| Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Free |
» hello Fatal, how are you doing?
» yah, maybe that is a good solution for “scar repair”, to turn the scar
» into a Rolling Stones mouth. I am sure girls will find it very hot. LOL.
hi, i mean heil, nazi boy
well i’m rather bald now, but i’ve gotten older too. Life goes on, so does hairloss. What about you ? Still wearing a Stahlhelm to hide your bald spots ? mmm…not the best tactic to find hotties imo 
» He will post an update today so keep an eye on the webpage if you are
» interested.
Well, the results clearly show contraction of the wound and that is not a good thing. If the closure is by contraction (evident from the length of hair on the edge of the wound) and not by tissue generation then nothing is really gained. The surrounding tissue closes the wound and there is no new hair. The most that can be gained is a better scar.
» » hello Fatal, how are you doing?
» » yah, maybe that is a good solution for “scar repair”, to turn the scar
» » into a Rolling Stones mouth. I am sure girls will find it very hot.
» LOL.
»
» hi, i mean heil, nazi boy
» well i’m rather bald now, but i’ve gotten older too. Life goes on, so does
» hairloss. What about you ? Still wearing a Stahlhelm to hide your bald
» spots ? mmm…not the best tactic to find hotties imo
Hahaha, I have a nice bald spot now. It looks horrific, but somehow, my brain gets used to it. Unfortunately, girls’ brains don’t get used to it. 
I am really tired of this. I didn’t expect that all this HM-research was such a pile of shït. My hopes now are below zero. Even if Dr. Jones is successful with Acell, it will be a cumbersome procedure, expensive, and with results largely depending on the skills of the surgeon who does the implantation of the multiplied hair into the recipient site. This is looking very very grim.
ok, as you brought up the subject, I am going to ask you:
do you still defend the biggest lie of all times, i.e. the Holocaust?
You have had plenty of time to reflect, to google about it, etc… Have you finally interviewed your family member (female) who was inmate (spared) in Birkenau while +1 million jews were suppossedly marching to the fake showers in the Kremas along the railtracks, month after month? Did she knew what was going on just a few meters away from the inmates barracks??? Do you think it is logical to undergo such a bizarre show of extermination in the middle of the camp where tens of thousands of spared jews were living?? don’t you think this is a bit exhibitionistic for such a top secret operation?
» Have you ever seen an open wound? That ain’t what it looks like.
»
» That red stuff is the ACELL sheet (or a Chinese Chile Pepper ). It
» was probably moistened initially then dried out turning darker. The ACELL
» sheet is basically pig bladder so it will appear and behave somewhat like
» tissue.
OKAY. Understood now.
so, maybe the wound is not contracting as much as I thought.
ok, now that the ACELL sheet has been removed, we can see the real extent of the wound. If Dr. Jones takes the next photos also without any ACELL sheet, then we will be able to evaluate the evolution of the contraction process.
» » He will post an update today so keep an eye on the webpage if you are
» » interested.
»
» Well, the results clearly show contraction of the wound and that is not a
» good thing. If the closure is by contraction (evident from the length of
» hair on the edge of the wound) and not by tissue generation then nothing is
» really gained. The surrounding tissue closes the wound and there is no new
» hair. The most that can be gained is a better scar.
That was precisely my point, but TheGayme has corrected me very well:
we don’t know the extent of the wound at the beginning. The first photos apparently show the naked wound, but as TheGayme has pointed out, the wound is already covered by the ACELL sheet, so it looks wider than it really is (the ACELL sheet is red, just like the wound).
» » » hello Fatal, how are you doing?
» » » yah, maybe that is a good solution for “scar repair”, to turn the
» scar
» » » into a Rolling Stones mouth. I am sure girls will find it very hot.
» » LOL.
» »
» » hi, i mean heil, nazi boy
» » well i’m rather bald now, but i’ve gotten older too. Life goes on, so
» does
» » hairloss. What about you ? Still wearing a Stahlhelm to hide your bald
» » spots ? mmm…not the best tactic to find hotties imo
»
»
» Hahaha, I have a nice bald spot now. It looks horrific, but somehow, my
» brain gets used to it. Unfortunately, girls’ brains don’t get used to it.
