» » » a lot of people are over-analyzing the percentages and just failing to

» » look

» » » at the basic math & marketing tactic: “if you don’t have good numbers

» » turn

» » » them into percentages to make 'em look good”

» » »

» » » Initial Count: 20/cm^2

» » » New Count: 41/cm^2

» » » Increate: 105%

» » »

» » » Total New Hair: 21/cm^2

» »

» »

» » i do not see why this is bad. they stated several times that icx would

» » initially be used in younger men who are at an earlier stage of

» baldness.

» » so if i am balding and i still have let’s say 150 hairs in 1 inch area,

» i

» » will have more than 300/inch… i think that’s great, for me that would

» be

» » the solution. so the technology for now will benefit people who still

» has

» » some hair to rejuvenate, along with the neogenesis process that, as

» sayd

» » by icx, would be more difficult to obtain.

»

» indubitably, it could be a way to hide poor results.

» In fact, if injections were 100/cm^2:

»

» the percentage per hairs is 105, the percentage per injections is 21!!

» poor!

ok true. but…

you just said

Initial Count: 20/cm^2

New Count: 41/cm^2

Increate: 105%

Total New Hair: 21/cm^2

now you’re talking about % of injections. anyway i do not say you are wrong. but:

as they state in their faq sheet, the treatments are repeatable. so these are some of the possible interpretations and what they would mean.

first interpretation: where % is the percentage of hair produced per injections. assuming what pat said: 21% chance for an injection to produce hair.

Initial Hair: 20

100 injections = 21hairs/cm2

400 injections made in 4 repeated treatments = 84hairs/cm2 - that’s good

result: supposing 3 months between treatments in 1 year you got 84 dht-immune hairs/cm2 + previous 20 = 104h/cm2

second interpretation: where % is the percentage of actual hair regrowth, assuming the initial count was 20 hairs/cm2, and assuming it will always produce the same amount of hair.

Initial Count: 20/cm^2

New Count: 41/cm^2

Total New Hair: 21/cm^2

second treatment:

Initial Count: 41/cm^2

New Count: 62/cm^2

Total New Hair: 21/cm^2

third treatment:

Initial Count: 62/cm^2

New Count: 83/cm^2

Total New Hair: 21/cm^2

fourth treatment:

Initial Count: 83/cm^2

New Count: 104/cm^2

Total New Hair: 21/cm^2

Results: after 1 year you have 104h/cm2, supposing 1 treament every 3 months.

third interpretation: where % is the percentage of actual hair regrowth, assuming the initial count was 20 hairs/cm2, and assuming it will always produce always produce 105% of the initial hairs.

Initial Count: 20/cm^2

New Count: 41/cm^2

Increate: 105%

Total New Hair: 21/cm^2

second treatment

Initial Count: 41/cm^2

New Count: 82/cm^2

Increate: 105%

Total New Hair: 41/cm^2

third treatment:

Initial Count: 82/cm^2

New Count: 164/cm^2

Increate: 105%

Total New Hair: 82/cm^2

after 9 months you could have 162h/cm2. this seems to be too optimistic.

logically, we assumed initial count to be 20h/cm2, if it was 1 or 2… we would be pretty f.ed.