Dr. Gho publishes article in the Journal of Dermatological Treatment

» About bverotti, you are again manipulating things. Why do you do that? Are
» you telling a joke again?

No, I’m not joking this time. As I said in my previous post, that was the nearest I could tell from a Dutch television show. I don’t speak Dutch, so I most likely got the details wrong. Part of it was it was in text below the video, and I put it through a language translator. I definitely got the part that one of the doctors recanted on his allegations, and some of the people that signed were not doctors (I’m pretty sure it said 4). It also seemed to say there was some kind of foul play involved on the part of people who signed the statement. Something to do with having pressured one doctor to sign and forging a signature or something. It was really hard for me to tell what was being said because I don’t speak Dutch. I appear to have misinterpreted much of what was said.

» You say that any HM-researcher will be able to duplicate the experiment?
» Why are you sure? You have not seen the article yet, have you?.
» What is the secret growth media that Gho is supposedly using? Is this a
» standard one, or the formula will be published in the article?
» How the follicles have to be extracted at the donor site? Do you think
» that the details in your interview/article will be enough to make the
» extraction?

The donor harvesting is easy. I don’t expect they will get 95% regrowth on their fist try, but they will be able to achieve regrowth. In fact, it is very difficult to not get regrowth when using the smaller needle on the complete FU as long as you use the hair shafts as guides.

The medium to grow the transected recipient grafts is not top secret. It consists of well-known follicle cell growth factors. Gho uses the same mixture of cells to stimulate the implanted follicles as he does to culture hair follicle cells.

Keep in mind, HT doctors will not be able to get recipient regrowth. They just do not know enough about the science to stand a chance of success. They are stuck doing old techniques unless Gho has mercy and licenses the procedure to them.

bverotti and the other clinics will probably be in a world of hurt for coming out against Gho, because he will most likely refuse to allow them to do the new procedure. It’s never a good idea to come out against peer-reviewed research when you yourself haven’t a clue about the science being performed. They will most likely learn this lesson the very hard way.

Gho set the record straight. This is ran through a language interpreter, but it imperative to read the entire thing at the link.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=http://hasci.com/uploads/downloads/Persbericht_Website.pdf&ei=NwDMS4T4GoSKswOviqm8Aw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDUQ7gEwBg&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dgerard%2Bjoling%2Bhaartransplantatie%2Bgho%26hl%3Den

IMO, the people who came out against Gho are looking extremely amateurish and foolish. They are WAY behind the times!

» I tried accessing this article from our university network… however it
» seems the university of würzburg has not subscribed to this journal… which
» for me… is a sign that it is not a very prestigious journal, since we have
» a subscription to most common journals its usually the crappy no-name
» journals which i have difficulty accessing.

I’m not sure which is less prestigious, your college or the journal Gho is published in? Not to be critical, but even most 2-year junior colleges in the U.S. have access to this journal. However, the type of subscription is typically limited to back issues, so you have to wait up to a year to read the article without paying.

» » I tried accessing this article from our university network… however it
» » seems the university of würzburg has not subscribed to this journal…
» which
» » for me… is a sign that it is not a very prestigious journal, since we
» have
» » a subscription to most common journals its usually the crappy no-name
» » journals which i have difficulty accessing.
»
» I’m not sure which is less prestigious, your college or the journal Gho is
» published in? Not to be critical, but even most 2-year junior colleges in
» the U.S. have access to this journal. However, the type of subscription is
» typically limited to back issues, so you have to wait up to a year to read
» the article without paying.

perhaps we are limited to older articles of this journal as well… i didnt check that. I study physics and for physics i rarely have trouble getting publications unless the journal is crappy… but maybe i judged too quickly in this case…

» perhaps we are limited to older articles of this journal as well… i didnt
» check that. I study physics and for physics i rarely have trouble getting
» publications unless the journal is crappy… but maybe i judged too quickly
» in this case…

That’s probably the case. I’ve checked several schools in my state (Washington), and they all have it but have delayed access.

