| Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Free |
» " Besides, if Syrup is the only bad story since 2003, I say Gho has a
» pretty good record right there."
»
» Well, I was around 5 years ago and there were a number of other cases, …
Show me these “number of other cases” …
(including adress, phone number etc)
Indeed, there were several Gho patients and none of them was happy. Hairsite himself tested FM, but never returned to Gho for more.
Hey, Gerard Joling is apparently very happy with Gho, but was it really something spectacular aside from a normal FUE?
» » " Besides, if Syrup is the only bad story since 2003, I say Gho has a
» » pretty good record right there."
» »
» » Well, I was around 5 years ago and there were a number of
» other cases, …
»
» Show me these “number of other cases” …
» (including adress, phone number etc)
» Indeed, there were several Gho patients and none of them was happy.
» Hairsite himself tested FM, but never returned to Gho for more.
»
Can you name the “several” patients who were unhappy? I did a search of our archives and couldn’t find any besides Syrup. There was indeed another Gho clinic’s patient who was unhappy, but he was treated by Dr. Genne, not by Dr. Gho.
The founder of HairSite did go to Dr. Gho for treatment and never returned for more. Can you quote the link where he said the reason he did not go back for more was because he was unhappy with the treatment?
well, Hairsite said that he couldn’t verify if there was regrowth but he felt that the donor area was distinctly thinner than before. And he didn’t return for more. So I assume he wasn’t very happy.
I have 3 forum members who were not satisfied with Gho (aside from Syrup and Hairsite). But before I post their names, I would like to compile more info. Is there any way to access the old archives (before 2007, I think)?
» » Indeed, there were several Gho patients and none of them was happy.
» » Hairsite himself tested FM, but never returned to Gho for more.
» »
»
» Can you name the “several” patients who were unhappy? I did a search of
» our archives and couldn’t find any besides Syrup. There was indeed another
» Gho clinic’s patient who was unhappy, but he was treated by Dr. Genne, not
» by Dr. Gho.
»
» The founder of HairSite did go to Dr. Gho for treatment and never returned
» for more. Can you quote the link where he said the reason he did not go
» back for more was because he was unhappy with the treatment?
–ignore----------
Hey Guys,
I just wanna add my 2 cents to this discussion.
I believe James Bond only posted this research paper to illustrate the fact that donor regrowth is possible. It may not be consistent, it may not be aesthetically robust… but it is possible.
We should be mindful of the fact that Dr. Gho’s technique is vastly different from the method used in the study; it involves longitudinal transection as opposed to lateral transection. Gho also uses a proprietary culture medium to re-activate the stem cells within the transected grafts. Both of these things might improve the consistency and quality of the procedure.
Having said that, Dr. Gho’s recent research paper is compelling only because his conclusion is a positive one. The actual quality of the research is relatively weak in my opinion. It just seems to lack adequate documentation. There are not enough pictures and there are not enough case-studies (especially for a procedure that has supposedly been in use for several years).
We should focus all of our efforts towards getting other researchers (whom we trust and admire) to try this method and chronicle their experiences in a transparent fashion. I say this because I don’t trust Dr. Gho. I don’t know the man personally, but how can we trust the source that has the most to benefit from a positive outcome? Furthermore, it just seems odd that after 3 years of offering a procedure there are no WOW results or repeat customers.
JB, if we compile a list of doctors can you send them the research paper? Most of them will scoff at the mention of Dr. Gho, but we only need one other surgeon to independently verify the technique.
» JB, if we compile a list of doctors can you send them the research paper?
» Most of them will scoff at the mention of Dr. Gho, but we only need one
» other surgeon to independently verify the technique.
… exactly, and most of them can close (in general) their doors in the very near future - for sure … :yes:
BTW - Why is it, that so many researchers in this field quote Dr. Gho in their research papers (References), like the one mentioned here by James Bond (actual topic here, look above)? Because they don’t trust him? Or is it due to the fact, that there are no other (skilled) researchers out there who are worth to mention them?
And what did your “trustworthy” HT butchers (or “Hair Researchers” ) during the past 15 years?
TODAY, most of them are not even skilled enough to perform accurate a traditional FUE procedure!!
» Indeed, there were several Gho patients and none of them was happy.
» Hairsite himself tested FM, but never returned to Gho for more.
»
» Hey, Gerard Joling is apparently very happy with Gho, but was it really
» something spectacular aside from a normal FUE?
»
»
Yes it was spectacular if indeed his donor site actually regrew hair. I understand 100% the scepticisim of people. Its agreed that without photos of a detailed case study that this will remain the case. However if there are actual scientific studies which say that donor regrowth is real how can people scoff at that? Granted it is not a perfect science by any means but who know with some more research and study this could become a reality. The real exciting thing about this is that its here now. With regards to gerard joling forget the fact that it may look like an ordinary fue precedure the real issue is has the donor site grown back? If it has we are onto a real winner with this one!
