no, Iron_Man. Aderans have never claimed to have solved baldness. They have never sold an unproven technique. Also, Aderans has the decency to do trials with hundred+ of trialists to evaluate his technique. They will launch the technique only when they have proved that it works.
Gho has never done clinical trials. I mean serious clinical trials.But he claims to have solved the baldness problem. And he is selling his technique for the last 10 years.
In July 2004, Gho said: ““At the moment we have increased consistency in the multiplication rate (50 to 80%).””. So this was 6 years ago. 6 years selling the “cure”, but no hard proof that it works.
Do you now see the difference between ARI and Gho?
» » 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, and Dr. Gho in front of
» the HM scene …
» » 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 HUMAN hair science? Eh?
This has been my “final” (edited) comment - with focus on last sentence …
Iron_Man, I see little difference between both of your edits.
If Gho is not a charlatan, at least, he has been totally unprofessional. This way of doing business is totally pathetic.
As there is no “medical community consensus” regarding Gho’s method efficacy, the patient has to decide for himself if he believes in Gho or not. This is pathetic. Most of patients have not the knowledge to evaluate these things.
At least, ARI have been professional, in spite of broken timelines. They are doing things the proper way.
» » » 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 HUMAN hair science? Eh?
»
» This has been my “final” (edited) comment - with focus on last sentence
» …
James Bond,
you might be right, let’s hope Gho moves fast to get this procedure out to the top surgeons, if he has truly done it then he deserves to become very rich indeed.
I am beginning to get my hopes up - which is a bad thing - it is the hope that kills you
» 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.
Gerard Joling is a Dutch pop star who recently had a HST with Dr. Gho as a surgeon. His results are excellent. Extremely good density, and totally natural look. He was able to lose his rug after many years of hiding under it. Prior to the HT, his hairline looked bad. Now he looks great! (see page 1 of this topic) Joling has been on several Dutch television talking about the procedure and claims he got full regrowth in the donor area. This kicked off a fire storm among HT clinics claiming it’s BS.
This proves Gho can do extremely good work when he wants to. My problem is he has many clinics, and non-MD technicians are doing the work. The thought of walking into one of his clinics and taking my chances with some unknown non-MD to perform a surgery we know requires extreme artistic skill and years of practice scares the heck out of me.
Why Gho keeps the crappy HT photos on his website is a complete mystery. The only reason I found out about Joling’s HT is because I complained to a guy from Holland about Gho’s sup-par placement skills, and he corrected me and showed me photos of Joling’s HT. I was initially stunned. I had no idea Gho could do this good of work. It is on par with the best surgeons out there IMO. But given all the crappy photos on his website, what guarantee do I have that I can walk in to one of his clinics and walk out looking like Jolings?
If I’m going to drop $25K on a HT, I have to have some assurance up front the person doing the work knows what the heck they’re doing, and I want to see photos of people with my baldness pattern who Gho’s technicians have fully restored to a non-baldness look.
» Do you now see the difference between ARI and Gho?
I’d say the main difference is Gho is performing a procedure shown in a peer-reviewed journal to fully restore the donor, and the only procedure Wasenik offers is antiquated, barbaric strip surgery.
About 5 years ago, Wasenik stated, “Gho foresaw all others.” He was in the lead then, and he remains in the lead for the moment. I have high hopes that ARI is about to take the lead for the first time, but that remains to be seen. Gho was in phase II HM clinical trials long before ARI was even formed. For a guy on an extremely limited budget working by himself as the only scientist on the project, he has accomplished an amazing amount. After millions of dollars and large teams of scientists focused on the problem, ICX never managed to catch up to Gho. That pretty much puts things into perspective. The science is extremely tough to figure out, and Gho managed to break a lot of early ground out ahead of others. Now its time for others to pick up the ball and start pulling their own weight.
The main criticism of Gho in the past was, “where is the peer-reviewed research?” Well, it’s here. It’s time for all the supposed experts to stop complaining, stop accusing, and pick up the ball and start doing something for a change. We don’t need mindless parrots and monkeys who we simply train how to use a razor knife. We need smart guys who can think for themselves and push the envelope? Is there nobody out there who can step up to the plate and meet the challenge? Or are they all just a bunch of mindless critics and complainers?
IMO, it was the hype surrounding Gho that originally provided the execs at Aderans the insight to form their own research team in an effort to cash in on the potential billions of dollars HM could bring. If that’s true, then for that accomplishment alone, Gho deserves a lot of kudos.