Just for fun, this Christos Zouboulis guy is a member of the editorial board of Journal of Dermatological Treatment. It looks like he could use some HM.

» » perhaps we are limited to older articles of this journal as well… i
» didnt
» » check that. I study physics and for physics i rarely have trouble
» getting
» » publications unless the journal is crappy… but maybe i judged too
» quickly
» » in this case…
»
» That’s probably the case. I’ve checked several schools in my state
» (Washington), and they all have it but have delayed access.
»
» Just for fun, this Christos Zouboulis guy is a member of the editorial
» board of Journal of Dermatological Treatment. It looks like he could use
» some HM.
»
» PubMed Central Image Viewer.
»
» About our Editors - PMC

oh crap… that means he is unable to pass judgement on HM articles without bias! :wink: Perhaps he is even on this board!? REVEAL YOURSELF CHRISTOS!

I have just read Gho’s replies, that you linked.

JB, I agree that the “manifesto” or “statement” was pretty poor and amateurish. I don’t know who wrote it, but this person should have been much more careful on how to say things. The list of doctors has indeed a stupid error. The header indicates “doctors/surgeons”, but the list includes 2 persons who are not doctors. I think this error is not important, because the remaining 8 persons are indeed doctors, and the 2 persons who are not doctors, are named without preceding “Dr.”, so I think it is just an stupid error, and Gho is exploiting it (no objection).

The manifesto contains a lot of “too bold” statements. They could have said the same ideas, but more carefully, protecting the author. Now Gho will try to use those statements against the authors. And he of course has every right to do so.

In general, I agree with the basic ideas of the manifesto, but they should have focused the matter differently. For example, they suppossedly have seen many former Gho patients with no regeneration, but the manifesto says nothing about these patients.

» Gho set the record straight. This is ran through a language interpreter,
» but it imperative to read the entire thing at the link.
»
» http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=http://hasci.com/uploads/downloads/Persbericht_Website.pdf&ei=NwDMS4T4GoSKswOviqm8Aw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDUQ7gEwBg&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dgerard%2Bjoling%2Bhaartransplantatie%2Bgho%26hl%3Den
»
» IMO, the people who came out against Gho are looking extremely amateurish
» and foolish. They are WAY behind the times!

» » » whoah! another racist post by Iron_Man! Congrats! :smiley:
» » »
» »
» » Hä? What? Another racist post?
» » PLEASE point to just 1 single “racist post” by me - just one!
» »
» » Actually I’ve been just worried about the poor holy cows in India,
» because
» » they are HOLY …
» »
» » Just kidding. Actually I like India and I really like the indian
» nation.
» » And I like their “Bollywood” movies and especially some of their actors
» as
» » well. But I HATE bull**** poster like you - independent of any nation.
» :expressionless:
»
» This forum is turning into a mockery.
»
» And actually that was racist but to a higher extent. You just insulted
» someone’s religion to the highest degree. In real life someone may have
» split your skull into two.

What is so unclear? I said I HATE bull**** poster like you, you and YOU.


mj2003:
» Everything and everyone from China is likely a sca_a_m. Speaking of
» sc_a_ms, I’m sittting here watching this annyoying Douchebag on T.V., Dr.
» Ho - infomercials. I can’t stand this dude. Comes out with a cure or
» device for everything every week. And you have dumbasses actually ordering
» this creep’s stuff. Just like you have morons thinking China products will
» get better…haha. *ahem, Dr. Gho :slight_smile:
»
» I’m goin to hell. Sorry if you’re Chinese. Nuttin personal. Not your fault
» China’s products’ main ingredient is 99% BS.

http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/forum_entry-id-65335.html

@all the other girlie (=BS poster as always): You already know my opinion about YOU … :slight_smile:

@James Bond: Thanks for your input!

