Why my doctor won't use ACell

[RichardDawkins]

You can deplet it by 50% but the hair characteristics are important then.

But nevertheless i guess right now the FUE specialists have their finest hour because they bet on the right horse, against all odds. Who would have guessed it a few years ago. Kudos to them. Especially when it comes to terms of being a specialist. My bet is that any doc who performs FUE since some years, will have the absolute advantage over the others when it comes to FUE multiplication.

But we should not forget one thing here, Gho was right with his studies about regeneration, if we like it or not. But how he performs it today is another pair of socks.

What those docs have to do now is simple, the ones who got regrowth have to work to get the regrowth rate higher

-----USE A SMALLER EXTRACTION TOOL FOR CHRISTS SAKE BECAUSE THE TRANSECTION HERE IS IN COMBINATION WITH ACELL HARMLESS AND FORCES REGENERATION-----

And the other ones should begin to get in touch with Regenerative medicine at all.

I am only glad that the time of repair patients will finally be over with a new standard

[Follicle Death Row]

Yeah FUE will get cheaper. It had some stigma attached to it in the early days because it was pretty much just a refined smaller scale punch graft procedure which we all associate with the old plug look.

Well Kim had already shown that transection could lead to multiplication; it was just horribly inconsistent. Now I didn't see Gho's slides and presentation when Rassman wrote him off and gave his science behind the technique 1/10 but I think Rassman was quite skeptical of Woods and his FUE work back in the day but Rassman nonetheless worked out FUE himself. Bernstein is looking into this whole autocloning after Cooley and Hitzig got cracking on it so you have to believe there's something to it. Seems like the growth cultures or ECMs could really change things. I'd imagine they're all having a look at it at this stage. Everyone would want to claim the technique for themselves. Tough to say where things will go from here and what time scale we're looking at but if practices don't evolve they'll get left behind.

URFUT is still the gold standard but if they can get a handle on regeneration then the numbers game becomes irrelevant and we can say goodbye to strip scars. Let's hope it becomes a reality in the not too distant future.

[HairTalk]

why is it that Dr. Cole always turns into a punching bag in this forum? Is it really a big deal that he calls his method of FUE CIT? They're his instruments, it's his technique, he can call whatever he wants, right? If you don't like what he's selling, don't buy it.

His Acell article doesn't even mention CIT once, only FUE. I dont understand why the conversation isn't focused more on the 54% regrowth, rather than some silly black/white photos and CIT.

Oh, please. If you're referring to my comments, I've hardly made Dr. Cole into a "punching-bag." On-line fora such as this are places where people can come to discuss the good, the bad, and everything in between. As I see it, expressing annoyance at Cole's gimmicky salemanship about F.U.E. is just fine, and hardly is substituted by one's right to "not buy."

As for "54% re-growth," that's a separate conversation, and it is being quite thoroughly had, as well. One dialogue does not detract from the other.

[HairTalk]

You can deplet it by 50% but the hair characteristics are important then.

But nevertheless i guess right now the FUE specialists have their finest hour because they bet on the right horse, against all odds. Who would have guessed it a few years ago. Kudos to them. Especially when it comes to terms of being a specialist. My bet is that any doc who performs FUE since some years, will have the absolute advantage over the others when it comes to FUE multiplication.

But we should not forget one thing here, Gho was right with his studies about regeneration, if we like it or not. But how he performs it today is another pair of socks.

What those docs have to do now is simple, the ones who got regrowth have to work to get the regrowth rate higher

-----USE A SMALLER EXTRACTION TOOL FOR CHRISTS SAKE BECAUSE THE TRANSECTION HERE IS IN COMBINATION WITH ACELL HARMLESS AND FORCES REGENERATION-----

And the other ones should begin to get in touch with Regenerative medicine at all.

I am only glad that the time of repair patients will finally be over with a new standard

I feel one ought to be careful when advocating the use of smaller excisions: as far as I understand, with narrower diameters comes an increased likelihood of damaging the follicular unit, which can decrease both the probability of hair re-growth and the likelihood that re-grown hair will be of good quality.

[RichardDawkins]

Yeh but i am sorry, i dont care for any stuff here except regrowth rate in the donor area. The rest i dont care. I give a flying **** how Cole is calling FUE. He could name his technique Shitpickle do da Shizzle and i wouldnt care.