»
» I am really tired of this. I didn’t expect that all this HM-research was
» such a pile of shït. My hopes now are below zero. Even if Dr. Jones is
» successful with Acell, it will be a cumbersome procedure, expensive, and
» with results largely depending on the skills of the surgeon who does the
» implantation of the multiplied hair into the recipient site. This is
» looking very very grim.
yup, i haven’t even read the post related to Acell stuff to be honest. Funny pictures though. I think anybody lurking this site for over a year with an IQ over 15 realized that hm is a lie. It’s not going to happen anytime near or far. But the eternal debates on whether hm will be here in 5 years are worth reading if you need a laugh imo.
» ok, as you brought up the subject, I am going to ask you:
» do you still defend the biggest lie of all times, i.e. the Holocaust?
» You have had plenty of time to reflect, to google about it, etc… Have
» you finally interviewed your family member (female) who was inmate (spared)
» in Birkenau while +1 million jews were suppossedly marching to the fake
» showers in the Kremas along the railtracks, month after month? Did she knew
» what was going on just a few meters away from the inmates barracks??? Do
» you think it is logical to undergo such a bizarre show of extermination in
» the middle of the camp where tens of thousands of spared jews were living??
» don’t you think this is a bit exhibitionistic for such a top secret
» operation?
Still not being a pathetic paranoid revisionist looser … I guess my IQ is over 15, sorry dude ! 
on the other side, maybe it’s why girls don’t get used to your hairloss ?
…
» » ok, as you brought up the subject, I am going to ask you:
» » do you still defend the biggest lie of all times, i.e. the Holocaust?
» » You have had plenty of time to reflect, to google about it, etc…
» Have
» » you finally interviewed your family member (female) who was inmate
» (spared)
» » in Birkenau while +1 million jews were suppossedly marching to the fake
» » showers in the Kremas along the railtracks, month after month? Did she
» knew
» » what was going on just a few meters away from the inmates barracks???
» Do
» » you think it is logical to undergo such a bizarre show of extermination
» in
» » the middle of the camp where tens of thousands of spared jews were
» living??
» » don’t you think this is a bit exhibitionistic for such a top secret
» » operation?
»
» Still not being a pathetic paranoid revisionist looser … I guess my IQ
» is over 15, sorry dude ! on the other side, maybe it’s why girls don’t
» get used to your hairloss ?
As you wish. Enjoy your superior IQ.
» As you wish. Enjoy your superior IQ.
… 15 is not that much, you can do it…come on SD!
»
» That was precisely my point, but TheGayme has corrected me very well:
» we don’t know the extent of the wound at the beginning. The first photos
» apparently show the naked wound, but as TheGayme has pointed out, the wound
» is already covered by the ACELL sheet, so it looks wider than it really is
» (the ACELL sheet is red, just like the wound).
I am not sure that you took my point. If the wound was closing by regeneration then the surrounding skin would comprise new hair growth but if you look at the picture, as the wound is closing, the hair arround it is the old mature hair. This means that the wound is closing by contraction and not by regeneration of new hair.
» »
» » That was precisely my point, but TheGayme has corrected me very well:
» » we don’t know the extent of the wound at the beginning. The first
» photos
» » apparently show the naked wound, but as TheGayme has pointed out, the
» wound
» » is already covered by the ACELL sheet, so it looks wider than it really
» is
» » (the ACELL sheet is red, just like the wound).
»
» I am not sure that you took my point. If the wound was closing by
» regeneration then the surrounding skin would comprise new hair growth but
» if you look at the picture, as the wound is closing, the hair arround it is
» the old mature hair. This means that the wound is closing by contraction
» and not by regeneration of new hair.
I think, after TheGayme comments, that the wound has not closed at all, not by regeneration nor by contraction. Read my posts and Gayme’s.
The wound looks wider in the first photos because it is covered with fresh, bloody, ACELL sheet. Then the ACELL sheet dried and turned brown, like a SCAB, and then the ACELL sheet was removed.
» » ahab, i think you are asking a good question, but from what i’ve been
» » reading the doctor is not appying this stuff often enough. it is
» supposed
» » to be supplied more than once and he is only applying it once.
»
» Maybe you should send him an email and tell him how it is done since you
» are an ACELL, uh, I mean “ACEL” expert.
»
» It’s never been used this way so nobody knows how “it is supposed to be
» supplied”. He is following ACELL’s instructions. Just shut up and stay
» tuned.
No moron, it is not being used the way it is supposed to be used. For example:
others are posting about how in the past there were multiple applications of ACELL to other patients.
in other past patients, long-dead scar tissue wasn’t removed and then ACELL applied to that area. in fact, in the past, ACELL was applied to recent wounds not old dead scar tissue that had been dead for years.