» I have just read Gho’s replies, that you linked.
»
» JB, I agree that the “manifesto” or “statement” was pretty poor and
» amateurish. I don’t know who wrote it, but this person should have been
» much more careful on how to say things. The list of doctors has indeed a
» stupid error. The header indicates “doctors/surgeons”, but the list
» includes 2 persons who are not doctors. I think this error is not
» important, because the remaining 8 persons are indeed doctors, and the 2
» persons who are not doctors, are named without preceding “Dr.”, so I think
» it is just an stupid error, and Gho is exploiting it (no objection).
»
» The manifesto contains a lot of “too bold” statements. They could have
» said the same ideas, but more carefully, protecting the author. Now Gho
» will try to use those statements against the authors. And he of course has
» every right to do so.
»
» In general, I agree with the basic ideas of the manifesto, but they should
» have focused the matter differently.

That means you agree with the basic ideas of the manifesto, because you’re pretty poor and amateurish too?
Hmmm, makes definitely sense in regard “Spanish Dude from HairSite”.

» For example, they suppossedly have
» seen many former Gho patients with no regeneration, but the manifesto says
» nothing about these patients.

Because there didn’t any exist?
ProHairClinic (mainly bverotti) spread this unproven rumor in the effort to discredit Dr. Gho (HSI), as soon as a interested party mentioned “Dr. Gho/HSI” - I folloed such discussions very closley on HaarWeb.nl.

Sorry, I should have said:
“I agree that the manifesto was expressed in poor and amateurish manners.
But basically I agree with the basic ideas of the manifesto, unless Gho proves them wrong”.
And prove things with photos, and Full heads of hair. Not blah blah blah theories.
Gho says that photos are not useful because they can be doctored. This same ridiculous excuse was presented by Dr. Bazan.

so, yes, I basically agree with the manifesto. I would sign there myself if it was redacted in a more careful way. :smiley:

» » I have just read Gho’s replies, that you linked.
» »
» » JB, I agree that the “manifesto” or “statement” was pretty
» poor and

» » amateurish. I don’t know who wrote it, but
» this person should have been
» » much more careful on how to say things. The list of doctors has indeed
» a
» » stupid error. The header indicates “doctors/surgeons”, but the list
» » includes 2 persons who are not doctors. I think this error is not
» » important, because the remaining 8 persons are indeed doctors, and the
» 2
» » persons who are not doctors, are named without preceding “Dr.”, so I
» think
» » it is just an stupid error, and Gho is exploiting it (no objection).
» »
» » The manifesto contains a lot of “too bold” statements. They could have
» » said the same ideas, but more carefully, protecting the author. Now Gho
» » will try to use those statements against the authors. And he of course
» has
» » every right to do so.
» »
» » In general, I agree with the basic ideas of the
» manifesto
, but they should
» » have focused the matter differently.
»
» That means you agree with the basic ideas of the manifesto, because you’re
» pretty poor and amateurish too?
» Hmmm, makes definitely sense in regard “Spanish Dude from HairSite”.
»
» » For example, they suppossedly have
» » seen many former Gho patients with no regeneration, but the manifesto
» says
» » nothing about these patients.
»
» Because there didn’t any exist?
» ProHairClinic (mainly bverotti) spread this unproven rumor in the effort
» to discredit Dr. Gho (HSI), as soon as a interested party mentioned “Dr.
» Gho/HSI” - I folloed such discussions very closley on HaarWeb.nl.

