Hair Multiplication HASCI

[FinHairLoss]

maybe because they'd be sued by gho

 

 

can we not conclude that something works unless feller does it?

[cureplease12]

that's not what I was alluding to...

 

Gho or his surgeons aren't really renowned for their skills at implanting. Feller and some other doctors approved on this site are.

 

My question is... why isn't a hair restoration coalition member not performing this procedure if it works.

 

get sued for what? the person who invented FUE.. is he suing all the doctors using FUE?

[sapo]

that's not what I was alluding to...

 

Gho or his surgeons aren't really renowned for their skills at implanting. Feller and some other doctors approved on this site are.

 

My question is... why isn't a hair restoration coalition member not performing this procedure if it works.

 

get sued for what? the person who invented FUE.. is he suing all the doctors using FUE?

 

My feelings exactly.

[cody1212]

The actual hairlines do not look that great but the concept makes sense. If our best surgeons used this idea it theoretically makes sense. Keep the remainder of the hair shaft in place and continue to reuse the donor site. It would also guarantee the doctors numerous transplants as the patient would have the hopes of acquiring a fuller head or hair.

 

I'm going to write two dr.'s in south florida regarding this and see if I can get thoughts..

 

Hopefully our best doctors are recognizing this idea and evaluating its usefulness....

[cureplease12]

nice. yeah that's what we need to do. get on top of the htn docs and push them for new ideas.

 

please post back if you hear anything

[FinHairLoss]

if you watch the videos they take grafts in and out a mile a minute

 

That's probably why they're regrowth sucks

 

 

its the only reason I'm not seriously considering a visit

 

 

 

 

 

 

quote from another board,

"

HSI wins lawsuit at the Reclame Code Commissie!

 

On 15 July 2010, the Hair Science Institute (HSI) could at the Reclame Code Commissie (RCC) successfully defend a lawsuit by some hair transplant clinics due to false statements made by HSI. This lawsuit was the newest episode of a continuing series of efforts of these clinics to discredit HSI.

 

Reason for the lawsuit against HSI were the made claims by HSI of "hair multiplication" as a result of HSI’s patented Hairstemcell Transplantation® (HST), and that for the hair multiplication claims no evidence exists. The applicants were:

 

• Transhair BV

• Aesthetic Team BV

• Laser Surgery

• Prohairclinic

• Hairplus Medical Care

 

After a fair hearing of all affected parties and experts, finally the commission came to the decision, that HSI has just made plausible statements on their website and judged therefore the lawsuit for unfounded.

In addition, the claim the popular Dutchman Gerard Joling has HSI “linked to his name” was dismissed by the commission as irrelevant. In the attached PDF file, you can read the official decision of the Reclame Code Commissie.

 

This decision was truly no surprise for HSI and its clients. However, for HSI it is gratifying to see, that now the Reclame Code Commissie too has confirmed, that Hairstemcell Transplantation@ (HST) and its resulting unique statement of "hair multiplication" is fully justified.

 

We hope you enjoy reading!

 

Official decision of the Reclame Code Commissie (RCC):

http://www.hasci.com/uploads/downloads/ ... aakRCC.pdf

 

 

"

 

and another

 

 

"

miozambrotta19 wrote:

The only thing that makes me question Dr. Gho is.. if his technique can enable the person to use the donor hair multiple times why doesnt he have any pictures on his website showing at least one person with a complete restoration. Wont showing full restorations pictures make himself and clinic more credible? I just dont get it.

 

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Posted: Wed Sep 8th, 2010 01:13 am

 

I have spoken personally with three different doctors at HSI, and have spent a total of well over an hour on the phone with them (the long distance charges sucked!). They were very patient with me, answered all my questions, criticisms and skepticism. They have also sent me clear close-up photos of before and afters showing donor regrowth after the procedure.

 

They started this new technique just a couple of years ago and the success they say is unquestionable. We just don't hear about it because we're across the Atlantic and doctors here will not give credit where its due because the procedure is patented -- let's face it, if the average prospective patient knew they could do an FUE procedure without loss of donor, they would take the option.

 

Yes, HSI admitted to me that the procedure was flawed in the early 2000s (causing much less donor regrowth), but Dr. Gho developed a much improved technique (splitting follicles laterally instead of horizontally) that guarantees at least 80% donor regrowth -- and he parted ways with his old clinic shortly thereafter to start HSI.