So your statement that the ACELL treatment is being used correctly is, well, incorrect. Indeed, in regards to ACELL, except for your uncanny ability to spell ACELL correctly you don’t have any of your facts straight so you shut up moron.
To everyone . . .
I’ll say this another time - Acell isn’t a hair growth product. The company didn’t design, create, test, and market it exclusively to the HT world. The rest of the world will not deem it to be a legitimate or fraudulent product based on what it does for us.
Yes, of course we’re all wondering about its capabilities to regenerate scalp follicles. But that’s not even the subject of half our discussions/debates about this stuff. We’re spending half these threads debating basic wound-closure issues that have probably already been sorted out by other medical experimentations a long time ago.
Acell didn’t just create this stuff this summer and then ship the first case of it to Dr. Jones last month. If we’re not satisfied and confident with what Dr. Jones is doing with it, then we could be looking for published research & informal feedback about it elsewhere. Closure of a raw wound on the scalp is not different than on some other area of the body, aside from our hair follicle questions.
» No moron, it is not being used the way it is supposed to be used. For
» example:
»
» 1. others are posting about how in the past there were multiple
» applications of ACELL to other patients.
»
» 2. in other past patients, long-dead scar tissue wasn’t removed and then
» ACELL applied to that area. in fact, in the past, ACELL was applied to
» recent wounds not old dead scar tissue that had been dead for years.
»
» So your statement that the ACELL treatment is being used correctly is,
» well, incorrect. Indeed, in regards to ACELL, except for your uncanny
» ability to spell ACELL correctly you don’t have any of your facts straight
» so you shut up moron.
Others are posting? Nobody else here knows shiit about ACELL.
Old dead scar tissue removed means it is REMOVED…no longer exists…it is now a NEW WOUND.
You are a fuucking IDIOT.
» To everyone . . .
»
»
» I’ll say this another time - Acell isn’t a hair growth product. The
» company didn’t design, create, test, and market it exclusively to the HT
» world. The rest of the world will not deem it to be a legitimate or
» fraudulent product based on what it does for us.
it doesn’t matter whether or not hairloss is what ACELL was originally produced for. The point is that, that is the context within that many of us are talking about ACELL. I imagine that there are people here who are discussing the ongoing experiment in the context of simply whether or not it will “cure” scar tissue, but that is not the context in which i am talking about ACELL. I do not have scar tissue and many of the other posters do not either. Of course I understand that if it works on scar tissue then it could benefit those of us who have scar tissue on our heads and for their sake i hope it does work on scar tissue, but my main concern, my vested interest, is whether or not it works to regrow hair, and that is the context in which i talk about this experiment with ACELL. Many of us here who only have hairloss, and no scarring, are primarily focused on whether or not it will grow hair or not. And we will discuss this product, and the ongoing experiment, in that context. We don’t just have to discuss this product, and the ongoing experiment, as you would have us do so. And by the way, if you want to quarrel with people who are interested in whether or not this product, and the ongoing experiment, regrows hair then you should also contact the subject and the doctor and the company that makes ACELL itself because they are all also watching this experiment and considering and contemplating ACELL’s ability to regrow hair or the lack thereof.
»
»
» Yes, of course we’re all wondering about its capabilities to regenerate
» scalp follicles. But that’s not even the subject of half our
» discussions/debates about this stuff. We’re spending half these
» threads debating basic wound-closure issues that have probably already been
» sorted out by other medical experimentations a long time ago.
Ok, then don’t read or respond to my posts because my posts are about the potential of the product to regrow hair. As a matter of fact, you should just figure out which of us posters are posting about hair growth and which are posting about scar erradication and you should only read and respond to the posts about scar erradication.
»
»
» Acell didn’t just create this stuff this summer and then ship the first
» case of it to Dr. Jones last month. If we’re not satisfied and
» confident with what Dr. Jones is doing with it, then we could be looking
» for published research & informal feedback about it elsewhere. Closure
» of a raw wound on the scalp is not different than on some other area of the
» body, aside from our hair follicle questions.
I am not saying there is a difference between closure of a raw wound on one part of the body from another part of the body. You need to start taking your iq pills because you clearly do not comprehend what i am saying. i am saying that there MAY be a difference between the closure of a very recent/immediate wound in healthy tissue that is still growing hair VS the closure of a wound that is right smack dab in the middle of scar tissue that is long since void of hair follicles. I am not saying i know there is a difference; i am merely saying there MAY be a difference. I am also saying that the present experiment does not utilize ACELL in the exact same manner that ACELL has been used in the past. Again, for example:
ACELL was used multiple times on the same wound.