So hairtalk if you wanna stick to this whole "bla bla cry cry why is he calling it CIT instead of FUE" stuff then feel free to go, because here we are only interested in how to increase the regrowth rate

[RichardDawkins]

I feel one ought to be careful when advocating the use of smaller excisions: as far as I understand, with narrower diameters comes an increased likelihood of damaging the follicular unit, which can decrease both the probability of hair re-growth and the likelihood that re-grown hair will be of good quality.

The damaging of follicles called transection, and this tranection is one of the keystones of Ghos research (stem cells do regenerate if you do it right). If you then put acell (an ecm) on them its like an healing or regenerating accelerator.

The Quality of the regrown hair remains the same as it was before, because its regenerating on a small scale. Its not like regrowing arms and legs here.

A question, did yiu ever read about ECM in general and stem cells and how hairs have the ability to regenerate themselves? Have you ever read literature about those circumstances? Even Aderans uses this in their presentations.

Also Cole did mention himself that with "not so deep" extraction the results in both depigmentation and regrowth were better then with fully cutting out the mini organs. Thats the reason why 1 to 4 mm punches dont work

[RichardDawkins]

Agree to one point. I dont think that FUT is the gold standard anymore even the simple FUE had more advances in their few years on the market then FUT had in the whole time

[Delphi]

I feel one ought to be careful when advocating the use of smaller excisions: as far as I understand, with narrower diameters comes an increased likelihood of damaging the follicular unit, which can decrease both the probability of hair re-growth and the likelihood that re-grown hair will be of good quality.

After listening to Spencer Koben’s interview with Dr. Harris, I think the new Artas robot might eliminate this issue and allow for even smaller punches to be used in the future. More doctors will be doing FUE and if this Acell pans out the future could look very bright for a lot of us.

[RichardDawkins]

After listening to Spencer Koben’s interview with Dr. Harris, I think the new Artas robot might eliminate this issue and allow for even smaller punches to be used in the future. More doctors will be doing FUE and if this Acell pans out the future could look very bright for a lot of us.

Oh good to hear, seems my future vision becomes more and more reality

[Delphi]

Oh good to hear, seems my future vision becomes more and more reality

You guys should listen to this if you haven't.

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=5185

[HairTalk]

The damaging of follicles called transection, and this tranection is one of the keystones of Ghos research (stem cells do regenerate if you do it right). If you then put acell (an ecm) on them its like an healing or regenerating accelerator.

The Quality of the regrown hair remains the same as it was before, because its regenerating on a small scale. Its not like regrowing arms and legs here.

A question, did yiu ever read about ECM in general and stem cells and how hairs have the ability to regenerate themselves? Have you ever read literature about those circumstances? Even Aderans uses this in their presentations.

Also Cole did mention himself that with "not so deep" extraction the results in both depigmentation and regrowth were better then with fully cutting out the mini organs. Thats the reason why 1 to 4 mm punches dont work

Yes, I understand Dr. Gho's studied method of duplicating follicular units involves extraction with transection, but what I'm saying is, such measure is more likely to result in poorer-quality re-growth (e.g., texture of transplanted hairs) — at least, this seems to be what some doctors have reported, with general F.U.E.

You guys should listen to this if you haven't.
http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=5185

Thank you.

[wilymon]

I really don't think that transection is the answer here. Cole does say that the transection rate of the patient was only 1.4%, which doesn't come close to accounting for the 54% regrowth. It's great that it works (if it works) for Dr. Gho, but the idea of transection and graft damage makes me nervous. Rather, I like the idea of hair regeneration without having to resort to this method.

It might be that the regeneration is related to the size of graft (1,2 or 3 hairs) versus the size of the punch. Does FUE use a single-size punch during the entire procedure or does it change depending on the graft? If changing sizes would help, the Artas Robot might be the answer.

[wilymon]

just came across this video from Dr. Sara Wasserbauer, who uses the Artas Robot, talking about the different kinds of FUE. Pretty interesting.

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?p=12018#post12018

[wilymon]

Dr. Amiya Prasad just posted this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM3Jq2734N0

A testimonial from a Hitzig patient who had Acell.

[RichardDawkins]

This would absolutely be my personal favorite weapon of choice a robotic FUE multiplication with a consitent regrowth rate in the upper 90%. The only downside which i see right now is

We suckers have to pay money to get our hairs back ;-) but there is one advantage for us, we are so focussed on our hair loss that we do sports and get ripped ^^

The one with the last laugh is always the winner :-)

But seriously its sad to see that this all could have been reality a few years ago, oh man. Well nevermind, i have to go to the Gym.

And one thing is so for sure, when i got my hair back i bet my ass that the Buzz cut will be hip and i paid money for nothing ^^