 

I asked HSI why they don't have photos on their site of NW6s transformed to NW1. They said the technique has only been around for a couple of years, you can only have approx 1500 grafts per procedure, and you have to wait at least 9 months between each one. So there hasn't been time for any drastic transformations yet. They admit their marketing sucks, but have said they really don't feel pressure to prove their naysayers wrong because they're booked through mid-2011 as it is. Clearly they're doing something right!

 

You also don't see any eurpoean patients really that are posting on english speaking forums because of the language barrier I assume. But we see their results because the clinics do the posting themselves -- when I asked about this, HSI readily admitted that they aren't active in this respect because the demand far exceeds their ability to meet it already... But for what it's worth I have seen the shaved-down donor regrowth on an HSI patient post-procedure with my own eyes. (I know, I know, I'm just some guy on a forum making that claim.. But what else can I do? )

 

Source: google it!

 

"

 

and another

 

"

 

However, in spite of what the HSI doctors said, we can track dr. Gho, claiming "donor regeneration", with high percentages, back from 2005 and before:

 

1-In a July 2004 interview, Gho says, regarding FM (the old technique, horizontal bisection), that donor regeneration was 50-80%.

 

2-In Nov 2005, James Bond interviewed Gho about the new HST technique,that was already in use. According to Gho, donor regeneration was above 80% back then.

 

3-In 2010 Gho said to the Reclame Code Commission, that he had treated 1200 patients (1934 procedures)from 2005 with the HST technique.

 

4-In 2010, In the Burns Journal, Gho says that the female patient on the before-after photo, had her first HST session in June 2005, 1097 grafts.

 

So, it seems that Wolvie1985 was not well informed in his phone call. Even though he talked for more than an hour, and talked to 3 different doctors at HSI.

 

"

 

 

 

im not sourcing any conclusions here, just sharing some stuff from other boards

Edited May 29, 2011 by FinHairLoss

[Kenaz73]

that's not what I was alluding to...

 

Gho or his surgeons aren't really renowned for their skills at implanting. Feller and some other doctors approved on this site are.

 

My question is... why isn't a hair restoration coalition member not performing this procedure if it works.

 

 

Why would they want to go through the hassle of learning a new technique, figuring out their own version of Gho's proprietary formula, test it out over x months if their hands are already full with clients? The operation itself is also a lot more time consuming and the profit margin likely shrinks from it.

[cureplease12]

In my opinion, and I am just about as optimistic as they come, Gho's technique is 99.9% garbage. Why? Just type his name on google and fine the plethora of negative publicity tagged to his name.

 

And uh no, I believe that is an entirely illogical statement kenaz... why? because if that technology truly existed, it would be performed here in the states by much more skilled, talented, and educated surgeons.

[Kenaz73]

I have no emotional attachment to Dr Gho and don't care either if transplants have been aesthetically successful because either he or his assistants have less than optimal skills. My point is is it possible the formula he came up with be effective? And I think it is.

 

I'm still sticking to my previous opinion. The point of a clinic isn't to offer the best services possible, it's to make money. If a clinic with skilled surgeons has its hands full with the current technique, I don't see what's their incentive to invest in training and research. Plucking is also much slower so they'd have to either hire more staff or raise the price tag per client to keep the same profit margin. Or like FinHairLoss hinted make their techies fastforward the job.

[FinHairLoss]

I inquired to HSI and received this email with 4 attachments I will try to upload. the attachments are 3 different journal publications

 

"Referring to our E-mail, I hereby send you some more information about our new improved method of hair transplantation, HairStemcell Transplantation® and our institute. Maybe you have read something on the internet or our website already.

 

Hair Science Institute, located in Amsterdam, Maastricht, London and Vienna, is a research, development treatment and training institute that develops new treatment methods in the field of hair restoration in association with Prof.dr. H.A.M. Neumann, head of the dermatological department at the Erasmus Medical Centre in Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

 

In my previous (fundamental as well as clinical) studies, I revealed that the whole follicle is not needed to regenerate hair growth. If a portion of the follicle remains in the donor area, it can regenerate a new hair, even when a part of the follicle is removed. The part, which has been removed, will also produce a hair when transplanted into the recipient area. So, one hair follicle is able to produce more hairs (see attached scientific publication in the British Journal of Dermatology).

