Hair Loss Cure? The Hair Stem Cell Transplant Procedure (The "Gho Procedure")

[aim4hair]

I agree with moopookoo on his last comment.

It would be great if the HRN team takes the lead to investigate HST instead of watching it progress and wait until it’s adopted by more doctors in the industry which many people see it coming.

 

After all, all what hair loss sufferers really need is a real investigation backed with evidence that put an end to this once and for all.

Any by taking the lead you will gain the respect of everybody regardless the result of the investigation.

And after all, I believe if HST was spread and confirmed it will just give another option for patients without replacing any old technique. Because even if HST was confirmed to work, some people would not care about the re-generating or the scar free option and would rather go for high session HTs instead of doing less than 2000 grafts every 9 – 12 months, and some others might still prefer the results of traditional techniques and so on.

So it’s really a win win situation for everybody.

[Blake Bloxham]

Thanks HRN team for taking time to respond.

Instead of us arguing back and forth abt hst, fue and gold standards why dont you guys from HRN take time to investigate hst and either prove it or disprove it once for all?

 

Can you help clarify "investigate" and "prove?"

 

I spent a great deal of time researching the procedure, writing an article about the subject, having other state-of-the-art hair restoration physicians review the piece and offer their own advice, and I also sent a personal email to Dr. Gho inviting him to review the piece and join the discussion. I suppose I could "pick up the phone and call Amsterdam," but aside from that, I feel like we've made quite an effort to review the procedure.

 

Furthermore, I'm not sure how we prove or disprove the procedure. Is there evidence supporting the very exciting and promising technique? Of course. Dr. Gho himself authored an excellent article in a respected Dermatology journal and several of the physicians I asked to review the technique commented on the interesting nature and quality of the research. However, in the same sense, the objective post-operative results and overall research behind the technique blatantly does not meet the current standards set by FUE/FUT techniques. If patients are aware of the pros and cons of each technique, then I don't think anyone has a problem with both options. However, I don't think it's possible to take any of this information and "prove" something one way or another. If you have an idea on how to scientifically prove or disprove the procedure, let me know what you were thinking. I'd honestly research it further or take the idea to other individuals with the means to consider the project.

 

 

You guys are doing a great job when assessing other docs, do the same with HST and Gho. there are many guys on hs forum who had procedure done and they all seem to be happy, how many patients is needed so it can be considered proof?

 

Again, we have reviewed HST and the Gho procedure. The results of the research are as follows (in my opinion): the procedure is very exciting and shows some promise, but as of now, the objective post-operative results don't meet the heights met by FUE/FUT procedures. I commend Dr. Gho on his innovation and look forward to watching "unlimited donor supply" procedures grow and improve.

 

Additionally, we aren't trying to "prove" anything with results (as they can, in many cases, be subjective), but the examples (we've seen) online simply don't compare to the online FUE/FUT results. If you have seen cases that prove otherwise, please send them to me in a private message and I'd be happy to review them. However, I still don't think it will "prove" anything "one way or another," but it will help build credibility either way.

 

 

I just have a feeling that there is no sense of urgency in adopting hst as a new gold standard or else you guys would be somewhere in holland right now but we strill talking abt strip in 2012.

 

Again, if the procedure demonstrated results comparable to that of FUE/FUT procedures, we would be investigating it as the new "gold standard." However, the hair restoration community isn't going to set something as the new standard of excellence simply because it's less invasive. If that was the case, things like low level laser therapy and scalp micropigmentation should have replaced hair transplantation years ago.

 

The bottom line is that the procedure has it's pros and maybe one day will become the "gold standard," but as of now, the results are simply inferior to FUE/FUT. Is the scarring less? Yes. Is the ability to regenerate the donor area ideal? Absolutely. Does this make up for inferior density and less aesthetically pleasing post-op results? Frankly, no ... it does not; and this is why HST is currently not the gold standard.

 

Hst has been around for abt 4 years and nobody bothered to investigate it yet, imagine in 10 years you decide to investigate and realize that gho was right..what abt all those patients that clds have been scar free had you investigated earlier?