ACELL was used on wounds that are fresh and in the case where ACELL regrew hair the wounds were in the middle of hair-growing skin, not scar tissue.
» » No moron, it is not being used the way it is supposed to be used. For
» » example:
» »
» » 1. others are posting about how in the past there were multiple
» » applications of ACELL to other patients.
» »
» » 2. in other past patients, long-dead scar tissue wasn’t removed and
» then
» » ACELL applied to that area. in fact, in the past, ACELL was applied to
» » recent wounds not old dead scar tissue that had been dead for years.
» »
» » So your statement that the ACELL treatment is being used correctly is,
» » well, incorrect. Indeed, in regards to ACELL, except for your uncanny
» » ability to spell ACELL correctly you don’t have any of your facts
» straight
» » so you shut up moron.
»
» Others are posting? Nobody else here knows shiit about ACELL.
Are you aware that you don’t know how to spell “sh_t?”
»
» Old dead scar tissue removed means it is REMOVED…no longer exists…it
» is now a NEW WOUND.
You might be right, but you don’t know this for fact. If what you are saying is true then that means that ACELL has no choice but to regrow hair because in cases where there is a fresh wound in the middle of hair-growing skin ACELL does indeed grow hair and there are lots of pictures that demonstrate that. SO THEN YOU ARE SAYING THAT YOU ARE 100% CERTAIN THAT THE PRESENT ONGOING EXPERIMENT WILL DEFINITELY WORK, and that makes you a fool and an idiot. Even the doctor doing the experiment and the company making ACELL do not know if the experiment will work. Go home little boy, go home and read a book, go to school, grow a brain.
»
» You are a fuucking IDIOT.
You mispelled “f___ing.” You really do have a lot of trouble with spelling, don’t you? Like i said little boy, go read a book, and do yourself a favor, make it a dictionary you imbecillic buffoon.
» » No moron, it is not being used the way it is supposed to be used. For
» » example:
» »
» » 1. others are posting about how in the past there were multiple
» » applications of ACELL to other patients.
» »
» » 2. in other past patients, long-dead scar tissue wasn’t removed and
» then
» » ACELL applied to that area. in fact, in the past, ACELL was applied to
» » recent wounds not old dead scar tissue that had been dead for years.
» »
» » So your statement that the ACELL treatment is being used correctly is,
» » well, incorrect. Indeed, in regards to ACELL, except for your uncanny
» » ability to spell ACELL correctly you don’t have any of your facts
» straight
» » so you shut up moron.
»
» Others are posting? Nobody else here knows shiit about ACELL.
On one hand you say that “Nobody” knows “shiit” about ACELL, but then on the other hand you say that YOU know, for a fact, whether or not ACELL will regrow hair. So you must be this “Nobody” person you alluded to who knows something (shiit) about ACELL. After all, since the rest of us (including the doctor doing the experiment and the company that makes ACELL) are waiting for results so we can learn about ACELL that shows that we admittedly do not have the answers yet, so since you are the person who already has the answers then you must be this “Nobody” person you allude to who knows “shiit.” But since you yourself say that this Mr. “Nobody” person (YOU) knows “shiit” doesn’t that mean that what YOU know is “shiit?”
So as you can see from the above I clearly do get it, and i do agree with you, you are definitely a “Nobody” who knows “shiit.”
»
» Old dead scar tissue removed means it is REMOVED…no longer exists…it
» is now a NEW WOUND.
And the fact that the same area used to have scar tissue that could not grow hair may or may not have an effect on whether or not the new skin regrows hair. I don’t know the answer to that question yet. You insist that you do know the answer, but i do not know, and the company that makes ACELL does not know, and the doctor doing the experiment does not know. You do know but then again you are “Nobody” who knows shiit.
»
» You are a fuucking IDIOT.
Isn’t it really more likely that you are an imbecillic fool who does not recognize intelligence in other people because you’re an imbecile? Trust me, the answer is yes, it is more likely.
» Are you aware that you don’t know how to spell “sh_t?”
I misspelled those on purpose to get around the profanity check, but you are too dense to realize that. By the way:
“Mispelled” is spelled Misspelled.
“Imbecillic” is spelled imbecilic
You continue to make yourself look even dumber. Keep it up.
