attention forum users


Gho's science is legit... thats a fact... the evidence for this is mounting



I want to make sure people look into HST from gho before they undergo ANY procedure with ANY other doctor...... ESPECIALLY if you're seriously considering a STRIP procedure



HST is the future

please look into it... there are tons of documents, videos, links on HASCIs website



I will be getting the procedure as soon as I can.. unfortunately the only 3 clinics in the world that offer the procedure are booked solid through march 2012... hopefully over the next 12-16 months other clinics will start to offer it or more HASCI franchises will open


the procedure is pretty expensive at the moment... if you are somebody who will need 4 or 5 procedures it will take at least 4-5 years.... by the time you get your 5th procedure the price of HST should be on par with some FUE rates today





in conclusion



DO NOT GET STRIP. PERIOD. IT IS OFFICIALLY OUT OF DATE AND OFFICIALLY OBSOLETE!


look into HST for youself


as I already said... HASCI's website has many resources and you can google to find great discussions on here and other hair loss forums



to the owners of hairrestorationnetwork.com.... you guys should probably look into Gho and position yourselves to be a leader in HST resources.... rather than becoming as obsolete at a strip surgery.... just a thought

I am very intrigued by Dr. Gho's technique but to say it is 100% legit and the future making everything else obsolete is a large overstep imo. I have yet to see any verifiable evidence that the donor hair does in fact grow back other than taking Dr. Gho's word for it. It would be amazing if this is for real but until there is actual verifiable peer reviewed proof it just looks like a refined fue procedure. It would not be difficult at all to document the regrowth in the donor area after a procedure and the fact that Gho has not attempted to do that makes me skeptical. I would also like to know more detail about his magic "fertilizer" that he uses to multiply the follicles. The hair loss community is skeptical of new treatments, for good reason, and until I see actual evidence I will remain a skeptic myself. If you do get a procedure with Gho I would encourage you to work with him to document the regrowth of your donor hair since you are so passionate about Gho, it would do a lot for the credibility of him and his procedure.

Fin,

While I've always greatly appreciated the fact that you keep the community up to date on the newest "cutting edge" hair loss treatments and procedures, this statement seems quite bold.

Frankly, I've done a bit of research regarding Dr. Gho's procedure, and while I truly believe the science of "hair duplication" (the plucking, treating, and implanting method) is very promising, the results for these types of procedures, thus far, simply do not match the "gold standard" set by quality follicular unit transplantation (FUT).

Now, if you wanted to claim that these types of procedures serve as a useful adjunct, a good tool for those who cannot or will not undergo FUT, etc, then I'd say that's an appropriate and fair assessment.

However, claiming that the RESULTS from these types of procedures already eclipse FUT and make the procedure outdated and useless simply is not accurate.

Are these types of breakthroughs exciting? Absolutely. Is it great that we are seeing any type of results from new, innovative procedures that utilize a less invasive approach? Yes. Should hair loss sufferers discount proven, effective treatments in the present with the hopes/assumption that the science behind some of these new techniques is here and ready to cure baldness? Absolutely not.

However, because, as you previously stated, we do want our community stay on the cutting-edge of new techniques, ideas, and treatments, if you do have any objective evidence regarding the procedure, please feel free to share!

__________________
Blake (Future_HT_Doc)

Forum Co-Moderator and Editorial Assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, the Hair Loss Learning Center, the Hair Loss Q&A Blog, and the Hair Restoration Forum

All opinions are my own and my advice should not constitute as medical advice.

what can I say...I'm bold and I make bold statements

I dont think he has a magic fertilizer that multiplies follicles..... stem cells can only be out of the body for so long before they lose their ability to reproduce whatever they are programed to produce (hair for example).... I believe the fluid lengthens the time the grafts can be out of the body..... as his extractions are smaller than normal fue and also only half the graft as fue... normal fue has fat tissue around it that probably preserve the cells well outside of the body... gho needed a way around that... ie his fluid.....


I will definitely record my Gho procedure as best I can... unfortunately he is booked through march 2012 and I havn't booked myself in because I wont be available to travel in march and I'm not sure when I'll have time to travel... I'm hoping other places open in the next 12-16 months maybe in america... or at least in europe which will put a limit on the waiting list and possibly start to bring the price down slowly

I'll post some pictures of what gho has offered for proof

Which is fine, but I do not think it's appropriate to dissuade other hair loss sufferers from undergoing hair transplant surgery now simply because you believe the Gho technique is "legit." Again, if you do have objective, concrete proof, or even anecdotal evidence greater than the information found on a clinic website or a google search, please share. We're always open to discuss new techniques, but these exchanges need to be open and fair, and bold statements should be substantiated.

I watched a video of a procedure he performed on an internet personality (I believe it was a gentleman with a program called "Scissor Boy"), and it seemed like the "fertilizer" was akin to a formula that supported/induced the ability for the body to regrow the missing portion of the follicle lost during the plucking process. Where did you hear that the fluid simply protected the follicle while outside of the body?

__________________
Blake (Future_HT_Doc)

Forum Co-Moderator and Editorial Assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, the Hair Loss Learning Center, the Hair Loss Q&A Blog, and the Hair Restoration Forum

All opinions are my own and my advice should not constitute as medical advice.

