Poll: What do you think of Hasci and their HST?

[didi]

Dean S could have 20 000 hst grafts at the expense of 3000 hst grafts(1-2 hairs grafts)...@ 1.35 per graft =4050 hairs( 1840 FUE grafts @ 2.2 hairs per graft)......real loss after 20 000 grafts is less than 2 000 fue/fut grafts.....


85% regen rate is good enough to ensure everybody gets full head of hair,

after 20 000 transplanted hst grafts donor would look like ~2000 FUE...and what is stopping hasci from transplanting 2000 grafts from top of the head back to donor to fill in these gaps?


it safe to say hascis claims are misleading, people spend money believing in donor regen of 80%+, and no wonder they do everything in their power to keep HT docs away from scrutinizing it+not doing tests properly(twice)..

now spencer says its good procedure if you want conservative HT,etc...YEs but what about their outrageous claims which promises to do the opposite of conservative?? you cant claim to do multiplication/cloning and and only able to give conservative HT.....makes no sense.....words conservative and multiplying hair shd not be in the same sentence..sorry but that's what it is

that's the thing I have issue with, if its marketed for what it is there would be no drama

[Arashi]

and what is stopping hasci from transplanting 2000 grafts from top of the head back to donor to fill in these gaps?

That's something I've been wondering too. Also, if donor gets thinner, then why not do a donor-to-donor HST ?

[greatjob!]

Dean S could have 20 000 hst grafts at the expense of 3000 hst grafts(1-2 hairs grafts)...@ 1.35 per graft =4050 hairs( 1840 FUE grafts @ 2.2 hairs per graft)......real loss after 20 000 grafts is less than 2 000 fue/fut grafts.....


85% regen rate is good enough to ensure everybody gets full head of hair,

after 20 000 transplanted hst grafts donor would look like ~2000 FUE...and what is stopping hasci from transplanting 2000 grafts from top of the head back to donor to fill in these gaps?


it safe to say hascis claims are misleading, people spend money believing in donor regen of 80%+, and no wonder they do everything in their power to keep HT docs away from scrutinizing it+not doing tests properly(twice)..

now spencer says its good procedure if you want conservative HT,etc...YEs but what about their outrageous claims which promises to do the opposite of conservative?? you cant claim to do multiplication/cloning and and only able to give conservative HT.....makes no sense.....words conservative and multiplying hair shd not be in the same sentence..sorry but that's what it is

that's the thing I have issue with, if its marketed for what it is there would be no drama

This has pretty much been my beef with hst from the start. What I am starting to realize is that just like every other hairloss treatment that varies wildly from patient to patient, hst is no different.

I think the 85% regeneration figure is the best that they have experienced, and that the figure varies from patient to patient. The recommendation not to have more than x amount of procedures likely depends on the patients goals and the actual regeneration rate that the patient experiences.

Dr. Gho has in the past made bold claims and used marketing techniques to push his treatment, and I think that is what hst is. He is not technically, lying as the max regeneration is 85% but that is not what everyone experiences. And he has developed the least invasive and least scarring treatment option currently available.

[Arashi]

This has pretty much been my beef with hst from the start. What I am starting to realize is that just like every other hairloss treatment that varies wildly from patient to patient, hst is no different.

I think the 85% regeneration figure is the best that they have experienced, and that the figure varies from patient to patient. The recommendation not to have more than x amount of procedures likely depends on the patients goals and the actual regeneration rate that the patient experiences.

Dr. Gho has in the past made bold claims and used marketing techniques to push his treatment, and I think that is what hst is. He is not technically, lying as the max regeneration is 85% but that is not what everyone experiences. And he has developed the least invasive and least scarring treatment option currently available.

And this is exactly what I've been thinking. I don't think Gho is lying, he's probably seen it in some patient. But since it varies greatly between patients, they evaluate after 3 treatments. Totally agreed.

[Kiwi]

Didi is a broken record, repeats the same shit in every post about hst. We know its not perfect, and there are things to be answered, but do you have something else to offer other than your trolling?

I don't agree.

We need Didi to balance Ironman!!!!!

[Kiwi]

And this is exactly what I've been thinking. I don't think Gho is lying, he's probably seen it in some patient. But since it varies greatly between patients, they evaluate after 3 treatments. Totally agreed.

So what we need is more doctors performing scarless FUE which like it or not is what Dr Gho does. It is but a variation of a theme (and its gross that he wants to patent it given its a variation of a theme).

Anyway hopefully this coupled with histogen is the breakthrough we need. And heck hopefully Gho can improve it even more

If I could afford to see Gho I'd be going tomorrow. So yeah I'm not criticising Gho I'm being purely selfish and noisy about what I want to see happen in the HT world.

[Arashi]

So what we need is more doctors performing scarless FUE which like it or not is what Dr Gho does. It is but a variation of a theme (and its gross that he wants to patent it given its a variation of a theme).

If that were true, then how would you explain gc83uk's results ? We've seen 65% regrowth in his case. Of course this didn't take failed extractions into account, nor did we see how recipient developed (well we can see the result but don't know exact numbers). But it seems impossible that these 2 factors alone make up for that 65%. Although extremely thin, he's got hair all over his scalp again.

[534623]

We need Didi to balance Ironman!!!!!

I don't think that I'm able to balance him, because ...


...he doesn't even buy Dr. Nigam's slim-on-phone product.

[greatjob!]

[DepressedByHairLoss]

I voted for "really don't know, it's still unproven" although my actual opinion is that although Gho's science seems to be solid, this HST really isn't that much better than what is out there right now. Even if some semblance of donor regeneration is achieved, it will still take many procedures and monumental amounts of labor and time to create any semblance of a full head of hair on some one with significant hair loss. Also, I believe a sentiment that Spencer echoed: that after a hair is plucked, the hair that grows in its place will degrade and become a "lesser-version" of the hair that was initially plucked. Scarring is still going to be an issue and a person would still need to be on finasteride too. And since finasteride causes side effects for many people (myself included), I'd really like an option where hormone inhibition was not part of the equation. Any way you cut it, I really believe that any derivative of simply moving hair from one place to another is really not the answer to hair loss that we are looking for.