PRP - Whats the Consensus?

[Curious25]

Hello,

I have recently been researching PRP, and the overall consensus that I can find is that it is a generally recommended and positively thought of treatment, either as a stand alone or to have in conjunction with other treatments, to work synergistically. 

The published studies clearly indicate improvement, albeit varied. The science adds up - especially more so now than ever, whilst there is a big focus within the industry on the regenerative techniques, such as Exosomes etc. on the horizon. 

The most common protocol over recent years is to have 3x initial loading treatments, separated a month apart, and then follow up treatments perhaps every 6 months thereafter. 

My questions to experienced forum members please; 

What is it that distinguishes the difference between 'good prp' and 'bad prp'? 
Do the new gun methods of administration provide a higher quality service? 
What is the optimum centrifuge to be used?
Does it cause fibrosis - and will this be an implication down the line for a HT? (Feller and Bloxham seemingly take a highly negative stance on PRP, and they state this as one of the reasons - i find this to be confusing as they are clearly industry leaders, however a lot of other industry leaders are advocates of the treatment).
Has anyone had personal experiences of regular PRP treatment (good or bad). 



 
 

[Dazed]

I had it with my 2018 FUE, and I really don't know how anyone can give an objective review, or even a subjective review in that situation.  I never had any follow up PRP although it was offered.