Analysis of gc83uk's Donor - 2nd & 3rd HST Procedures - BaldTruthTalk.com
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 59
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    643

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

    I've analyzed over 100 extraction points from gc83uk's 2nd and 3rd HST procedures.

    There are a few new and very interesting things we can observe from this documentation:
    - A before and after comparison of the extraction points. In other words, what does the follicular unit (FU) look like before extraction and how does it regenerate afterwards.
    - The regeneration process for FUs which have been extracted multiple times.
    - Which FUs HASCI targets for extraction.
    - And of course, a regeneration rate for gc83uk's 2nd and 3rd procedures.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    643

    Default Analysis of 2nd Procedure

    Day 2

    Month 9

    'Day 2' shows extraction points from gc83uk's 2nd procedure. 'Month 9' is photo of gc83uk's donor 9 months after the 2nd procedure or 1 day before his 3rd procedure.

    The blue, numbered circles are extraction points and the red lines/dots are a mapping of the surrounding hairs.

    For more clarity, click and zoom in on an area of interest.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    643

    Default Analysis of 3rd Procedure

    Day 0

    Day 2

    Day 24

    'Day 0' is a 'before picture' gc83uk took a day before his 3rd HST procedure. It is the exact same picture as the photo from the 2nd procedure labelled as 'Month 9'. 'Day 2' shows which follicular units HASCI extracted. Finally, "Day 24" shows the same donor area 24 days after the 3rd procedure.

    The blue, numbered circles are extraction points from the 3rd procedure. The green, numbered dots are extraction points from the 2nd procedure (see analysis above). A blue circle with a green dot inside indicates that the follicular unit has been extracted during both gc's 2nd and 3rd procedure. Finally, the red lines/dots are a mapping of the surrounding hairs.

    For more clarity, click and zoom in on an area of interest.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    643

    Default

    At the moment, I haven't calculated any regeneration rates but feel free to analyse and make any observations on your own.

    It's also my intention to eventually focus in on an a couple of specific areas as I did in the this preview. But again, if anybody wants to save me the trouble , feel free to do that as well.

    If there's any clarification needed or mistakes, please point them out.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JJJJrS View Post

    At the moment, I haven't calculated any regeneration rates but feel free to analyse and make any observations on your own.
    Really great and very clean work!

    But why didn't you calculate the regeneration rates?

    So in this case and with your 100 extractions sites analysis (twice as much as in my analysis) we have 2 separate regeneration rates:

    - regenaration rate of gc's 2nd HST (100 extractions sites observed)
    - regenaration rate of gc's 3rd HST (100 extractions sites observed - same area)

    So it would be interesting to know, how much your 100 sites versus my 53 sites vary concerning the regeneration rate.

    In my opinion, in future, the regeneration rates in general would be more accurate if you use THREE complete different areas - as I did in my own case:

    - a small area with around 50 grafts or so above/behind the RIGHT ear;
    - a small area with around 50 grafts or so above/behind the LEFT ear;
    - a smal area with around 50 grafts or so in the occipital area;

    In simple words, we do not need to check ALL extractions sites (1500 or more) of every procedure, as the joker Rassman suggests this BS. We simply do, what many others in other fields (factories etc) do when there are big numbers involved; namely - sample or so-called spot checks.
    That means, if you get in all 3 different areas almost the same percentage (%), in this case, you can conclude that the MEAN percentage is THE regeneration percentage of the whole extraction procedure.

    Furthermore, in the first step, it's completely irrelevant which type of graft regenerated; so in the first step we just talk about "REGENERATION SITES". A detailed analysis, whether or not an indentical graft regenerated, you can do and determine this later with other/additional photos, because you can't always determine this anyhow with just 1 photo.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    643

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 534623 View Post
    But why didn't you calculate the regeneration rates?

    So in this case and with your 100 extractions sites analysis (twice as much as in my analysis) we have 2 separate regeneration rates:

    - regenaration rate of gc's 2nd HST (100 extractions sites observed)
    - regenaration rate of gc's 3rd HST (100 extractions sites observed - same area)

    So it would be interesting to know, how much your 100 sites versus my 53 sites vary concerning the regeneration rate.
    Anyone is free to do the calculations themselves since every point is circled and numbered. My intention is to calculate the regeneration rate for all extraction points in both procedures, for extraction points extracted multiple times, as well some type of comparison on the quality of the FUs, before and after extraction. For example how often does a multi-hair FU regenerate with less hairs or appear thinner. All of this requires some more work and I'm tired of it . But again, anyone is free to help me out and I can confirm the results later.


    Quote Originally Posted by 534623 View Post
    In my opinion, in future, the regeneration rates in general would be more accurate if you use THREE complete different areas - as I did in my own case:

    - a small area with around 50 grafts or so above/behind the RIGHT ear;
    - a small area with around 50 grafts or so above/behind the LEFT ear;
    - a smal area with around 50 grafts or so in the occipital area;

    In simple words, we do not need to check ALL extractions sites (1500 or more) of every procedure, as the joker Rassman suggests this BS. We simply do, what many others in other fields (factories etc) do when there are big numbers; namely - sample or so-called spot checks.
    That means, if you get in all 3 different areas almost the same percentage (%), in this case, you can conclude that the MEAN percentage is THE regeneration percentage of the whole extraction procedure.
    At this point, I probably won't do anymore donor counts for a while Very time consuming, but if people want to analyse other procedures in the future all they need are good photos and some patience.