 

Again, how are we not investigating the procedure? Just because our investigation didn't reach the same conclusion as others would like doesn't mean that we're ignoring or haven't researched HST. What's more, we're really not telling any individual to have one procedure over another. In fact, I feel as if I've been very fair in discussing the potential pros of the HST procedure. However, in that same sense, I still can't honestly say that it's better for patients. What I can say is that we've investigated the claims, posted a logical conclusion, and created appropriate mediums for individuals to read what we have to say and choose accordingly. I don't see how this can be interpreted as anything besides fair.

[Blake Bloxham]

many famous people had it, his clinic is booked out till March next year so I heard..

 

Again, this isn't evidence of quality. The Jonas Brothers are famous and sell out stadiums, but this doesn't mean we should let them replace the Beatles

 

 

It is time to act now, we are all going to be happy no matter what the outcome is going to be, he is either scammer or king

 

All we ask is that hair loss sufferers conduct thorough research and pick the best procedure for their needs. However, all I can say as for now is that based upon my personal research, I think unlimited donor supply procedures are promising and will one day likely be great, but currently do not match the standards set by FUE/FUT. In the end, this should be a big factor for any individual considering spending a significant amount of time, resources, and effort on one operation.

[moopookoo]

I dont know where you get that hst results are not on par with fue or fut results, if you compare 1500 hst to 1500 fut/fue then you will se tht there is nothing between them. You cant compare 10-15000 fue session to 2000 hst, compare apples to apples.

 

Have a look at this scissor boy, his results look amazing for the number of grafts, are you saying Umar or any other doc would deliver better res with that amount of grafts?

http://www.h*irsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry-id-105627-page-0-category-17-order-last_answer-descasc-DESC.html

 

Replace * with a

 

 

http://www.scissorboy.com/video/index/122/-1/all/40

 

 

 

 

I guess we just have to wait for doc from Atlanta to deliver his verdict on hst.

I believe if he gives it tick of approval it hst will go viral, scarless and 80% regeneration, many fut fue clinics will suffer as a result unless they convert and take time to learn hst.

[aim4hair]

Can you help clarify "investigate" and "prove?"

 

Furthermore, I'm not sure how we prove or disprove the procedure. Is there evidence supporting the very exciting and promising technique? Of course. Dr. Gho himself authored an excellent article in a respected Dermatology journal and several of the physicians I asked to review the technique commented on the interesting nature and quality of the research. However, in the same sense, the objective post-operative results and overall research behind the technique blatantly does not meet the current standards set by FUE/FUT techniques. If patients are aware of the pros and cons of each technique, then I don't think anyone has a problem with both options. However, I don't think it's possible to take any of this information and "prove" something one way or another. If you have an idea on how to scientifically prove or disprove the procedure, let me know what you were thinking. I'd honestly research it further or take the idea to other individuals with the means to consider the project. .

 

Thanks again for your effort Blake!

 

In scissor boy's 4 month post op video which he posted in his facebook page:

Jul 17, 2011 1:15pm | Facebook

 

He wrote a comment and i quote:

"I am willing to have my donor area shaved so the area can be inspected but if I do I want to have 2 independent and unbiased qualified doctors/labs to do the inspection.Some other people have been talking about setting this up butI haven't heard anything back from them yet."

 

Maybe you guys can get in touch with him and make some arrangements.

 

Furthermore, there are many guys on diffrent forums (HS) who are scheduled to go through HST and planning to document their case, and im sure if there is a real intention to investigate, some of them might be welling to have their donor inspected prior and post HST.

[Blake Bloxham]

I dont know where you get that hst results are not on par with fue or fut results, if you compare 1500 hst to 1500 fut/fue then you will se tht there is nothing between them. You cant compare 10-15000 fue session to 2000 hst, compare apples to apples.

 

Have a look at this scissor boy, his results look amazing for the number of grafts, are you saying Umar or any other doc would deliver better res with that amount of grafts?

http://www.h*irsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry-id-105627-page-0-category-17-order-last_answer-descasc-DESC.html

 

Replace * with a

 

 

http://www.scissorboy.com/video/index/122/-1/all/40

 

Link didn't work (even with replacing the *). I'm not referring to comparing 10k FUE cases to 2k HST cases ... I don't think the straight comparisons hold up. If the results were posted on our network as straight FUE cases, members would not gush over the results. To me, this means HST cases are receiving extra "credit" simply for being HST cases. Now, as I stated before, this is okay in my book BECAUSE the procedure does offer advantages. However, this doesn't change the fact that on an equal playing field, they post-operative images simply don't compare.