I really have to disagree with this statement... I have a bias against strip surgery... I think its terrible and should be disregarded as soon as possible... with that said I am not talking about just any new technique.. I'm talking about HST... this is not in phase I,II, or III this is AVAILABLE NOW (although there is a waiting list) for humans NOT MICE....

I can't seriously suggest to anybody that getting a FUT procedure at this point in time is a good idea and I think if you look even further into HST you won't either..

I will post everything I can on this thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Follicle Death Row
I should imagine a 0.6mm extraction tool leaves no marks to the noticeable marks to the naked eye.

its actually a .05mm needle I believe

here are the latest pictures of WS


??·??? ??(?/?) -6park.com


WS wears his hair MUCH shorter than the MAJORITY of FUE or strip patients





other interesting pages...


http://translate.google.com/translat...iddel-werkt%2F

http://www.hasci.com/uploads/downloa...tspraakRCC.pdf

Follicular bisection in hair restoration: in vivo ... [Dermatol Surg. 2010] - PubMed result


James Bond's interview with Dr. Coen Gho



Joling after his 2nd HST

http://media.nu.nl/m/m1dzlkcaaqry.jpg

DAMN THATS CUT SHORT!


wesley....

Before: http://img811.imageshack.us/i/wesley...ramonastr.jpg/

Now: http://img821.imageshack.us/i/wesley...bresciaca.jpg/




I can't speak for the journal that the below link leads to but I think its a reputable peer review journal.....

http://www.hasci.com/uploads/downloa...%20Neumann.pdf



Below is an article showing bernstien using the same theory as HST with his own twist....

http://www.bernsteinmedical.com/hair...llular-matrix/



HST on burn victim new clip

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diL2P...ature=youtu.be

While I'm glad you've admitted this bias, it doesn't help make the case that you're reviewing the situation from a fair, objective point of view and arriving at the conclusion that "HST" is valid and should replace modern follicular unit transplantation.

I think all readers reviewing this thread and researching hair transplant surgery should keep this heavily influenced opinion in mind.

... and what is so special about the HST technique? As previously stated, many of our members (myself included) have reviewed the procedure and believe the evidence and concrete results are lacking. By stating that you believe the new technique is legitimate and should replace FUT, I think you should provide the evidence proving that the procedure isn't "just any new technique."

Furthermore, I'm confused as to why the lack of controlled, regulated, peer-reviewed clinic studies and publications make the procedure, in your opinion, more legitimate? Progressing through the standard safety and efficacy trials is a very common practice in medicine and surgery, and I'm curious as to why simple availability opposed to a product with potential and slated efficacy and safety review is an advantage?

Has this technique (including the "fertilizer") been tested or reviewed by any sort of federal drug administration?

Again, I've looked into the procedure and still believe current, proven techniques are a better option. At this point in time, I'd share this sentiment with any inquisitive hair loss sufferer. However, I do look forward to any evidence that will help me better understand the procedure.

Thank you. I look forward to reviewing the information. Please remember to keep our terms of service in mind when posting this evidence.

__________________
Blake (Future_HT_Doc)

Forum Co-Moderator and Editorial Assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, the Hair Loss Learning Center, the Hair Loss Q&A Blog, and the Hair Restoration Forum

All opinions are my own and my advice should not constitute as medical advice.

This gentleman underwent the Gho procedure? Frankly, I don't think his hair looks much shorter than styles I've seen in similar follicular unit extraction (FUE) cases. Do you believe the procedure should replace FUE hair transplant surgery as well?





Maybe it's my computer, but neither of these pages would open.

This source has no abstract and also only comments on the idea behind "plucking" partial follicular unit grafts (utilized in the hair duplication method), not how well these grafts survive and grow (terminally) when implanted in the recipient region.


This interview is six years old. Has there been any more substantial updates or media focus since this time?



Again, maybe it's my computer, but neither of these sources opened to an image.




It does seem like a reputable journal, but like the above pubmed reference, the most substantial findings have to do with regrowth in the "plucked" donor area, not yield of the duplicated grafts in the recipient region.

According to the article, there was around a 97% regrowth rate in the donor region (which, if the follicles were simply being "plucked" seems fairly reasonable), but the most conclusive data with regard to yield in the recipient region simply says "almost all implanted grafts grew a hair."

I'm not sure why substantial, accurate values were provided for donor regrowth, but not follicle survival rate in the recipient region.

Again, I could very easily have missed something (and if so, please feel free to clarify; my intent is to provide the most accurate, objective review possible), but the article doesn't necessarily seem to focus on significant "results."

Thank you for providing this information. I hope you're able to continue researching and updating the community with your findings.



While the method behind the hair duplication technique in this instance is similar, ACell/Matristem techniques rely on the formula that's applied to the "plucked" grafts before implantation. Allegedly, this treatment allows the body to regrow a complete follicle around the partial, plucked follicular unit graft. Frankly, I assume the "fertilizer" utilized by Dr. Gho claims to do something similar, but it's the variability between these two formulas that makes all the difference.

Furthermore, ACell is undergoing numerous clinical trials at the moment, including an efficacy and safety review at the New Hair Institute under Coalition hair transplant surgeon Dr. Rassman.

__________________
Blake (Future_HT_Doc)

Forum Co-Moderator and Editorial Assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, the Hair Loss Learning Center, the Hair Loss Q&A Blog, and the Hair Restoration Forum

All opinions are my own and my advice should not constitute as medical advice.