 

Our specially developed instruments and experience of our staff makes it possible to put this knowledge into practice with the new technique of HairStemcell Transplantation® (see attachment in the Journal of Dermatologic treatment).

 

We are the only clinic (in the world) who is able to perform the HairStemcell Transplantation. This is because we use custom-made materials and instruments, which makes it is impossible to use these materials and instruments in other locations than in one of our own facilities. These materials and instruments are also under continuous development, therefore, it has no use to train medical staff other then medical staff for our own clinics.

 

With HairStemcell Transplantation® we use a needle of 0.5 up to 0.6 mm to extract only a minimal piece of tissue. The tissue contains a very small part of the hair stem cells, but sufficient to produce a new hair.

 

We leave far more tissue behind in the donor area, and therefore the chance of re-growth is higher compared to the other techniques like Follicular Unit Extraction or Follicular Multiplication. The rate of multiplication is therefore higher compared to the other techniques. Because with the other techniques, frequently, too much follicular tissue is extracted from the donor area, so only the graft will generate a new hair.

 

This means that in the future, after the treatment, the hairs in the donor area can be cut short, without any visible density loss and without scars.

 

Due to the re-growth of hair in the donor area of at least 70 to 80% and the fact that there are no residual scars, the donor area (following recovery) can be used again. Especially in burn victims, where the donor area is limited, this is very important. This method in burn victims has been described in the attached article in Burns.

 

In the reception area, holes are also made with the same size needle as used for extracting the grafts. Because of this, the grafts (which consists of 2-3 hairs) fits perfectly in the holes. There will be no scars in the reception area. Other advantages are better and faster (wound) healing and a higher hair density because we can place the grafts closer to each other. Anaesthesia is painless and also after the treatment you will experience no pain.

 

With HairStemcell Transplantation, it is also possible to restore the eyebrows or beard.

Pictures of the donor area and the difference between FUE and HST can be found on our website. (KNOWLEDGE CENTER -> TREATMENT MODALITIES -> SURGICAL -> HairStemcell Transplantation and the difference between FUE and HST). I also attached our brochure in English, so you can read more about our technique.

 

 

I hope that I have given you sufficient information for the time being.

BJD5682.17may04.pdf

Edited June 13, 2011 by Future_HT_Doc

[FinHairLoss]

other files..

 

 

 

There were two more files... one to a journal and another to their brochure however the files are too big

Gho & Neumann.JDT.2010.pdf

[Blake Bloxham]

Fin,

 

Thank you for sharing this information. Having said that, I did want to state that you're always free to share personal research, journal abstracts, etc, but make sure that the outside information stays away from clinic promotion (I know you aren't personally promoting any clinic, but I just wanted to make sure that promotion isn't inadvertently occurring simply through outside links during discussion).

 

Furthermore, after quickly reviewing the attached information, I still believe this technique is very close to the "plucking"/"autocloning" technique utilized during a plucking procedure with ACell and I'm curious to learn more about the differences between the two methods and see some results.

 

Again, thank you for keeping us updated.

[FinHairLoss]

I may go for it.... I mean does Gho have enough balls to actually make the statement you will regrow donor hair and that the most important part of the procedure is the fact that donor hair can be re used after it regrows.... elaborating that this is for burn victims....

 

 

 

I mean thats a huge claim to make... and to say its especially good for burn victims... I mean how many burn victims can you do the procedure on before they realize that their very limited donor area is gone... and than how long before he is crucified for taking advantage of downtrodden burn victims..... I mean who would do that? / who would want to try and pull that scam off?

 

 

 

and also is gho that seedy that he'd claim this stuff so that he can get a huge short term influx of customers until people realize the procedure is "fake"... the guy is a doctor so he can only be so stupid... and that business plan is stupid as ****

 

 

I may go for it

 

 

 

it seems legit to me

[Kenaz73]

I believe the technique is legit. What I'm concerned about is the technicians' skill. also that only 70-80% of the donor area may regrow. I'm wondering if they ever do a second op for the donor area.

 

Since you've done the research and I'm too lazy to dig it again. Where does the decimal in 2.6 hair yielded / hair plucked come from? I assume 2 is the hair plucked + the one regrowing.

[FinHairLoss]

I would like to see or read at least one amateur review from a patient who has had the procedure

 

 

a youtube video maybe.. anything