LOOOOL

» » » » whoah! another racist post by Iron_Man! Congrats! :smiley:
» » » »
» » »
» » » Hä? What? Another racist post?
» » » PLEASE point to just 1 single “racist post” by me - just one!
» » »
» » » Actually I’ve been just worried about the poor holy cows in India,
» » because
» » » they are HOLY …
» » »
» » » Just kidding. Actually I like India and I really like the indian
» » nation.
» » » And I like their “Bollywood” movies and especially some of their
» actors
» » as
» » » well. But I HATE bull**** poster like you -
» independent of any nation
.
» » :expressionless:
» »
» » This forum is turning into a mockery.
» »
» » And actually that was racist but to a higher extent. You
» just insulted

» » someone’s religion to the highest degree. In
» real life someone may have
» » split your skull into two.
»
» What is so unclear? I said I HATE bull**** poster like you, you and YOU.
»
» -------------------
» mj2003:
» » Everything and everyone from China is likely a sca_a_m. Speaking
» of
» » sc_a_ms, I’m sittting here watching this annyoying Douchebag on T.V.,
» Dr.
» » Ho - infomercials. I can’t stand this dude. Comes out with a cure or
» » device for everything every week. And you have dumbasses actually
» ordering
» » this creep’s stuff. Just like you have morons thinking China products
» will
» » get better…haha. *ahem, Dr. Gho :slight_smile:
» »
» » I’m goin to hell. Sorry if you’re Chinese. Nuttin personal. Not your
» fault
» » China’s products’ main ingredient is 99% BS.
»
» http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/forum_entry-id-65335.html
» -------------------
»
» @all the other girlie (=BS poster as always): You already know my opinion
» about YOU … :slight_smile:
»
» @James Bond: Thanks for your input!

» After the declaration was published, it seems that Dr. Gho immediately
» sent lawyers to threaten these clinics with lawsuits.

Well, what they did was illegal. I would sick lawyers on them if they did it to me, and I would press full charges in whatever criminal matters might apply.

You cannot list your title as a doctor or surgeon, when in truth, the only thing you are trained in is waving a magic comb over a bald head and pretending it can give you your hair back. I agree with Gho that having such unskilled people pretending to be doctors and attacking peer-reviewed scientific research is ludicrous. Not one single person who signed that complaint has specialized knowledge or training in the area of research they were criticizing.

Even Dr. Loek Habbema, who has an impressive amount of publications hasn’t an ounce of understanding in stem cell engineering. He is a mainstream surgeon and dermatologist and nothing more.

The doctors who actually signed this thing would have been way ahead of the game to leave these lazer “experts” off the complaint. It’s like they tried to provide quantity over quality, and it diluted the impact this could have had if they would have just stuck to a “less manipulated” document.

In addition, the clueless wording of the accusations in the complain is so far off base as to make them look like ignoramuses and takes away any credibility that their critique might have had. It is extremely apparent in reading the complaint that not one person who signed has a clue about stem cell science and the breakthroughs that have been made in stem cell-related hair restoration over the last 15 years.

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&sl=nl&u=http://www.medicalfacts.nl/2010/01/25/reactie-hair-science-institute-op-beschuldiging-dubieuze-praktijk/&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522Donor%2Bhair%2Bfollicle%2Bpreservation%2Bby%2Bpartial%2Bfollicular%2Bunit%2Bextraction.%2BA%2Bmethod%2Bto%2Boptimize%2Bhair%2Btransplantation%2522%26hl%3Den&rurl=translate.google.com&twu=1&usg=ALkJrhjVCjCni6fZX4hVPxoQXJqJnkSE3A

It would be extraordinarily unusual for a scientist to post an outright lie in a peer reviewed journal (claiming 95% regrowth when actually getting 0%) in order to lure in a few extra patients into his clinic. The consequences of getting caught would be to have your medical license revoked. Not only this, Neumann would lose his prestigious position at the medical university where he teaches. I think the odds of either Gho or Neumann 100% falsifying the data for this study is very close to zero. I would put the odds of them conspiring together and both willingly and knowingly falsifying the data for this study at 0%.

I think Gho called it right when he said most of these doctors signed the complaint due to “research envy.”

I can’t emphasize enough that donor regrowth was independently proven by a hair transplant clinic in Italy. I posted the study here on numerous occasions several years back.