» » Hey, Gerard Joling is apparently very happy with Gho, but was it really
» » something spectacular aside from a normal FUE?
Traditional FUE vs. PL-FUE
Traditional FUE
The major disadvantage of the FUE method is that the extracted hair follicles are removed (once and for always!) and the source of potential grafts will be consumed in time. Therefore traditional Hair transplantation methods (FUT or FUE) in general, will always be limited by the availability of donor hair follicles.
HST PL-FUE
(2) The partial follicular units, which remain in the dermis in the donor area, can survive and produce the almost same number of hairs with the same diameter and characteristics when a longitudinal part of this follicular unit is extracted.
And this is just one PL-FUE result/outcome of such a PL-FUE procedure:
And this IS “spectacular” in comparison to a normal FUE procedure/technique … :yes:
The just partial harvested longitudinal follicular units, which have been transplanted in the recipient area, have the same diameter and characteristics as the hair in the donor area, although these “grafts” have just been smal parts of intact/whole Follicular Units (FU’s) …
Hello shooter!
You should know that back in 2004, Gho already claimed 65% donor regrowth.
This was with the old FM technique. So after 6 years, no WOW results whatsoever.
July 2004: (FM method): regrowth: between 50-80%
quote Gho:
The rate of multiplication varies between patients, because we sometimes remove too much follicular tissue from the donor area, so only the graft will generate a new hair. At times we remove insufficient follicular tissue from the donor area, so only the donor area will continue to produce hairs. These are the reasons why the percentage of “multiplication?varies for each patient. At the moment we have increased consistency in the multiplication rate (50 to 80%).
<<
It seems that the most Gho can do is this:
still, I agree with you, that other TRUSTWORTHY DOCTORS should try the technique.
But in the last hours, James Bond and Iron_Man are hinting to HITZIG AND COOLEY to do a Gho+Acell test. Do you smell crap? I do.
And about the article posted by James Bond, he has been mentioning it over and over again in the last years, pretending that it was a proof that Gho technique is viable. Now he has finally posted it, and to my surprise, this study failed totally. And it doesn’t prove the donor regeneration. No way. Please, I have explained in this thread. They harvested 15 hairs, and when the recipient “half-follicle” grew, the donor “half-follicle” died. So it was a total gailure. Furthermore, when the donor survives, it can’t be harvested again because the punch “sinks” or something.
» Hey Guys,
»
» I just wanna add my 2 cents to this discussion.
»
» I believe James Bond only posted this research paper to illustrate the
» fact that donor regrowth is possible. It may not be consistent, it may not
» be aesthetically robust… but it is possible.
»
» We should be mindful of the fact that Dr. Gho’s technique is vastly
» different from the method used in the study; it involves longitudinal
» transection as opposed to lateral transection. Gho also uses a proprietary
» culture medium to re-activate the stem cells within the transected grafts.
» Both of these things might improve the consistency and quality of the
» procedure.
»
» Having said that, Dr. Gho’s recent research paper is compelling only
» because his conclusion is a positive one. The actual quality of the
» research is relatively weak in my opinion. It just seems to lack adequate
» documentation. There are not enough pictures and there are not enough
» case-studies (especially for a procedure that has supposedly been in use
» for several years).
»
» We should focus all of our efforts towards getting other researchers (whom
» we trust and admire) to try this method and chronicle their experiences in
» a transparent fashion. I say this because I don’t trust Dr. Gho. I don’t
» know the man personally, but how can we trust the source that has the most
» to benefit from a positive outcome? Furthermore, it just seems odd that
» after 3 years of offering a procedure there are no WOW results or repeat
» customers.
»
» JB, if we compile a list of doctors can you send them the research paper?
» Most of them will scoff at the mention of Dr. Gho, but we only need one
» other surgeon to independently verify the technique.
» However if there are actual scientific studies which say that donor regrowth »is real how can people scoff at that?
Scientific STUDIES? What studies? Plural?
The only SUCCESSFUL study is the one published by Gho this year. And needs to be verified.
» With regards to gerard
» joling forget the fact that it may look like an ordinary fue precedure the
» real issue is has the donor site grown back? If it has we are onto a real
» winner with this one!
IF IT HAS. But have you seen Joling’s donor regrowth? This guy is appearing everywhere, advertising for Gho’s HST technique, and everyone assumes that there was donor regrowth. But where is the evidence? The only evidence is the before-after photos I have posted:
This is after 6 years of hypes from Gho, it seems that this is the best he can do:
» Hello shooter!
» You should know that back in 2004, …
… Spanish Dude have been the same douche bag as today?
One CRAP after the next and always the same BULLSH*T - since YEARS!
