acell - its a dud

[35YrsAfter]

Sorry but that could be anything in that picture: a failed extraction, transected hair, a split follicle or even a follicle that was in telogen phase 5 months back (roughly 10% of all follicles are in telogen mode on average)

I totally agree with Boldy that what you guys saw in the first month most probably were just transected hairs. Cause come on man, everybody knows you can't grow a follicle PLUS hair long enough to pierce the skin in just one month, that's just impossible.

In fact I think what you guys are counting as regrowth is just what I described above:

* 30% first month was just transected hair & failed extractions growing back
* 10% was telogen phase hair growing back
* 10-20% split follicles.

And there's your 50-60% 'regrowth'. See, it's VERY difficult to do a good analysis and yours is bad for sure cause, again, as we all know it's just impossible to see what you guys claim to see in just 1 month. That''s no regrowth for sure !

The day of surgery photo is from 03/12/2013. The photo indicating regeneration was taken on 08/14/2013. That's roughly 5 months not 1 month. Telogen hairs are raised and would have come out entirely with the extracted follicular units. Dr. Cole used our largest punch to ensure that nothing was missed. We have a photo of the extracted follicles taken under magnification and only one was purposely transected. It was not one of the two I indicated in the photo. In our studies where we did not use ACell, the extraction sites are easy to find under magnification and we have never seen any hair growing out of extraction sites where ACell was not used.

The bottom line is, there is never enough proof for some people related to things they have their mind set against. Regenerative medicine is reality and I'm sure there will always be people who will never accept that reality. In the US anyway, most people are aware of the existence of the "Flat Earth Society", Holocaust deniers and moon landing conspiracy theorists.

35YrsAfter also posts as CITNews and works at Dr. Cole's office - forhair.com - Cole Hair Transplant 1070 Powers Place Alpharetta, Georgia 30009 - Phone 678-566-1011 - email 35YrsAfter at chuck@forhair.com
The contents of my posts are my opinions and not medical advice. Please feel free to call or email me with any questions. Ask for Chuck

[joachim]

35yrsafter: what is the average donor regeneration then? 10%, 20%, 30%?

[Arashi]

The day of surgery photo is from 03/12/2013. The photo indicating regeneration was taken on 08/14/2013. That's roughly 5 months not 1 month. Telogen hairs are raised and would have come out entirely with the extracted follicular units. Dr. Cole used our largest punch to ensure that nothing was missed. We have a photo of the extracted follicles taken under magnification and only one was purposely transected. It was not one of the two I indicated in the photo. In our studies where we did not use ACell, the extraction sites are easy to find under magnification and we have never seen any hair growing out of extraction sites where ACell was not used.

The bottom line is, there is never enough proof for some people related to things they have their mind set against. Regenerative medicine is reality and I'm sure there will always be people who will never accept that reality. In the US anyway, most people are aware of the existence of the "Flat Earth Society", Holocaust deniers and moon landing conspiracy theorists.

35YrsAfter also posts as CITNews and works at Dr. Cole's office - forhair.com - Cole Hair Transplant 1070 Powers Place Alpharetta, Georgia 30009 - Phone 678-566-1011 - email 35YrsAfter at chuck@forhair.com
The contents of my posts are my opinions and not medical advice. Please feel free to call or email me with any questions. Ask for Chuck

Instead of comparing people who doubt Acell with Holocaust deniers (really, WTF, are you an official representative of dr Cole ???), you could try to be more constructive and answer the most important question here: How do you explain regrowth within 1 month yourself ?? As everybody knows, a follicle takes more than a month to generate and for it to grow hair long enough to pierce the skin, it would take at least another month. So how do you explain THAT ?

[clarence]

The bottom line is, there is never enough proof for some people related to things they have their mind set against. Regenerative medicine is reality and I'm sure there will always be people who will never accept that reality. In the US anyway, most people are aware of the existence of the "Flat Earth Society", Holocaust deniers and moon landing conspiracy theorists.