 

Again, I look forward to reviewing more results. Send me cases in a private message (to comply with forum TOS) and I'll objectively review them all.

[Blake Bloxham]

Thanks again for your effort Blake!

 

In scissor boy's 4 month post op video which he posted in his facebook page:

Jul 17, 2011 1:15pm | Facebook

 

He wrote a comment and i quote:

"I am willing to have my donor area shaved so the area can be inspected but if I do I want to have 2 independent and unbiased qualified doctors/labs to do the inspection.Some other people have been talking about setting this up butI haven't heard anything back from them yet."

 

Maybe you guys can get in touch with him and make some arrangements.

 

Furthermore, there are many guys on diffrent forums (HS) who are scheduled to go through HST and planning to document their case, and im sure if there is a real intention to investigate, some of them might be welling to have their donor inspected prior and post HST.

 

If he, or anyone else, would like to post their results on the forums ... we will happily host and evaluate any legitimate cases that meet our terms of service. In fact, I'd love to see some more HST cases!

[chrisdav]

I did watch the video attached but only saw a picture at ten days post op.

 

The presentation and documentation of the results shown on the website are poor in my opinion.

 

The results ideally need to be presented with month on month pictures to 12-18 months taken at different angles in the correct lighting, pre op and immediate post op, graft numbers of the hair used, donor density, hair diameter, videos of the patients etc etc.

 

I cannot find any of this.

 

This is one of the main attractions of the major forums in my opinion as they are currently the the best source of information available for perspective patients to view and the good surgeons put up countless patients presentations like what I have stated above.

[aim4hair]

I did watch the video attached but only saw a picture at ten days post op.

 

The presentation and documentation of the results shown on the website are poor in my opinion.

 

The results ideally need to be presented with month on month pictures to 12-18 months taken at different angles in the correct lighting, pre op and immediate post op, graft numbers of the hair used, donor density, hair diameter, videos of the patients etc etc.

 

I cannot find any of this.

 

This is one of the main attractions of the major forums in my opinion as they are currently the the best source of information available for perspective patients to view and the good surgeons put up countless patients presentations like what I have stated above.

 

He had a video updat after 4 and 9 months

[chrisdav]

Must have missed that aim4hair but thanks and I will have a look.

[krazyXplorer]

Hello everyone

 

I'm new here... I just saw this link which is a patent about hair loss treatment..

 

METHODS FOR GENERATING NEW HAIR FOLLICLES, TREATING BALDNESS, AND HAIR REMOVAL - Cotsarelis, George

 

Does anyone knows about this and can anyone explain this in simple English

[aim4hair]

Hey guys,

That's 16 months update that was posted today by scissorboy and again he is mentioning that he is welling to shave down to the skin and have his donor inspected:

 

 

[chrisdav]

Thanks for posting that Aim4hair.

 

It would be great if he could do that.

[aim4hair]

Thanks for posting that Aim4hair.

 

It would be great if he could do that.

 

you welcome, i really think that we reached the point where some doctors should really put their ego aside and step up and do serious effort to see if HST works as claimed, regardless if it works or not providing evidence would put an end to this debate and do good for everybody.

There is a doctor from atlanta who is looking seriously into this and planning to visit gho in august to verify his technique.

 

One thing i give gho credit for is that he is not afraid to perform his technique on public figures, since i would assume if somebody is trying to pull off a scam he would try to avoid public figures as much as possible.

[Blake Bloxham]

AIM,

 

Here's the issue (as I see it) ...

 

In science, if you make a claim, the burden of proof is on you. If you stand up and claim "I can cure diabetes," then it is your responsibility to set up a clinical trial, test the hypothesis, and prove you can, in fact, cure diabetes. If you stand up, make a claim, provide no real proof, and then chastise the rest of the scientific community for not adapting to your unproven method, you're in the wrong.

 

At this point in time, the procedure has been established, demonstrated some efficacy (in legitimate journals), but is still not accepted as the new norm by the hair restoration community.

 

To me, this means one of two things: 1. Widespread conspiracy; frankly, I do not believe this is the case. 2. The proof was offered and was either a. not convincing enough to create change, or b. not significant enough to properly demonstrate its true worth. As you guys are probably well aware, I personally think the potential here is huge. Of all the future treatments currently being tested, I think unlimited donor supply procedures are going to be big in the future. However, despite the potential it has, despite what it may or may not have done for other patients, as of now, I don't think the burden of proof falls onto other physicians. I think it is up to the creators of the procedure and satisfied patients to make the change.