And always the same song: “We don’t know, I don’t know, I’ve know idea, I know nothing, I have no idea how a traditional HT works, Tatoos are great, crap, crap, crap endless CRAP …” )
BTW - Spanish Dude, why don’t you buy a nice wig?
Buy the wig from Aderans, Japan, because the sell the most advanced wigs on this planet!
Tell Aderans, you’re the most desperated and well-known moron “Spanish Dude from HairSite”, and maybe you get a cool wig FOR FREE !! 
"Show me these "number of other cases …
(including adress, phone number etc) "
Iron_Man,
it was FIVE years ago, I don’t have that information and I am certainly not going to spend all my time trying to dig it up - and I wouldn’t give out my address - let alone theirs. You have already called out Syrup and then had to back-track. Why would I want to prove this to YOU anyway, if you don’t believe me - guess what - I DON’T MIND.
In my view extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, that has not been forthcoming to date in terms of lots of satisfied customers and lots of video evidence of the donor regeneration - hopefully it will.
<>
do a search for “Dr Ghos bad work” with an author of ‘Chip Chop’.
69Sting is a credible poster on here (I think Hairsite will vouch for that), I believe he had Gho work on him and said the following:
“after the area was excamined really close on my visit it appears that there was little or no regrowth in the donor area from Dr. Gho.”
This is why I hoped Dr Gho had made a new breakthrough - or maybe all these people are lying for the fun of it…
» "Show me these "number of other cases …
» (including adress, phone number etc) "
»
» Iron_Man,
» it was FIVE years ago, I don’t have that information and I am
» certainly not going to spend all my time trying to dig it up - and I
» wouldn’t give out my address - let alone theirs. You have already called
» out Syrup and then had to back-track. Why would I want to prove this to YOU
» anyway, if you don’t believe me - guess what - I DON’T MIND.
»
» In my view extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, that has
» not been forthcoming to date in terms of lots of satisfied customers and
» lots of video evidence of the donor regeneration - hopefully it will.
»
» <>
»
» do a search for “Dr Ghos bad work” with an author of ‘Chip Chop’.
This has nothing to do if I believe you or not. Instead of just mention any insecure allegations, I appreciate always if somebody is LINKING to the SOURCE of his allegations/claims. Because this how science actually works on one hand, and why a guy called “Sir Tim Berners-Lee” actually invented the World Wide Web (WWW) 18 years ago on the other hand … 
Anyway, thanks for your LINK to one SOURCE of your allegations, even it’s NOT really an adequate one, because there you can just find some insecure “quark chit chat” by some forum users. What’s more, a moderator (“Farell”) thereupon mentioned the following:
“If you are making claims that Dr Gho has NO happy patients then you must have surveyed every single patient he has ever treated. Othewise you could never be able to make such a claim.
You have until Sunday to post the survey that you conducted that indicates the claim you made, “Ghos happy patients= none” is true and supported by fact.
If you dont post the survey then I will assume that you have none and therefore this claim is false. The result of making false claims on this forum is that your thread will be deleted and your posting account will be cancelled.
Anyway, END OF THE STORY “How can I effectively destroy the reputation of a HM researcher”, because not even the posting by “AIO“ counts as an accurate claim in this context, even there’re positive claims, and imho not even any “nicely” pics by any Gho’s patients would “proof” anything!
Dr. Gho HIMSELF mentioned it several times (interviews, research papers etc) in the past, that his old FM method worked sometimes inconsistent etc, AND that he – in 2003/2004 - NOT recommend this procedure for the clinical practice. So what?
@Skywalker, you mentioned/linked to h a i r l o s s h e l p.com. Again, thanks for that. But how about h a i r l o s s T A L K.com?
http://www.hairlosstalX.com/interact/viewtopic.php?p=211231#p211231
(Replace the „X“ with „k“ within the URL and enter it directly into your browser!)
Here you’ll find some serious, IMHO more accurate and far more important user discussions about Dr. Gho, in 2006 …
P.S.: Did you noticed that each and every serious started topic (like this one) mostly ends up into total FARCE as soon as one single and desperated moron called “Spanish Dude” comes along? On the other hand, it seems he has a disease - and I’m his cure.
Therefore, from now on I call him “training”, rather than “troll” or “Spanish Dude” … 
Hi, training :waving:
call me CURE!
» Title:
» In Vivo Follicular Unit Multiplication:
» Is It Possible to Harvest an Unlimited Donor
» Supply?