Then why should we not just go straight to Dr. Gho, instead of Dr. Cole? Nobody is comparing us to Holocaust deniers for dismissing Dr. Gho's regeneration claims, after all. Hm, Chuck?

[35YrsAfter]

Instead of comparing people who doubt Acell with Holocaust deniers (really, WTF, are you an official representative of dr Cole ???), you could try to be more constructive and answer the most important question here: How do you explain regrowth within 1 month yourself ?? As everybody knows, a follicle takes more than a month to generate and for it to grow hair long enough to pierce the skin, it would take at least another month. So how do you explain THAT ?

Arashi, did you read my previous post? The after photo was taken 5 months post-op not 1 month as you claimed.

To put things in perspective, consider a major characteristic of troll-like statements. They are commonly broad brush, half-truth statements. For example the title of this thread; "acell - it's a dud".

I don't have a high tolerance for BS, and I'm not going to be political to appease those who make troll-like, broad, half truth statements. The statement, "acell - it's a dud", has plenty of company in the hair loss forum trolling archives:

Prior to 2003, Dr. Cole had performed over 8,000 strip procedures. At that time he was ridiculed for transitioning to FUE. Some self appointed experts at that time claimed that FUE was a "dud".

In 2006, I personally participated in a body hair study conducted by Dr. Cole. I posted photos clearly showing leg hair growing on my scalp. The trolls came out in force and stated that it couldn't possibly be leg hair growing because body hair will not grow on the scalp. Some stated that the growing hair I posted was scalp hair, not leg hair. The truth is, certain types of body hair (leg hair) will not grow reliably on the scalp. So the truth didn't fit any broad brush statements on one end of the spectrum or the other.

It's possible some of the posters are so focused on hair loss and hair loss research, they've missed other major achievements taking place:

1.) Human hair grown on a mouse.
2.) Human ear grown on the back of a mouse
3.) 3d skin printing from a converted ink jet printer
4.) Animal cloning

I see posters in hair loss forums referring to the photo of human hair growing on a mouse. I don't recall anyone questioning that reality. Now contrast that to some follicle regeneration using ACell powder mixed with hyaluronic acid placed in a minimal depth (human) donor extraction site. Although the human hair growing on a mouse is technically far more challenging, no one appears to be questioning that achievement.

In the original article cited, William R. Rassman, M.D offers no technical information regarding the methods that brought him to the conclusion that ACell is ineffective in promoting "cloning". The other study relates to using ACell in a strip scar. ACell sells several products and there's no mention of what ACell product was used or whether it was powder mixed with hyaluronic acid or not. At Dr. Cole's office we could easily duplicate an ACell no-growth study. All we would need to do to diminish the effectiveness of ACell is stuff the powder into an extraction site without mixing the ACell powder with hyaluronic acid. A recent study where we did that, only 1% of the extracted hairs grew back. If we performed full-depth extractions, ACell wouldn't be of any value regenerating hair because there would be nothing left to remodel.

Although tissue remodeling/regeneration is a complex process, it can be explained so the mechanics of the process make sense. I have posted this explanation several times and one troll referred to the explanation as a wild theory:

Extracellular matrix exists between the cells of all soft tissue in the body. Extracellular matrix serves as a "scaffold" and provides a medium for cell communication/cell signalling. When you extract an FUE graft, the extracellular matrix is removed. Cell communication is disrupted and the body loses track of what previously existed in the extraction site. When this happens, the body uses its generic filler known as scar tissue. When ACell powder is mixed with hyaluronic acid, it forms a gel that simulates young soft extracellular matrix. Cell communication/signalling is restored to varying degrees. The scaffolding effect of ACell coupled with the improved cell signaling in minimal depth FUE enables ACell to perform as the FDA recognizes, remodeling and regeneration.

