Thanks for posting that info.
Anyway, regarding Drs. Cooley and Hitzig and their rebuttal, I say, fair enough.
If they say plucked hairs don’t grow in any thinner, I have no reason not to believe them.
But they still need to PROVE that the donor hairs (at plucked hair sites) always grow back. It seems they haven’t even addressed this point in their rebuttals.
Yeah, I know, yadda yadda yadda, “everyone knows that plucked hairs always grow back…”
I’m not saying that they don’t, most of the time… but as Ahab so eloquently pointed out, it’s all right to assume that when plucking hairs out to REMOVE hair, but when plucking out valuable donor hair in areas where you need to PRESERVE hair, you need 100% proof that it will ALWAYS grow back, no matter what the plucking technique or the number of times those hairs are plucked.
Otherwise the procedure has little utility and might actually make your situation worse.
PLEASE NOTE that I’m not saying that I know that plucked donor hairs don’t grow back. I am not even saying that I strongly suspect they don’t grow back.
I AM saying we need 100% hard proof on this… irrefutable VISUAL evidence.
And so far, no one has given that to us.
I think the other rebuttals by Drs. Cooley and Hitzig to Dr. Cole are fairly trivial and situational, and don’t really change things one way or another.
Another HUGE, overarching question they have not even addressed – really the biggest question of them all – is, DO PLUCKED HAIRS CYCLE?
Where is their answer to that one?
Have they even volunteered to do controlled testing on this?
As for ACell, they need to do controlled testing to evaluate the relative benefits of using ACell versus not using ACell.
They can’t, and shouldn’t, just rely on subjective visual assessments, like “That looks great”, or “This is really remarkable!”
We need to see scientific, controlled experiments – side-by-side comparisons.