When I asked Dr. Gho about the independent study that had verified and proved his claims, he indicated that it was about time someone started catching up to him. He felt it would take a long time for them to figure out the recipient growth aspect of his procedure though, because that’s where the difficulty is. The donor regrowth is the easy part. Pretty much anyone can do it.

That’s why I remain stunned that there are so many supposed “hair restoration experts” out there in the world who still cannot believe donor regrowth is possible. It’s literally like walking into the dark ages and meeting these people. I can’t for the life of me figure out, with something so promising, proven, and independently verified, why they haven’t devoted their life to pursuing the furthering of this knowledge. The only thing I can figure out is that they must be too busy making money hand over fist with the older techniques to care.

This thing has been out there for over a decade, and nobody cares to pursue it. It’s absolutely aggravating. If even a quarter of the hair restoration professionals out there were devoted to this, baldness would be eradicated from the earth. This is a potential cure. Right now, too little hair is moved, and it is too expensive. But if there was some competition and furthering of the science, we could all be cured and not have to mortgage our homes to do it.

These people’s time would be way better spent researching than complaining.

I admit I’ve been an outspoken critic of Gho’s in the past - Hell, he deserved it. A website with pencil drawings of results instead of photos, the promising of “getting to the head of the HM queue” if people would only book FUE with him, and then when photos of his work did appear they were so aesthetically poor that the patients qualified as “in need of repair” rather than “here are the results!”

In addition, it’s not only Bverotti making these claims. I remember Dr Feller saying that he had treated Gho patients and there was no evidence of regrowth in the Donor and I’m also sure a number of other respected Docs have said the same (although I won’t name them as I can’t be sure who it was - but they were respected Docs who are always over these boards).

But, But…

If Gho has truly got what he claims to have then yes, that is truly a major breakthrough. However, I can’t see where he can go from here. After all, I may be wrong but you can’t “copyright” a surgical procedure, can you? In which case, his sole way of making money out of this before others rip him off is somehow saying the growth factor solution is his own and then selling that to other clinics. Whatever, that’s his problem, not ours.

What I will say, is if this is true (and certainly, claiming this on a forum as he did all those years ago, is one thing; claiming it in a journal is another), then this is a major breakthrough. No FDA trials to wait for and the prospect of unlimited donor. Indeed, the only limits could be the aesthetic skills of the surgeon (one reason why I wouldn’t go to Gho even if this is unanimously accepted by everyone) and money.

Still, IF it works it will only be a matter of time before more skilled surgeons take it on, in which case I’ll be there!

Basically, this looks like it’s worth keping an eye on. The reactions of others at the ISHRS conference will also be interesting.

One thing that does niggle, though - FUE is more expensive than strip because it’s so labour intensive (say, typically $5-7 a graft). This Gho technique sounds WAY more labour intensive. I’m not too concerned about the time it would take (and it must take longer than normal FUE) but how much will this cost? Does anyone know what Gho is charging for HST now?

» If Gho has truly got what he claims to have then yes, that is truly a
» major breakthrough. However, I can’t see where he can go from here. After
» all, I may be wrong but you can’t “copyright” a surgical procedure, can
» you? In which case, his sole way of making money out of this before others
» rip him off is somehow saying the growth factor solution is his own and
» then selling that to other clinics. Whatever, that’s his problem, not
» ours.

And that could explain why he has previously been reluctant to publish. As far and I recall, you cannot patent a medical procedure in the U.S. However, the recipient soaking aspect might be patent enforceable. So perhaps Gho has needed to advertise to draw in patients, but reluctant to get ripped off.

He has worked on this thing for a decade, and has certainly made a lot of strides toward making it a better procedure. He has gotten it to the point where he believes he has a patent that will be enforceable; thus, he can publish the details and hope for the best.