[FinHairLoss]

AIM,

 

Here's the issue (as I see it) ...

 

In science, if you make a claim, the burden of proof is on you. If you stand up and claim "I can cure diabetes," then it is your responsibility to set up a clinical trial, test the hypothesis, and prove you can, in fact, cure diabetes. If you stand up, make a claim, provide no real proof, and then chastise the rest of the scientific community for not adapting to your unproven method, you're in the wrong.

 

At this point in time, the procedure has been established, demonstrated some efficacy (in legitimate journals), but is still not accepted as the new norm by the hair restoration community.

 

To me, this means one of two things: 1. Widespread conspiracy; frankly, I do not believe this is the case. 2. The proof was offered and was either a. not convincing enough to create change, or b. not significant enough to properly demonstrate its true worth. As you guys are probably well aware, I personally think the potential here is huge. Of all the future treatments currently being tested, I think unlimited donor supply procedures are going to be big in the future. However, despite the potential it has, despite what it may or may not have done for other patients, as of now, I don't think the burden of proof falls onto other physicians. I think it is up to the creators of the procedure and satisfied patients to make the change.

 

 

LOL, dude he put out peer reviewed papers for 10 years showing the progression of the theory and finally the procedure itself. He has a large study coming out in the next year. Anyway, good luck selling FUTs for another 6-12 months before FUT/FUE Dday.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Fin,

 

Nobody here is selling hair transplants. We are an educational website and community that promotes the free exchange of ideas and opinions on today's and future hair loss treatments. The publishers, moderators and members of this community all hope advanced procedures with unlimited donor hair and/or other innovative treatments do become regularly available and widespread. But at this time, most are in their infancy stages and/or are still undergoing testing and are not showing results to the same degree of efficacy as today's hair transplants. Hopefully, this will change in time.

 

But frankly, I'm getting tired of watching you disrespect our moderators and community just because you disagree with dissenting opinions. There is no conspiracy to cover up or stop innovation. In fact, we do our best to report on it and encourage open discussion about it. Thus, I trust and expect further responses from you will be more respectful.

 

Thanks,

 

Bill

[Blake Bloxham]

LOL, dude he put out peer reviewed papers for 10 years showing the progression of the theory and finally the procedure itself. He has a large study coming out in the next year. Anyway, good luck selling FUTs for another 6-12 months before FUT/FUE Dday.

 

I truthfully wonder if you're even reading what my saying/analyzing my opinion on the procedure.

[Blake Bloxham]

Fin,

 

Nobody here is selling hair transplants. We are an educational website and community that promotes the free exchange of ideas and opinions on today's and future hair loss treatments. The publishers, moderators and members of this community all hope advanced procedures with unlimited donor hair and/or other innovative treatments do become regularly available and widespread. But at this time, most are in their infancy stages and/or are still undergoing testing and are not showing results to the same degree of efficacy as today's hair transplants. Hopefully, this will change in time.

 

But frankly, I'm getting tired of watching you disrespect our moderators and community just because you disagree with dissenting opinions. There is no conspiracy to cover up or stop innovation. In fact, we do our best to report on it and encourage open discussion about it. Thus, I trust and expect further responses from you will be more respectful.

 

Thanks,

 

Bill

 

Nicely stated!

[sgs]

IMHO the Dr's that are accepted and pay to post their results here are in hopes of selling transplants. It's a business decision and likely one they have each decided is a good one. While we all want the best for everyone in our position, it's still a business. Again, IMHO.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Sgs,

 

And Dr. Gho is hoping to make his procedure effective and marketable enough to sell his procedure as well.

 

Nobody is denying that physicians want to make money. The implication behind Finhairloss' post was that the publishers of this community are attempting to suppress discussion about potentially new treatments in order to sell hair transplants. This is simply not the case. This community embraces the latest proven treatments and also recommends physicians that are outstanding at performing them. If Dr. Gho's procedure is eventually proven as or more effective than current methods, we'll begin prescreening and recommend the best physicians at performing that procedure as well.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

[aim4hair]

While i have respect for all talented doctors regardless which procedure they do, and i don't see any problem with doctors marketing their work.

