Can someone please explain Gho to me?

[didi]

Of course there is some loss. As far as I remember, no one said that the donor regenerates at 100%. The percentage is likely around 80%. So, for a 1000 grafts session you can say goodbye to 200 grafts.

In Gcs case,Its not just 20% which didint regenerate, remember there another 40% or so(according to JJJJrs analysis) thet either regrows thinner or with less hairs.

20%(600 follicular units didnt regrow)+ another 1000 units regrew as thinner or less hairs...

[534623]

In Gcs case,Its not just 20% which didint regenerate, remember there another 40% or so(according to JJJJrs analysis) thet either regrows thinner or with less hairs.

20%(600 follicular units didnt regrow)+ another 1000 units regrew as thinner or less hairs...

Shit, and what can we do now?

[534623]

I have seen an interview and read a few threads so I know that his basic thing is to get the follicle to replicate itself giving an unlimited donor supply and I have many questions.......

In which thread or forum could you read the "unlimited donor supply" thingy?

[clarence]

Whoever is reading Hairsite will find a thread, where Dr. Nigam claims that no stem cells are actually being extracted in Gho's technique, or as he puts it:

"Dr. Gho’s technique utilized only preservative media which does not have stem cell or isolated stem cell for boosting and survival of bisected follicle & no growth factor, no stem cells were utilized. Dr. Gho claims in his website that stem cell is been extracted from the donor area and implanted in the recipient area which is false and misleading because bisected follicle unit is extracted and implanted in the recipient area.

Sure, even an idiot can see the rationale as to why Nigam would make up something like this... but I don't know, do we have the evidence to dismiss this claim? Nigam does provide us some explanation of the HST process - whether true or not - which seem consistent with his claims.

Blindly longitudinal bisection in vivo has a disadvantage since the hair follicles angles at the skin surface is different from the placement angles of the bottom part of the hair follicle with the root. Hence higher number of transected or unsuitable grafts are possible and it’s a time consuming process

By Dr. Nigam's logic, I suppose, Dr. Gho's technique is called "stem cell transplantation" by the same criteria as a FUE or FUT might be called "stem cell transplantation" (ie. also stem cells will be extracted along with tissue)? Either way, he does tend to bring up the limitations of his knowledge/imagination/whatever, e. g.

Due to patent pending neither Dr. Nigam nor Dr. Gho has not mentioned that at what level they bisect the follicle.

[Arashi]

Whoever is reading Hairsite will find a thread, where Dr. Nigam claims that no stem cells are actually being extracted in Gho's technique, or as he puts it:



Sure, even an idiot can see the rationale as to why Nigam would make up something like this... but I don't know, do we have the evidence to dismiss this claim? Nigam does provide us some explanation of the HST process - whether true or not - which seem consistent with his claims.



By Dr. Nigam's logic, I suppose, Dr. Gho's technique is called "stem cell transplantation" by the same criteria as a FUE or FUT might be called "stem cell transplantation" (ie. also stem cells will be extracted along with tissue)? Either way, he does tend to bring up the limitations of his knowledge/imagination/whatever, e. g.

How could a bisected follicle regenerate without stem cells ? Hence it's pretty evident that stem cells are transplanted as well. It's the whole basis of the Gho strategy. Bisect the follicle and each part regenerates itself, using stem cells that are not *under* the follicle, as previously expected, but next to it.

[clarence]

How could a bisected follicle regenerate without stem cells ? Hence it's pretty evident that stem cells are transplanted as well. It's the whole basis of the Gho strategy. Bisect the follicle and each part regenerates itself, using stem cells that are not *under* the follicle, as previously expected, but next to it.

Yes I made an attempt at pointing this out when I said "ie. also stem cells will be extracted along with tissue" (and what I said before that)... but what could Dr. Nigam mean, other than that Dr. Gho extracts more than just that which he claims to extract, ie. (in his recollection of Dr. Gho's claims) the stem cells as such?

[Arashi]

Yes I made an attempt at pointing this out when I said "ie. also stem cells will be extracted along with tissue" (and what I said before that)... but what could Dr. Nigam mean, other than that Dr. Gho extracts more than just that which he claims to extract, ie. (in his recollection of Dr. Gho's claims) the stem cells as such?

I don't know, AFAIK dr Nigam is a fraud and I don't pay any attention to his posts anymore

[clarence]

Fraud or not, I believe the weight is on the word "extracted". You don't extract stem cells in a FUT or a skin transplant - you extract follicular units or you extract skin, regardless of what stem cells will be included in the extracted tissue. Or, according to Nigam, you don't extract stem cells in a HST - you extract... what exactly?

[Arashi]

Fraud or not, I believe the weight is on the word "extracted". You don't extract stem cells in a FUT or a skin transplant - you extract follicular units or you extract skin, regardless of what stem cells will be included in the extracted tissue. Or, according to Nigam, you don't extract stem cells in a HST - you extract... what exactly?

Sorry I really don't understand what you're asking. Clearly you extract *skin*, containing part of the follicle and stem cells.

[clarence]

Sorry I really don't understand what you're asking. Clearly you extract *skin*, containing part of the follicle and stem cells.

That's the kind of answer I was looking for, thank you; you don't extract stem cells. You extract tissue containing the stem cells, if you do one of the following; HST, FUE, FUT, skin transplant or a good old Sioux scalping ritual. If I am wrong, you may correct me... but in any case I'm beginning to think that Dr. Nigam is making a big deal of it out of some really trivial difference.