So honestly, do any of you think it's more likely to grow human hair on a mouse than than it is to remodel/regenerate extracted follicles on a human donor site with ACell, when stem cells are left behind by FUE?

35YrsAfter also posts as CITNews and works at Dr. Cole's office - forhair.com - Cole Hair Transplant 1070 Powers Place Alpharetta, Georgia 30009 - Phone 678-566-1011 - email 35YrsAfter at chuck@forhair.com
The contents of my posts are my opinions and not medical advice. Please feel free to call or email me with any questions. Ask for Chuck

[Boldy]

35years,

Thanks for your long post, however I can clearly tell the difference between trolls and non trolls. It is not the case here.

Simple question seems to be repeatedly avoided.

The point that we are trying to make is cole claims regrowth within 4 weeks in the other topic.. As arashi said. This is simply not possible. And we only ask for explanation how can you claim this. So let's stay on topic again.

Thanks for your time.

[35YrsAfter]

35years,

Thanks for your long post, however I can clearly tell the difference between trolls and non trolls. It is not the case here.

Simple question seems to be repeatedly avoided.

The point that we are trying to make is cole claims regrowth within 4 weeks in the other topic.. As arashi said. This is simply not possible. And we only ask for explanation how can you claim this. So let's stay on topic again.

Thanks for your time.

The rate or speed of hair growth is about 1.25 centimetres or 0.5 inches per month.
Around the papilla is the hair matrix which is a collection of epithelial cells often interspersed with melanocytes. Cell division in the hair matrix produces the cells that form the major structures of the hair fiber and the inner root sheath. The hair matrix epithelium is one of the fastest growing cell populations in the human body, which is why some forms of chemotherapy or radiotherapy, that kill quickly dividing cancer cells, may lead to temporary hair loss.

35YrsAfter also posts as CITNews and works at Dr. Cole's office - forhair.com - Cole Hair Transplant 1070 Powers Place Alpharetta, Georgia 30009 - Phone 678-566-1011 - email 35YrsAfter at chuck@forhair.com
The contents of my posts are my opinions and not medical advice. Please feel free to call or email me with any questions. Ask for Chuck

[ShookOnes]

The rate or speed of hair growth is about 1.25 centimetres or 0.5 inches per month.
Around the papilla is the hair matrix which is a collection of epithelial cells often interspersed with melanocytes. Cell division in the hair matrix produces the cells that form the major structures of the hair fiber and the inner root sheath. The hair matrix epithelium is one of the fastest growing cell populations in the human body, which is why some forms of chemotherapy or radiotherapy, that kill quickly dividing cancer cells, may lead to temporary hair loss.

35YrsAfter also posts as CITNews and works at Dr. Cole's office - forhair.com - Cole Hair Transplant 1070 Powers Place Alpharetta, Georgia 30009 - Phone 678-566-1011 - email 35YrsAfter at chuck@forhair.com
The contents of my posts are my opinions and not medical advice. Please feel free to call or email me with any questions. Ask for Chuck

uh..so this is the reason?

[hellouser]

uh..so this is the reason?

LOL, no. He's been dodging the question and show of evidence for a while. There's no need to continue the ACELL discussion with him anymore.

[Hair Bear]

I think a better way of wording it is as follows.

Despite the fact that we have been working on Acell for a long time it has thus far failed to provide any noteworthy results in regards to hair however in the interest of science we shall still keep plugging it because right now nothing is the new everything.
Pixie dust on the other hand well... that is the future, trust me!
We are currently testing it on a unicorn with great results.

Yours sincerely, every scammer you have ever known.

Please note that the above is not directed at anyone in particular here.

[35YrsAfter]

I think a better way of wording it is as follows.

Despite the fact that we have been working on Acell for a long time it has thus far failed to provide any noteworthy results in regards to hair however in the interest of science we shall still keep plugging it because right now nothing is the new everything.
Pixie dust on the other hand well... that is the future, trust me!
We are currently testing it on a unicorn with great results.