But i really don't understand what more ppl need to consider HST legit, Dr. Gho provided scientific peer reviewed papers about his technique, he performed on advanced cases amd also did work on public figures where no scammers will dare to do since they are under the spot and if his technique does not work as claimed he will be exposed, he is welling to proove his technique to any doctor who is intrested, he has clinics in diffrent countries and cities for like 4 years since he started doing HST with no complaints or lawsuits amd he is still expanding, some online forum members went through HST and seemed satisfied and documented their case, Dr. Gho won all lawsuits from doctors who claimed he was scammer, so im comfused what more ppl are asking for ?

Actually some ppl just criticize Gho for the results of less than 2000 grafts on his webpage which if he was scammer, this is the easiest part to fool ppl with as explained in the below link

 

 

As i said before, i don't think any surgery will replace the other, this will only give patients more options, but let's be realistic, what more proof do you guys expect to say HST is legit ?

 

Some ppl say that they won't beleive in it unless they see nw7 become nw1, which means that they will ignore all evidence and wait for years to see that happen, and that's for a simple reason, to make that transformation you need more than 10000 grafts.

Dr. Gho just recently started to do bigger sessions (up to 2000) grafts since before he used to do 500 to 600 grafts and as we all know you have to wait 9 to 12 months between sessions and since HST been out there for like 4 years so of course no such case existed yet, but i beleive we will see this transformation within couple of years (and im sure dr. Gho would not accept to perform on nw6 celebrity like dean saunders unless he beleives he can make that transformation) but should we really waste all those years waiting for this transformation to happen to accept this procedure ? I think that is a bad idea

[Blake Bloxham]

AIM,

 

If you've reviewed all the information and the evidence is sufficient for you, then you've proceeded cautiously and should feel confident with the procedure. However, as I stated earlier, if the claim was made, the evidence was presented, and it still didn't revolutionize the field, it's very possible that the procedure was not impressive enough to become the new norm. Does this mean it doesn't work? Absolutely not. It simply means that, as of now, it doesn't present enough evidence to replace the current gold standard.

 

Despite what others are stating, this is actually extremely common in medicine. Look at pharmaceuticals, for example. Say a drug to treat Parkinson's disease is currently the gold standard and must be utilized by physicians in order to offer the accepted standard of care. Every day, pharmaceutical companies are researching and testing new drugs to better fight the same disease. In many instances, new drugs that "work" just fine are presented, tested against the standard, but still fail to present enough evidence to upset the norm. Does it mean that these drugs don't technically work? No. Does it mean that the new drug doesn't present some advantages over the current standard drug? No. However, what it does mean is that the drug did not present enough evidence to become the new standard of care.

 

Like I've said numerous times, I think unlimited donor supply procedures are going to be huge. In theory, I could easily see these become the standard of care one day. What's more, I do my best to stay up to date with these procedures and would love to do what I can to further their advancement. However, as of now, I simply cannot state that they ARE the current gold standard or that they SHOULD replace FUE/FUT as the best available treatment.

 

However, as Bill stated earlier, we are an educational community and serve to help others find the most up-to-date information about hair restoration. If individuals come to the forums, read the information about the Gho procedure, feel they've completed adequate research, and would like to go through with the procedure, then that's absolutely fine. However, all I can say for now is that the rest of the hair restoration community is not as convinced.

 

Again, I'm all for the future of this procedure and can't wait to see it continue evolving and improving. Like Bill said, if it does become the standard of care, we will happily begin recommending physicians offering unlimited donor supply procedures!

[aim4hair]

Just to keep this topic updated with HST news.

 

Singer Gerard Joling judst had his 3rd HST procedure:

 

Weer nieuw haar voor Gerard – Shownieuws.tv

 

Total HST grafts so far:

 

2009 : 1500 Grafts

2011 : 1650 Grafts

2012 : 1670 Grafts

 

also before starting with HST, Gerard Joling had a strip HT before 2009.

[Blake Bloxham]

Thanks for the update!

 

Interesting to see Dr. Gho removing grafts from below the previous FUT scar. It looks like the extractions may have been beyond the universal donor area, and, in theory, these grafts should be more susceptible to DHT. However, it could have just appeared that way because of the placement of the previous FUT scar.

 

Is that gentlemen (Gerard Josling) very famous in Europe?