» You might be right, but you don’t know this for fact.
Uh…yes, dipshiit (misspelled on purpose), it is a fact that a scar removed is a new wound. When are you going to get this through your extremely thick skull?
» If what you are
» saying is true then that means that ACELL has no choice but to regrow hair
» because in cases where there is a fresh wound in the middle of hair-growing
» skin ACELL does indeed grow hair and there are lots of pictures that
» demonstrate that.
Where are all these pictures? I’m not saying that at all. There very well may just be a new scar with no hair growing in it.
» SO THEN YOU ARE SAYING THAT YOU ARE 100% CERTAIN THAT
» THE PRESENT ONGOING EXPERIMENT WILL DEFINITELY WORK, and that makes you a
» fool and an idiot.
Again I never said it would work, it may just produce a new scar.
» On one hand you say that “Nobody” knows “shiit” about ACELL, but then on
» the other hand you say that YOU know, for a fact, whether or not ACELL will
» regrow hair.
When did I say whether or not ACELL will regrow hair? I never said that. I said an excised scar is in fact a new wound. There is no proof ACELL will work on a new wound, or any wound, to regrow hair.
Get your facts straight fuuckhead (misspelled on purpose). And no, you do not get it.
» saying. i am saying that there MAY be a difference between the closure of
» a very recent/immediate wound in healthy tissue that is still growing hair
» VS the closure of a wound that is right smack dab in the middle of scar
» tissue that is long since void of hair follicles.
“closure of a wound that is right smack dab in the middle of scar tissue”
THIS DID NOT HAPPEN. THE SCAR TISSUE WAS COMPLETELY REMOVED! Making a NEW WOUND. IT IS NOW A “very recent/immediate wound in healthy tissue”. The doctor did not just cut through the middle of the scar, HE EXCISED IT, which means he cut around it, removed it, it is GONE.
DO YOU GET IT NOW??? Probably not.
» » Are you aware that you don’t know how to spell “sh_t?”
»
» I misspelled those on purpose to get around the profanity check, but you
» are too dense to realize that. By the way:
Oh i understand that i just wanted to engage your stupidity so i thought i would say something to pull your chain and it worked. And by the way, you are now saying that you really aren’t so stupid because you can spell these words i said you can’t spell but then doesn’t your admitted vulgarity and profanity make the same point that you are stupid as mispelled words would have made? In other words, the fact that you really can spell those words doesn’t prove that you are a buffoon because your needless profanity and vulgarity makes the same point that you are an idiot/imbecile.
»
» “Mispelled” is spelled Misspelled.
» “Imbecillic” is spelled imbecilic
That was a typo moron, and note that i insulted you without using profanity/vulgarity. But then again, even if it wasn’t a typo you can’t really blame me for not knowing how to spell imbecile because i never see the word as it is never leveled my way. I’m sure you see/hear it all the time, directed at you.
»
» You continue to make yourself look even dumber. Keep it up.
»
» » You might be right, but you don’t know this for fact.
»
» Uh…yes, dipshiit (misspelled on purpose), it is a fact that a scar
» removed is a new wound. When are you going to get this through your
» extremely thick skull?
I will accept this if and when the ongoing experiment regrows hair. if it doesn’t then that will show that you are a fool and a buffoon because your posit is clearly that the ongoing experiment has no choice but to succeed. And let me again point out that the doctor doing the experiment, and the company that makes ACELL, do not know if the experiment will work or not. The fact that “a scar removed is a new wound” is not the FINAL WORD on whether or not the tissue being removed is scar tissue could affect the outcome of the experiment, you imbecile. The fact that the tissue being removed is scar tissue, that doesn’t grow hair, could have an unforseeable-in-advance affect on whether or not the experiment works. The doctor, the company, and myself know this, and that is why we are waiting for more info to make a final judgment. You OTOH do not accept that the fact that the tissue being removed is long since scarred and long since void of hair growth could have an affect on whether or not the experiment works or not. So you believe the ongoing experiment has no choice but to work since it works when the area of lost tissue it is applied to consists of healthy skin that is growing hair (prior to the injury).
Your insistance that the ongoing experiment has no choice but to work because the fact that the tissue removed was scar tissue that hadn’t grown hair in years is irrelevant just shows what an imbecile you are anyway it’s spelled.
I repeat you are an imbecilic fool and a buffoon.
| Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Terms of Use & Privacy |
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.