a case study of DONOR REGENERATION with the FUE-L Technique by Dr B. MOUSSEIGNE - Page 14 - BaldTruthTalk.com
+ Reply to Thread
Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14
Results 131 to 133 of 133
  1. #131
    Senior Member clarence's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arashi View Post
    Yeah they obviously gave up on it. I mailed Matthieu a couple times, he stopped replying, I guess they figured out that all this 'donor regeneration' has been nonsense after all. It was first HASCI who came up with this scam. Then Dr Nigam, the master of scam artists jumped too onto it and inspired by their claims of successes, others like Dr Mousseigne started investigating. Then it turned out Dr Nigam was a scammer, then we found out the truth about HASCI and then Mousseigne just stopped responding ...

    Donor regeneration, a few years ago this seemed so promising. Quite sad it turned out to be all a lie ...
    It's at least very promising for Dr. Cole and Chuck,... whose recent low profile about Dr. Cole's "regeneration" success is very disappointing.... The 50% regeneration, I believe, was reported already way before he started trying out Amniofix some four months ago.

  2. #132
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    67

    Default

    There is only Dr Cole left but even he dropped regeneration rate from 60% to 40% and now it would be awesome if he could actually PROVE that he can get 40% ...still HUGE achievement but dont think it will happen

  3. #133
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mathieu View Post


    The picture was taken immediately after the Follicular Units' extraction.
    For further details, please check out the chart below.






    h = hair(s)
    FU = Follicular Unit
    / = the FU was left untouched


    Over a total of 100 Follicular Units within the test area:
    -60 were harvested
    -40 were left untouched

    Which equals a graft harvesting as high as 60% of all the FU within the test area.

    With traditional FUE (# FUE-L), it is recommended not to harvest more than 30% of FU of a given area, following a specific harvesting pattern, so the patient won't suffer from visible scarring (i.e. sum of hypopigmented dots) and/or donor depletion.
    With traditional FUE, 60% FU harvesting would most likely cause the aforementioned problems.


    Further details:

    FU– 1 hair = approx. 3,3% of the attempted removals (2/60) ; 50% succesful removal rate (1/2 h)
    FU– 2 hairs = approx. 73,3% of the attempted removals (44/60) ; 80,7% succesful removal rate (71/88 h)
    FU– 3 hairs = 20% of the attempted removals (12/60) ; 75% successful removal rate (27/36 h)
    FU– 4 hairs = approx. 3,3% of the attempted removals (2/60) ; 87,5% successful removal rate (7/8 h)

    total of hairs available in the 60 FU = 134
    total of hairs successfully removed = 106
    total of hairs transected = 28


    Summary:

    60% of the Follicular Units available in the test area were harvested, which is twice the amount recommended with traditional FUE (in order to avoid donor depletion or excessive visible scarring); if no donor regeneration would occur in the test area, a lack of hair could definitely be observed at the end of the healing phase. We'll see if that actually occured with our next picture (taken 12 days post-op).

    Over 134 hairs available for removal's attempt, 106 were successfully harvested, which equals an average successful rate of 79,1%, all FU's types combined.
    We will observe the evolution of the transected hairs on the next picture, taken 12 days post-op.

    With 106 hairs successfully harvested from 52 FU (the other 8 FU - n° 17, 23, 35, 54, 67, 81, 94, 99 - were fully transected and no hair was harvested), the average transplanting ratio is 2,01 h/FU, which relates to the average ratio for traditional follicular units transplants (1,8-2,4 h/FU, with variations below or above this range, depending on the type of recipient area; e.g. lower ratio on the hairline, higher ratio on the posterior parts). Once transplanted, and if the growth rate is good, these grafts should produce regular density, as observed with traditional follicular unit transplants (i.e. FUT & FU
    This isn't a research study — not even a pilot. Please share your publication reference. Please also post a discussion of your findings, including the theories there-behind.

    Thank you very much.

Similar Threads

  1. Mousseigne, french doctor, on the road of donor regeneration
    By caddarik79 in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 05-06-2013, 09:29 AM
  2. Dr Nigams - NSN Donor regeneration!
    By didi in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
    Replies: 246
    Last Post: 04-05-2013, 03:07 AM
  3. HST – Donor Regeneration Process
    By 534623 in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-22-2012, 07:44 AM
  4. Hair Regeneration Pilot Study
    By DepressedByHairLoss in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-01-2012, 09:06 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

All booked in for FUE.
10-07-2018 09:05 AM
by 37L
Last Post By Karlsch
Today 02:00 PM
Overmachogrande laser llt
01-16-2014 02:43 AM
Last Post By brettwisconsin
Today 12:23 PM
My Finasteride Journey
11-06-2018 03:56 AM
Last Post By DJR71
Yesterday 09:01 PM
Brand New Transplant - 2000 grafts
Yesterday 07:49 PM
by DJR71
Last Post By DJR71
Yesterday 07:56 PM