Yours sincerely, every scammer you have ever known.

Please note that the above is not directed at anyone in particular here.

I'm posting in this thread for the roughly 90% who visit the forum but never post. My first problem with this thread are broad brush comments such as the title of this thread; "acell - it's a dud". That's like saying John Smoltz can't pitch. Sure he had his share of injuries, but he can pitch better than you or I. Using ACell powder mixed with hyaluronic acid in minimal depth FUE donor extraction sites nearly always improves healing at the very minimum.

The other issue I have with this thread relates to the reaction of disbelief that a product cleared by the FDA as a regenerative and remodeling product could remodel or regrow some hair follicles when minimal depth FUE leaves stem cells behind in donor extraction sites. Contrast that small feat with the many animals have been cloned since "Dolly" the sheep. They all had hair/fur/wool by the way. Researchers can also grow a multitude of organs in the lab. A human ear has been grown on the back of a mouse and human hair has even been grown on mice. I don't see anyone here questioning those achievements. That in itself is suspicious to me that there is such a reaction of disbelief that some hair follicles can be regrown. Do you really think hair is that difficult to grow? On my head and your head where we want it to grow, perhaps, but older men see thick hairs begin to grow on and in their ears they didn't have when they were younger. You don't see ears, arms, or noses randomly sprouting on people's bodies. Hair really isn't that difficult to grow. ACell mixed with hyaluronic acid in minimal depth extraction sites is a small feat compared with some of the recent medical breakthroughs in regenerative medicine.

One thing to be aware of is, strip only hair restoration surgeons are frustrated by the number of prospective patients asking about regenerative products like ACell. ACell is of practically zero value in strip surgery because that surgical method does not leave stem cells behind. Dr. Cole did mention to me that ACell can help a strip scar become more pliable, but that's about it.

Chuck

[walrus]

Using ACell powder mixed with hyaluronic acid in minimal depth FUE donor extraction sites nearly always improves healing at the very minimum.

It is clear you are not a man of evidence. You have repeatedly been asked for proof, which you still fail to provide.

Contrast that small feat with the many animals have been cloned since "Dolly" the sheep. They all had hair/fur/wool by the way.

Quite simply, this is a ridiculous comparison to make. Dolly the sheep was cloned by nuclear transfer, what does this process have to do with Acell?

[ShookOnes]

I'm posting in this thread for the roughly 90% who visit the forum but never post. My first problem with this thread are broad brush comments such as the title of this thread; "acell - it's a dud". That's like saying John Smoltz can't pitch. Sure he had his share of injuries, but he can pitch better than you or I. Using ACell powder mixed with hyaluronic acid in minimal depth FUE donor extraction sites nearly always improves healing at the very minimum.

The other issue I have with this thread relates to the reaction of disbelief that a product cleared by the FDA as a regenerative and remodeling product could remodel or regrow some hair follicles when minimal depth FUE leaves stem cells behind in donor extraction sites. Contrast that small feat with the many animals have been cloned since "Dolly" the sheep. They all had hair/fur/wool by the way. Researchers can also grow a multitude of organs in the lab. A human ear has been grown on the back of a mouse and human hair has even been grown on mice. I don't see anyone here questioning those achievements. That in itself is suspicious to me that there is such a reaction of disbelief that some hair follicles can be regrown. Do you really think hair is that difficult to grow? On my head and your head where we want it to grow, perhaps, but older men see thick hairs begin to grow on and in their ears they didn't have when they were younger. You don't see ears, arms, or noses randomly sprouting on people's bodies. Hair really isn't that difficult to grow. ACell mixed with hyaluronic acid in minimal depth extraction sites is a small feat compared with some of the recent medical breakthroughs in regenerative medicine.

One thing to be aware of is, strip only hair restoration surgeons are frustrated by the number of prospective patients asking about regenerative products like ACell. ACell is of practically zero value in strip surgery because that surgical method does not leave stem cells behind. Dr. Cole did mention to me that ACell can help a strip scar become more pliable, but that's about it.