    If you look at this post, I recommended people to focus in on a smaller area. For example, anyone can isolate 50 or so FUs and post the cropped pictures of these areas.

    My goal was to make it as complete as possible to give us the largest sample size possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by 534623 View Post
    Furthermore, in the first step, it's completely irrelevant which type of graft regenerated; so in the first step we just talk about "REGENERATION SITES". A detailed analysis, whether or not an indentical graft regenerated, you can do and determine this later with other/additional photos, because you can't always determine this anyhow with just 1 photo.
    I think an analysis like this is very important. Of course, it's a little more subjective but a basic comparison is more than possible with the pictures I've analysed. I've also analysed gc's Day 20 photo which I can post also but I don't think it will give anymore clarification than the day 24 photo. Based on a preliminary look, I could see something like this raising more questions than answers.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JJJJrS View Post

    If you look at this post, I recommended people to focus in on a smaller area. For example, anyone can isolate 50 or so FUs and post the cropped pictures of these areas.
    I recommend the same. Even just 30 grafts/extractions sites would be completely sufficient, IF you also do this with 2 additional and completely different areas, as suggested in my previous post.

    Concerning "isolate":
    It MUST be a clear defined AREA - not a cherry-picked one, or just cherry-picked extractions sites, scattered everywhere in the photo.
    It MUST be like this - as for example:

    This is what I call CLEAR DEFINED AREA. Most guys, who followed my analysis, they knew in advance which area I have chosen; namely, a simply randomly chosen area after day 1 and day 2 and day 3 etc. So up to day 5 or so, NOBODY could know what will actually happen in this clear defined area! - neither gc, nor myself nor someone else.
    For example:
    If it would have been my intention to fake the result, in this case, I would rather try to avoid to include the first 1-2 "hair-rows" at the buttom of the blue square (with number 3,4, 5 and 6), and instead of, I would simply make the area somewhat higher, where practically ALL hairs regenerated. So the percentage of "Regrowth" would be, of course, even somewhat HIGHER.

    Furthermore, such a "cropped picture" as just posted - is actually completely USELESS! It is useless insofar, because in theory, YOU CAN fake such a small pic. Cropped photos, which are, in fact, comfortable for viewers on one hand, and just to show AT A GLANCE your result on the other hand, are just allowed, when the WHOLE photo (uncropped) is also attached (via link or whatever) so that viewers, if they wish, can also see "What's going on beyond this small area?" - THAT's the point.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    643

    Default

    I agree with everything you wrote. I know people will look at the analysis and some might be overwhelmed. But my interest is entirely in accuracy and not with presentation. I want as much feedback and observations as possible right now.

    I specifically decided to choose a large area to document for the reasons you wrote. I think with 100+ extraction points you get a sufficient sample size to get the most accurate results and nobody can accuse you of cherry-picking the area. In addition, I don't really have any plans to do something like this again, unless there's a very good reason, so I decided to make this as definitive and complete as possible.

    Like I mentioned earlier, right now I would like hear people's observation. I've done all the boring, tedious analysis, now all I need is for someone to help me answer the original questions in this thread. All it really takes is opening the photos from the 3rd procedure and comparing the blue extraction points.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    643

    Default Analysis of 3rd Procedure

    Day 20

    I've decided to include an additional picture from gc83uk's 3rd procedure, this one from Day 20. The hairs in this photo are longer but it should help with comparing the follicular units before and after extraction when combined with the Day 24 photo. For example, you can check how many hairs are in the FU before and after extraction and whether the hairs appear to be thinner or not.

    I've made some minor adjustments to the photos, i.e., filled in some missing points, so please clear your cache if you want the very latest results.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    298

    Default

    Impressive work!

    I have all the patience needed to calculate percentages etc. but not the time. I hope someone else will do it though.

    You offer freely a great service to our bald(ing) community! Thank you for this.

Similar Threads

  1. gc83uk's hair line or end game?
    By Kiwi in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-14-2013, 03:40 PM
  2. Conflicting analysis from two hair transplant surgeons
    By tdo in forum Men's Hair Loss: Start Your Own Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-19-2012, 10:10 AM
  3. Cost/Benefit analysis of future treatments vs Micropigmentation
    By alanrudy in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-04-2012, 12:24 AM
  4. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-19-2011, 06:53 AM
  5. Does scalp reduction, strip, or donor stretching reduce donor density?
    By CIT in forum Hair Transplant: Start Your Own Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-17-2009, 03:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

» IAHRS

hair transplant surgeons

» The Bald Truth

» Recent Threads

Hair systems
10-06-2019 10:10 AM
by Houndog
Last Post By JaneSteele
Today 05:34 AM
I want to Hair Transplant
06-27-2019 07:35 AM
Last Post By jithupaultkmce
Today 02:54 AM
OUT THE PARK ! Dr Scott Alexander 6 months post op | 2014 FUE | Phoenix, AZ
Yesterday 11:05 PM
by Spex
Last Post By Spex
Yesterday 11:05 PM
Hair Transplant -- Decision on doctor -- In the US or Turkey?
01-19-2020 12:48 PM
by DSG
Last Post By kg1922001
Yesterday 02:11 AM
I donít think my result is going to be good
10-09-2018 12:50 PM
by C1982
Last Post By C1982
Yesterday 01:09 AM