do you find it hard to beleive that 8 years after HST started by dr gho there is no single NW5/6/7 to nw 2/1 transformation? HASCI clinics have 2-3 patients per day for the past 7-8 years...thats many 1000s of patients so far...
With their hair multiplication technique you would think that there would be many cases out there with high density recipient, yet dr gho is giving conservative hairlines
Hair Stem Cell Transplantation® (HST) is a procedure developed and patented
by the Hair Science Institute. It doesn’t actually involve hair transplantation but rather hair multiplication.
WHat is your explanation
04-07-2013 07:19 AM
Joker
Dr. Nigam,
Please do not bring Dr. Gho into this. It will only create more problems and slow down your progress. There is no need to get agitated over anything that Iron Man says on these forums. Absolutely no one takes him seriously. You should not either.
Keep your hands clean, and just focus on your own research. We really need you to be successful and we cannot afford to have you stuck in litigation against Dr. Gho. That is exactly what your detractors want. DON'T DO IT.
Thanks again for all of your work,
Joker
04-07-2013 07:38 AM
Arashi
Quote:
Originally Posted by didi
I also analized recipient and theres 1.35 hair/graft instead of 2.5 as claimed on website...
Hehe. I thought you were going to do a useful count. Like counting the amount of HAIRS in the extracted grafts vs the amount of added HAIRS in the recipient. That would mean something. Comparing the average hair/graft in a specific patient to the average, how is that useful exactly ?
I myself have unfortunately a lot of 1 hair grafts in my donor (and am really jealous of for example NSN, who has tons of 3 hair grafts). It obviously varies between patients so comparing a patient to the average is pretty useless. But comparing harvested hairs/graft in donor vs new hairs/graft in recipient, THAT would be interesting (and I was under the impression you were going to research THAT).
04-07-2013 07:43 AM
Arashi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joker
Dr. Nigam,
Please do not bring Dr. Gho into this. It will only create more problems and slow down your progress. There is no need to get agitated over anything that Iron Man says on these forums.
Totally agreed. You keep talking to IM like he's working for HASCI. Did you see the picture of his scalp ? Now try to pinpoint him on the HASCI website where they show employees ok ? http://www.hasci.com/en/the-institute/who-we-are/
It's plain crazy to suggest IM works for HASCI, he would do the company a lot more harm than good. And I think you know pretty damn well that he doesn't work for HASCI.
I'd say, show us PROOF of your technique. Like shoot some good pre-op & post-op photo's of the patients you're going to treat soon, like that guy from the Netherlands. THAT will be useful to people here. All that mambo jambo talk about cd34+ cells, progenitor cells etc, sounds very nice and all, but who cares, it's RESULTS we want to see.
04-07-2013 07:49 AM
blowmeup
Don't worry about IM Dr. Nigam, nobody takes him seriously. He's obviously a really antisocial recluse who needs the attention he gets on the forums. I can only imagine how sad his real life must be.
04-07-2013 08:01 AM
Arashi
Quote:
Originally Posted by didi
I wanna mention that GHos HST dsnt regenerate 80% as claimed,
respected member JJJJrS analized GCs transplant and found that only 50% of FUs FULLY regenerated, 30% partialy or with thinner hairs and 20% didnt regenerate at all....
so if we count number of HAIRS (not FUs) in donor region then regeneration is 65%....not 80....
JJJJr can confirm exact % of regeneration...
This actually, Didi, is a very good point and we have to thank JJJJrS for analysing and finding this. However 65% regeneration is still 65% more than FUE.
If Dr Nigams could for example show us proof of 80% REAL regeneration, than that would be huge. But for now all we've seen are:
1) photoshopped photo's
2) photo's from his staff member, which for several reasons outlined are not valid at all
3) a photo of the few grafts surrounding NSN's birthmark. He magically disappeared after this, never showed us another photo. And you Dr Nigams never supplied us with any pre-op photo's either.
Again, I'm not here to bash you. But I merely want to point out: focus on proving YOUR technique and stop arguing with people over Gho. We KNOW what Gho's numbers are. Now we want to find out yours.
04-07-2013 08:24 AM
UK_
Whats the issue with the birthmark photo? I thought we had established 80% regeneration - or have we all changed our minds now?
04-07-2013 08:26 AM
Arashi
Quote:
Originally Posted by UK_
Whats the issue with the birthmark photo? I thought we had established 80% regeneration - or have we all changed our minds now?
Yeah 80% regenerated around the birthmark but it's very weak proof, since IF dr Nigam wanted to cheat, he'd obviously do so around the birthmark area, since he'd know we'd focus on that. That is why we need to see a photo of the rest of NSN's donor. If that shows us 80% regeneration, then that's a great thing. We of course cant establish the TRUE regeneration (or let's call it hair regeneration instead of graft regeneration), cause we never got to see pre-op photo's of the area. But at least we'd know that regeneration really occurs to a certain extend.
04-07-2013 08:30 AM
UK_
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arashi
Yeah 80% regenerated around the birthmark but it's very weak proof, since IF dr Nigam wanted to cheat, he'd obviously do so around the birthmark area, since he'd know we'd focus on that. That is why we need to see a photo of the rest of NSN's donor. If that shows us 80% regeneration, then that's a great thing. We of course cant establish the TRUE regeneration (or let's call it hair regeneration instead of graft regeneration), cause we never got to see pre-op photo's of the area. But at least we'd know that regeneration really occurs to a certain extend.
Cheat? You mean if he tried to fool us by implanting other hairs into the extraction sites around the birthmark? Sorry but that just doesnt sit right with me - it'd be too hard to pull off and far too obvious given how clear the images are.
If Gho can produce 80% regeneration I dont see why other doctors cant do the same for a lower price. This looks like the next leap in hair transplantation surgeons have been expecting for years, the next will be cell based transplantation (HM).
04-07-2013 08:34 AM
Arashi
Quote:
Originally Posted by UK_
Cheat? You mean if he tried to fool us by implanting other hairs into the extraction sites around the birthmark? Sorry but that just doesnt sit right with me - it'd be too hard to pull off and far too obvious given how clear the images are.
No, it's really easy to pull that off. Just extract small portion of the skin and leave the grafts in tact, that's all.
Again, I want to make it clear: I am NOT suggesting he did this. But I AM suggesting that after the photoshopped pictures, I'm extremely skeptical and I want to see SOLID proof, like a photo of the whole area and not just the birthmark.
Quote:
If Gho can produce 80% regeneration I dont see why other doctors cant do the same for a lower price.
Maybe, maybe not. I haven't studied all this so I don't know how hard it is and how important his 'preservation medium' really is. All I do know is Gho publicized several scientific articles in peer magazines. We've seen NOTHING from Dr Nigams in the scientific world. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean he can't pull it off. Again, I'm not educated enough on the subject to make a good guess about it.