Chuck

because they provide proof/evidence/pictures

[Arashi]

The other issue I have with this thread relates to the reaction of disbelief that a product cleared by the FDA as a regenerative and remodeling product could remodel or regrow some hair follicles when minimal depth FUE leaves stem cells behind in donor extraction sites. Contrast that small feat with the many animals have been cloned since "Dolly" the sheep. They all had hair/fur/wool by the way. Researchers can also grow a multitude of organs in the lab. A human ear has been grown on the back of a mouse and human hair has even been grown on mice. I don't see anyone here questioning those achievements. That in itself is suspicious to me that there is such a reaction of disbelief that some hair follicles can be regrown. Do you really think hair is that difficult to grow?
Chuck

This is really totally ridiculous ! Generating a hair follicle has NOTHING to do with cloning sheep ! You could as well compare it to shooting a rocket to the moon. And yes, generating a follicle is extremely complicated, that's why nobody succeeded so far. And yet you claim to do it, but fail to present any credible evidence and start to talk exactly like Nigam now. My hope for Dr Cole is totally out of the window now ... I can't imagine that a serious doctor would want a guy like you to represent him, somebody who compares generating follicles to cloning sheep and who compares questioning Acell to denying the holocaust. I don't have any words to describe how ridiculous that all is !

[35YrsAfter]

It is clear you are not a man of evidence. You have repeatedly been asked for proof, which you still fail to provide.

What "proof" could anyone supply in a forum other than photos? I have done that and indicated the follicles that regenerated. That wasn't enough for a few and someone suggested the growing hair was a transected hair or telogen hair, which it was not. Telogen hairs are closer to the surface than anagen hairs and a 1.2mm FUE punch was used for the extractions. This large punch helped ensure all follicles were extracted. Go back to the photo and also notice the near complete absence of visible scarring. All follicular units were checked for their number of hairs. We performed the studies to confirm that ACell performed as the FDA allows them to market their products. The FDA allows the company ACell to market their products as both regenerative and remodeling medicine. ACell is expensive, so Dr. Cole wanted to test the claims of its effectiveness in order to determine if it's worth buying and offering to patients.

Dr. Cooley, Dr Obie and Dr. Mwamba are three doctors among many other doctors I know of, who have had success with follicle regeneration using ACell. I'm not sure if Dr. Wesley has done an ACell study himself, but he acknowledges Dr. Cooley's study as legitimate. He understands the medical technology. If you don't want to believe Dr. Cole's study, consider Dr. Cooley's.

Quite simply, this is a ridiculous comparison to make. Dolly the sheep was cloned by nuclear transfer, what does this process have to do with Acell?

I brought up cloned animals as an example of an extraordinary modern medical breakthrough that few, if any question. To say that a comparison (which wasn't the main reason I brought it up) is ridiculous, is a ridiculous statement in itself. Most people know, that all living things have a multitude of things in common.

Almost every cell in the human body contains a copy of the "blueprint" for an entire body. Cloned animals follow the "blueprint". If not in the case of a horse, how could it become a copy of the original horse? Most of us couldn't even draw a picture of a decent horse. When damaged tissue has it's cell communication enhanced and "scaffolding" replaced, the damaged tissue can better follow the blueprint which indicates what's supposed to be at the damaged tissue site. ACell mixed with hyaluronic acid improves cell communication or cell signalling so when the follicle stem cells are left behind after minimal depth FUE extractions, enhanced cell communication enables the body to better recognize those stem cells and according to the "blueprint", better remodel/rebuild/repair the damaged tissue. Not a 100% but it's a start.

Not sure why ACell is such a big deal to a few of you. It's pretty much old news and AmnioFix may replace ACell and PRP anyway.

There are volumes of studies (non hair related) that confirm that extracellular matrix serves as a "scaffolding" and facilitates cell communication.

Chuck