Hello Dr Nigam,
Regarding the point above highligted, they don't claim more than double with HST compared with FM. As far as I know the improvement was 50% donor regen with FM and with HST they claim 85% regen.
Regarding NSN, I know you say it will be difficult to analyse the donor regrowth, but I think it will be very easy. I'm just waiting for NSN to send me a new shot of the 468 extractions above his left ear to compare it with the after pic of the 468 extractions.
I should be able to find all 468 extractions for regrowth assuming the new picture is good enough. The only problem is there was no before picture of this same area, so we won't actually know how many singles doubles multi's were in this area to begin with, so instead we will just have to settle for a regeneration %.
Regarding the point above highligted, they don't claim more than double with HST compared with FM. As far as I know the improvement was 50% donor regen with FM and with HST they claim 85% regen.
Regarding NSN, I know you say it will be difficult to analyse the donor regrowth, but I think it will be very easy. I'm just waiting for NSN to send me a new shot of the 468 extractions above his left ear to compare it with the after pic of the 468 extractions.
I should be able to find all 468 extractions for regrowth assuming the new picture is good enough. The only problem is there was no before picture of this same area, so we won't actually know how many singles doubles multi's were in this area to begin with, so instead we will just have to settle for a regeneration %.
Comment