.

Not a problem gc. Without your excellent photos, none of this would be possible so I owe you for that. Also IM for his original analysis of your donor which is the basis for this work.

I've been working on the analysis on and off for the past couple of weeks and all the snow over here has given me an opportunity to finish faster than I expected. Overall, it's not something I really plan to do again but I think I've made this analysis as complete and accurate as I possibly can.