It would be extremely difficult for someone to figure out how to do this on their own. The way forward is for one of the better surgeons, Bisanga for instance, to license and learn the process from Gho. Once in the hands of a guy like that, we are talking full restorations of perfect looking hair.

However, we still have a lot to learn about this procedure. Gho uses technicians to harvest the grafts. Can they get the same consistency when harvesting large numbers of grafts in an everyday setting that Gho can get when taking a small number of grafts for a known donor regrowth study? Did each FU regrow the same number of hairs as original, or did it grow a single hair of the same size and quality? Are Gho’s technicians capable of reconstructing high quality hairlines and graft placement? There are many questions. I believe the donor regrowth is real and have ever since I read the Italian study. But is this experiment duplicatable in mass, and are the regrown donor hairs just as strong and vigorous as the ones they replaced?

In the Italian study, they found they could not reharvest the regrown donor hairs because they were “soft.” However, Kim showed it took up to a year for the transected donor hairs to fully reform. The Italians attempted to reharvest the donor hairs way before they were fully formed. Gho claims the fully formed donor hairs are reharvestable and just as good as the originals.

There are many questions. I think people need to get past the shock and awe of donor regrowth and move on to how to push this technique to be a legitimate first ever cure of baldness. True HM will blow HST away when it arrives. But in the meantime, we must work to maximize the interim techniques. No existing technique shows as much promise as HST. IMO, it needs to proliferate out to other clinics so that it can mature at a fast pace in a world-wide setting. Gho will make tons of money either way. What matters most at this point in history is to make as big of an improvement as possible in as many patients as possible.

» One thing that does niggle, though - FUE is more expensive than strip
» because it’s so labour intensive (say, typically $5-7 a graft). This Gho
» technique sounds WAY more labour intensive. I’m not too concerned about
» the time it would take (and it must take longer than normal FUE) but how
» much will this cost? Does anyone know what Gho is charging for HST now?

You have pointed out the two biggest fears about HST.

  1. Can Gho’s non-MD lab technicians perform the high level of skilled work it takes to look like a head of hair that is not balding?

  2. The procedure costs too much for the average Joe to be able to afford. Currently, it works out to about $8 per recipient graft. That is actually not a bad cost considering what you are getting (1 FU in the donor and 1 in the recipient). However, $10,000/day to have this procedure could easily be reduced and still leave a ton of profit for Gho’s clinics.

Of the two big issues, the first one is the one I am most concerned about. I would need some kind of guarantee that walking in there and dropping $25K on two days worth of HT and travel expenses is going to leave me looking like a guy who never had a hair transplant. The fear of some unskilled guy off the street who isn’t even an MD placing my grafts is scary, to say the least.

Give this technology to Bisinga, and lets see what he can do with it.

Bisinga = not a cure
Gho = not a cure
Bisinga + Gho = cure

Yep, that’s pretty much my thoughts on it. If Gho does indeed have something then he deserves whatever plaudits he gets as a researcher. But having seen some of his HT work (only 8 or 9 cases but they were all really, really bad) then I’m going to wait and see what other , more skilled, surgeons can do with the technique.

And you’re right - hopefully in a few years one of the other companies will blow this away. But as an interim technique it needs to be investigated by other surgeons. Especially for those poor guys who are essentially disfigured and whose donor is virtually non-existent.

I am no expert about hair transplants, so I don’t know who could be the best doctor for a full restauration using Gho’s technique.

Anyway, the idea is interesting.
Lets suppose its Bisanga, as proposed by JB.

According to Iron_Man, Gho can nowadays move 1500-2000 grafts per day using HST. I don´t know if this figure is accurate.

If true, Gho could move 15.000 grafts in 10 days.
I think this would be enough to make a good proof-of-concept trial.
The perfect trialist would be a NW6 patient with approximately 15000 grafts left in the donor area. The idea would be to harvest all of the donor grafts.