But enough about Gho. Either he needs to produce or someone else needs to get his/her hands on the technique and take this to the next level. moving 2000 grafts is not cutting the mustard. Give this thing to Armani and lets get it going for real.
» I have the “you know” tekst;-) …got it for free from someone, but I
» don’t think I can post it here, right??
Right. This tekst has been written for researchers and educated persons - none of them you will find here. Some guys (and girlie) here do not even know how exactly a traditional Hair Transplant works …
» 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.
Cal, I was just as skeptical as you. At one point I thought of going to see Gho but then decided against making the trip because I hadn’t heard validation of donor regrowth and didn’t want to waste my time. The thing that has changed for me (and perhaps given me some hope) is the fact that he has been published in a respectable journal (I wouldn’t say it is one of the most prestigious journals in the world, but it is respectable).
James Bond is right when he says that no rational person would fake or doctor results for a medical journal. If you are found out, you will have your medical license revoked and that will be the end of it. Do you guys remember Hwang Woo-Suk? He faked results and was found out two years later. I don’t think Gho is that foolish. The balance of probabilities suggest that the results are real.
That doesn’t mean I don’t want to see results though - I do.
Knocking on Einstein’s door in the 1940s would not have done anything to help get you an A-bomb. Bert just helped kick off the project. The US govt was the only entity that stood any chance of making it happen in a real way.
Dr. Gho may have been instrumental in making the entire HM race happen. But in 2010 nobody is going to his clinic and coming out with more hair than they’re getting from any other good conventional HT clinic.
» » I have the “you know” tekst;-) …got it for free from someone, but
» I
» » don’t think I can post it here, right??
»
» Right. This tekst has been written for researchers and educated persons -
» none of them you will find here. Some guys (and girlie) here do not even
» know how exactly a traditional Hair Transplant works …
Ok, If you guys want the tekst, send me a personal mail with your email adres. It is an interesting tekst.
Hey Hommefatale, could you please reply to the starting message of this thread, (for clarity’s sake) and we will discuss. Could you tell us anything about the “tekst”?
Did Gho evaluate the donor area at 1 year after the transplant?
Did Gho harvest all the grafts in a square of area 1 cm x 1 cm?
thanks
» » » I have the “you know” tekst;-) …got it for free from someone, but
» » I
» » » don’t think I can post it here, right??
» »
» » Right. This tekst has been written for researchers and educated persons
» -
» » none of them you will find here. Some guys (and girlie) here do not
» even
» » know how exactly a traditional Hair Transplant works …
»
»
» Ok, If you guys want the tekst, send me a personal mail with your email
» adress. I will send it to you then.
5 patients participated in gho’s study. All male between 36 and 61. He used 1.5 x 1,5 cm of the head for this experiment. After counting the hair, he took 100 graft from this area. He also measured the diameter of the individual hairs. before and after 12 months. these are the results:
Table III. Characteristics of the hairs in the donor area.
Number
Average diameter of 10 hairs
Before extraction (mm) 12 months after the extraction (mm)
1 55 54
2 94 93
3 56 55
4 82 80
5 65 63
He counted and fotographt the hairs before and after he took it out. the result are very postif.
Between 90% and 102% the hairs grew back in the donor area.
Also the diameter of the hairs in the recipient area were analyzed. Both te donor and the new hairs in the recipient area are of the same quality as the original hairs. he measuared the thickness of these new hairs with an electronic digital micrometer.
He didn’t took the whole graft out, but a part. Between 69 and 91% of these partial follicular units where sutible to transplant back on the head. The rest were no good. So not all the graft they extract are suitible. Its a gamble :)…If you are lucky 91% of the grafts are good.
There is also a photo of a hair that was transplanted. The follical produced first thin hair and after 3 months it was thikker. That means the follical recovered. The hair is thinner on the top than the lower part.
This is an advertising site for paid
advertisers to showcase successful hair restoration results only. It is not the
mandate of this site to engage in the discussion of failed, unsuccessful
procedures, lawsuits, litigations, refunds or complaint cases. Surgical hair
restoration procedures carry risks. Please do thorough research, consult your
own physician and investigate a doctor's background carefully before making a
decision. By proceeding to use our site, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy at http://hairsite.com/terms-of-use/ where you can also find a list of HairSite's sponsoring physicians.
