Hair Manipulation scientific info- site

[Smoothy]

Here is a link to in-depth info regarding Hair manipulation (which is different than stem cell cloning), It has the lastest updates from science to patient trials. Good info that could set the stage for things to come in the US.

[Smoothy]

Here is a link to in-depth info regarding Hair manipulation (which is different than stem cell cloning), It has the lastest updates from science to patient trials. Good info that could set the stage for things to come in the US.

[Robert_]

Smoothy,

 

In keeping with the rules of the forums, I edited the URL in your post. If you can find information on this technique that isn't promotional in nature then I will allow it to stay.

 

-Robert

[hairworthy]

Interesting info as long as you're not tempted to go to one of the GHO clinics using the GHO method by doctors having followed the GHO training, eaten GHO food and slept in GHO beds. See what I mean... The guy's got a BIG BIG head and is full of s... tatements like the one reproduced on this page ("Due to our Follicular Multiplication technique being new, 99.9% of doctors are not yet familiar with this technique"). He's been promising the moon and miracle treatments for years, saying he's the leader in HT research and so on, but when it comes to showing actual RESULTS, nothing's there. Just have a look at his own website if you need convincing, or ask the North American docs what they think of his "claims". Caution!

[Smoothy]

Robert,

Sorry for the rule violation but this site had the best indepth explanation of HM which is different than cloning/stem cells.

I was basically just reading the "context" about the science behind HM-- NOT the promotional clinic publishing it. The problem in getting education info like this or other future procedures is that some doctor/clinic has to be the forerunners in releasing the info--and most will attach their clinic as promo efforts. Well, it provided me with some insight on the process.

 

Hairworthy, your right, I would never go to this GHO clinic but thought the info was interesting since I havent seen much published on it. I hear of stars like Tom Arnold, Sly Stalone, and John Trovolta being involved in Hair Manipulation (Arnold has said so public on his TV shows)-- So I wanted to find more info out. If you find anymore--non promo- info, post it.

[Robert_]

No problem smoothy. The only problem with the rule is that I have to sometimes "cherry-pick" what is suitable and what is not. Take, for instance, in another post you posted a link to a nutrition supplement website. I allowed that to stay and even posted another website because I believe that forum readers should be able to share where to get the best products at the best price via the internet provided that they are reputable and, basically, do not "feed" back to the hair replacement industry. When it gets into that, as you can imagine, competitiveness can get hairy and the forums can easily turn into a marketing hub.

 

I have absolutely no doubt that you meant no harm and only good when you posted, however those are the mechanics behind why I took it down. I am constantly on the look out for new information on cutting-edge techniques, however, and welcome any posts that share worthy, relevant information that does not have promotional content.

 

-Robert

[Old Baldy]

Smoothy: Hair manipulation is the way of the future. No doubt it in this old man's opinion. It will be the "norm" in the future.

[gillenator]

Old Baldy,

 

We all of course hope you are correct about HM being the "norm" of the future, however emperical verification must exist on what scientific studies claim no matter who conducts them.

 

To date we have only heard of claims and some have been promising the moon for decades.

 

So my advice to anyone in the Norwood 6 and 7 categories, and yes maybe even class 5, DO NOT HANG YOUR HAT ON HM OR CLONING. Wait for the proof in the pudding and in the meantime, plan your restoration on the active donor that you have at present, not something you are wishing for. Best wishes to all.

[Old Baldy]

Oh, there's no doubt about that Gill. (I'll probably be dead in 20 years anyway!! )

 

My rank layman's guess is that HM is still quite a ways down the road. But it will come IMHO. Medical science is doing things with gene therapy, research, etc., that I would NEVER have dreamed of 30 years ago.

[mr invisible]

im confused, is hair manipulation only beneficial to people with low donor hair?

[gillenator]

Old Baldy,

 

Yes I sure agree with you that there has been far more scientific research done especially in the last three years than ever before and I do feel we are closer to realizing it. You and I are possibly closer in age and it may not be in our lifetime, who knows.

 

It's the younger patient who may be swayed by all of the publicity, get a little too aggressive because he is hanging his hat on HM for future resources and then run out of donor before HM is actually available. Every now and then a younger fella will tell me that he wants to build a thick, dense frontal hairline and forelock. And then he further states he is going to use HM to fill in the mid-section and back. I always ask them if they have their HM session scheduled or who the doctor is that is going to do HM on them. They often look perplexed at that moment and blurt out something like "it's all over the internet".

 

So as you can tell, I am cautioning many folks to wait for the emperical proof "before" they hang their hat on something that has not yet arrived.

 

 

Mr. Invisible,

 

Yes HM would be most beneficial for those who have the potential for advanced hairloss "including" women, and yet desire "full coverage". It would also be very practical to the patient who "has" the potential to lose alot of hair but has not occured yet. They could do HM along the way so to speak and maybe never have the appearance of any hairloss. It will also be helpful to those with "low" densities.