ulko

Granted, one-off treatments with a laser comb will probably not affect hair loss to any noticeable degree. Continually wearing a "laser cap," though, is a whole different story imo. Lasers can be used to cause vasodilation, which basically is what minoxidil accomplishes as well. I don't think the laser cap should be discounted yet, just because of the limited results we've seen with the combs.

There have been studies showing that transected follicles have the potential to regenerate. A quick search gives this for example (on horizontally transected follicles): Hair Regeneration from Transected Follicles in Duplicative Surgery: Rate of Success and Cell Populations Involved - TOSCANI - 2009 - Dermatologic Surgery - Wiley Online Library The problem with any kind of transection is that you will remove a part of the basic follicular structure, whereas in plucking, both what's left in the donor and in the transplanted follicle will provide a quite precise scaffold in which the follicle can regenerate. If Gho's paper is valid, he actually provides statistically significant data that the hair in the donor will grow back thinner, which imo owes to the above.

Yep, that's the much controversial Gho for you. He basically transects the follicles longitudinally by using a small punch on a 3 hair FU, as is my understanding. I very much doubt full regrowth in the donor, since the amount of tissue that is removed should be sufficient to induce fibrosis. If you're refering to Hitzig's and Cooley's hair duplication 'autocloning' procedure, the difference with plucking is that only some of the dermal sheath will get transplanted (although the complete way around the follicle). Anecdotally, this should be sufficient, and, since scarring of the donor is much less likely, I don't see a venue for what Gho's doing, even if it actually would work. jm2c :cool:

Your choice (obviously) . Personally, I think that that kind of 'eyebrow cowlick' ruins the facial symmetry somewhat. If I could, I'd probably straighten mine out, although it's really not a big deal (in fact, it's a tremendously small deal when I come to think of it). I'd definitely not pay to get it accentuated though. But it all comes down to personal taste I guess Good luck anyway.

I would be very wary about getting an eyebrow transplant from a doc that I didn't have 110% confidence could do the job. Eyebrow jobs can end up looking messed up, and when they go wrong, they are highly visible. Also, if you're transplanting to the outer rim of the eyebrow, I'd definitely wait for the verdict on Acell, which could give you actual eyebrow hairs instead of hairs taken from the scalp. That's what I'm doing Good luck!

Why did you use beard hair? This was probably before much testing had been done with acell, but I believe Cooley has stated that scalp hair has a higher yield. Why not give it a go again with the plucking if Cooley can offer it for free? Can't hurt and I reckon that he probably has improved his technique by now. Don't give up ej!

I wouldn't be surprised. This is how the mob works. First, they act as if everything was forgiven. But then... :eek: They never forget.

This thread is f-ing hilarious! In the end, you have to admit that there is a certain charm to Dr. Loria's mafia like work ethics. I'd seriously watch out for the horse head, hairthere

Who was your doc? Although I can admit that it looks unusually "bow-shaped" (i.e. going far above your ears), I'm sure that this was intentional. I'd suggest that you contact the clinic and ask. I can understand that these things can be quite distressing 2 days post op. Hang in there mate!

Dr. Alexander, it's interesting to see that the hypopigmentation from the scar seems to be completely gone. Does she have any cover-up tattoo, or might this a positive side effect from the transplant (or am I only not seeing it in the after photo due to the increased hair count)? Great job in any case!

Haha, you go Sparky!

Cure for baldness on the horizon as scientists grow world's first hair follicle using stem cells | Mail Online As always, the cure is 5 years away To be honest, I really do believe more in the lab route than what Aderans are doing with injections. I just can't see how growth direction can be controlled sufficiently with Aderan's approach. It's great also to have some folks supposedly from academia working on HM and not only from the private sector. Maybe we can hope for some more transparency this way.

You could even learn a thing or two from Dr. Loria :confused: Trust me, shady posts like these will just put Dr. L Shapiro's rep even further down.

You may very well be right, I just think it is a bad idea to go around waiting for something that may never come around. At the very least, I think it might be a good idea to devise a back-up plan, should the result not be satisfactory. If the problem in brows' case is just low yield, the surgery was far from a disaster. If there was no shock loss and the hairs that actually do grow blend in well, I'd say: just go for it again! Hair transplants are hardly rocket science. It does work for almost any individual. Only in very rare instances it doesn't. Since barely any of brows' donor was used, it is not the end of the world, even though it might feel like so at this point. Sorry if I sounded too harsh. It was certainly not my intention to instill any sense of doom-and-gloom

The follicles enter dormancy due to the trauma from the procedure. The telogen phase in scalp hair is 3-4 months. Any follicle that has not gone into anagen by then will not do so - it has simply suffered too much trauma from the procedure. Sure, there might be some (more or less inexplicable) exceptions to the rule, but to say that 90% of the growth hasn't occured yet 6 months post op is just naive. It is my understanding that the conception of waiting until the 1 year mark before the final result can be seen has sprung from the fact that there might be some thickening of the transplanted hair even when all of the hair has grown out.