Gho would do the harvesting, and conditioning of the FU’s, while Bisanga would do the design and placement. Dr. Jones would supervise the whole thing, to check that there are no manipulations. Dr. Jones would be the referee., so to speak.

This way we ensure:
-Correct harvesting by Gho (suppossedly 95% survival in both sites)
-Correct aesthetic placement by Bisanga (Gho is quite poor on this, Bisanga could be better, I suppose).
-They can do it alternatively, so that Gho doesn’t reveal to Bisanga the details of how to extract the grafts. i.e., Gho extracts the grafts, separates the FU’s, and soak them into the growth media… and when there are enough FU’s ready, then Bisanga enters the room, and places them in the recipient site. The problem is that Gho will see the design by Bisanga, and will learn Bisanga’s tricks. I don’t know when Dr. Jones should enter the room, to avoid him leeching Gho’s and Bisanga’s tricks. All this “copyriht protection” could complicate things.

For even better credibility, several candidates-patients could be presented to Hairsite forum members, (for example, 4 candidates) and forum members would choose the one they prefer. Well, if Jones is the referee, I think this is not necessary. Just an idea.

This experiment would be a spectacular proof of concept, and a historic event if successful.

The patient’s donor and recipient areas would be checked later at 1 week, 3 months, 1 year and 3 years, to verify that the donor and recipient hairs can cycle normally.

This trial can be done right now, as Gho doesn’t need to train Bisanga on the technique.

Instead of Bisanga we could choose another doctor, if we have any problem with Bisanga.

The key point is to harvest all the donor area. If Gho’s claims are true (average survival >95% in donor and recipient) then this could be possible with little risks.

Edit 1: well, to simplify the experiment: Dr. Jones doesn’t need to be present during the transplant (10 days). He would simply evaluate the trialist BEFORE, and AFTER (at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 1 year, 3 years).
BEFORE:Take BEFORE photos, and count available hairs in the donor area. Place a few tatoo points to delimit donor and receptor areas.
AFTER: Evaluate donor and recipient areas, at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 1 year, and 3 years. Jones would shave the trialist, and take “AFTER” photos, and count hairs in both areas.
This way we don’t have to worry about Jones potentially accessing Gho’s and Bisanga’s “secrets”, and we save 10 days to Dr. Jones.

Gho hasn’t given any NW#7s back their NW#1s as far as I know.

People can excuse & defend & reason about it all they want but so what? There are guys on the HT board that will tell you that Dr Armani could get 15,000 FUE grafts “if he ever needed to” but he just hasn’t done it yet. I know bullsh*t when I smell it.

Whatever Dr. Gho’s problem is, the bottom line is the same. For the last decade he has been showing some combination of unwillingness and/or inability to do the job we need done. So I don’t really care about his claims & research at this point.

» Gho hasn’t given any NW#7s back their NW#1s as far as I know.
»
» People can excuse & defend & reason about it all they want but so what?
» There are guys on the HT board that will tell you that Dr Armani could get
» 15,000 FUE grafts “if he ever needed to” but he just hasn’t done it yet. I
» know bullsh*t when I smell it.

I have to agree Dr WHo ahhh i mean Gho is to hairtransplantation what Duke Nukem Forever is for gamers… a mysterious thing :wink:
»
»
» Whatever Dr. Gho’s problem is, the bottom line is the same. For the last
» decade he has been showing some combination of unwillingness and/or
» inability to do the job we need done. So I don’t really care about his
» claims & research at this point.

» Whatever Dr. Gho’s problem is, the bottom line is the same. For the last
» decade he has been showing some combination of unwillingness and/or
» inability to do the job we need done. So I don’t really care about his
» claims & research at this point.

And how about e.g. Aderans?

Strange comment …

The only difference between e.g. Dr. Gho and Aderans is, that during the last 8 years Aderans failed behind the HM scene (lab mice), and Dr. Gho in front of the HM scene (“human trails” ). Today, which “failure” has been more important for the hair science? Eh?