»
» This study was supported by research grant from the ISHRS in 2004
» (according to the ISHRS Website):
» FUE Hair Harvesting and Transplantation Procedure Robert Niedbalski MDPhase II: Injection of Autologous Platelet Rich Plasma and Use of a Specially Formulated Hair Matrix in Treating Non-Scarring Alopecia Burak Sonmez, MDAnalysis of the Hair Cycle and Hair Follicles in the Donor Site in the Megasession FUE Hair Transplant Using a Novel Punch Instrument Sunghyun (Sven) Son, MD Pilot Trial for Minimizing the Wound Healing After Hair Restoration Surgery Using a Novel Existing Topical Formulation Title Metadata: 2021 Past Grant Recipients: AdytaK. Gupta, MBChB, FISHRS Investigates Reversing Alopecia
»
» Published Online: 3 Nov 2006:
» http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118565909/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
»
» Authors:
» ERGIN ER, MD * , MELIKE KULAHCI, MD * , AND EMIRALI HAMILOGLU, MD * ,
» * TRANSMED Hair & Cosmetic Surgery Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey
Thanks. It’s been so many years ago, I forgot the source. I was getting it confused with the Italian study, called something like, “Biopsy of hair follicles” that showed transected upper and lower follicle parts continued to grow hair from each part. The lower third grew full thickness hair, and the upper 2/3 grew thinner hair.
Iron_Man,
I don’t think you are getting it, I am not saying Dr Gho’s procedure doesn’t work now, and I am not saying he has no happy customers (actually I am sure he has), what I am saying is that he has a lot of unhappy customers and in my opinion it brings his integrity into question because they were never sorted out.
Your link by the way, shows a distinct lack of happy customers looking to come forwards, that doesn’t mean there aren’t any, but that link is hardly a ringing endorsement.
I don’t care whether you agree or not, but in my view extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, I am bringing up his track record because in my opinion we have to be very careful about the claims and although I am inclined to think Dr Gho has something now it is worrying how he has failed over the years to produce evidence for his procedure. This leads me to think, as I said before, maybe he is a great researcher but incompetent at everything else.
Let’s hope he is on the level and he gets his act sorted out.
» Iron_Man,
» I don’t think you are getting it, […]
I think, I understand absolutely what you say resp. you try to explain … 
I think this comment by “Chip Chop” is accurate, because sometimes I had the feeling that Dr. Gho isn’t really able to sell accurate HIMSELF! 
And -IMHO- that is his biggest problem I think on one hand, and on the other hand, that is one reason why I like such guys like Dr. Gho.
But I noticed, that he already learned his lessons (in general) from the past …
» This study was a total failure. JB, I don’t understand how you are using
» this study as proof of concept. It is all the contrary.
Huh?
The study proved 76% of lower thirds left in the skin regrow thick hair. You will recall that Gho’s FM technique used the exact transectioning technique used in this study, and Gho claimed up to 70% regrowth of the donor. People freaked on that and said it was impossible and accused him of making it all up. Yet, the entire time, this study was sitting out there which had already proved his claim was true. We heard endless BS about how donor regrowth is impossible and Gho’s technique left scars in the donor. Well, yes it did, because as he fully disclosed, the procedure was inconsistent. One thing is absolutely certain, his claim of leaving the lower third in the skin and having it regenerate is 100% fact. Astonishingly, 99.9% of HT doctors still do not realize this. Come on guys, it’s time to play catch-up here.
I’ve been saying for years to stop concentrating on donor regrowth. It is not the difficult aspect of the procedure. The difficult aspect of the procedure is the recipient growth. There are numerous scientific articles out there that address this.
Gho claims he got around the recipient regrowth problem by soaking the grafts in a special cell-growth solution as opposed to saline. Given the known aspects of cell-based science, this claim is in the realm of common sense and is in no way outlandish or unbelievable. This was all addressed in my 2005 interview with Dr. Gho. I find it odd that I would have to repeatedly readdress it 5 years later.
Gho claims to be able to get higher and more consistent donor regrowth (compared to FM) by horizontal transectioning. He has fully published his technique so that it can be independently verified. What more can anybody realistically expect? This is ground-breaking science, not grade-school reading class. If HT doctors have the ability to get through med school, then they have the skills to understand what I am saying and read the scientific literature that supports it.
Edit: Removed frustrated rant on the number of studies you must read to piece together the science of HM. If you only have the patience to read one study that shows how it works, read Dr. Gho’s latest study.
"But I noticed, that he already learned his lessons (in general) from the past … "
Well, I am not so sure about that, but if he has we will get a lot of progress in the next few months - we’ll see.
“What more can anybody realistically expect?”
Well, let’s see, the first thing I would do is make a deal (including financial) with a reputable HT doctor (like Dr Bisanga) to help him reproduce the result so that the reputable doctor can be confident in how to do it.
Next I would get that reputable doctor to invite one well thought of individual from each of the HT forums to have a 500 graft free HST HT - very carefully documenting by video and photos where all the grafts were taken out and including a very small area where ALL the grafts are taken out (with the promise that if HST doesn’t work it will be fixed for free), I appreciate a few will be in telogen but not that many.
ALL this will be recorded by video and photos and then in a year video and photos will again be carefully done to document proof of regrowth in the donor and growth in the recipient area.
Dr Bisanga and the individuals to give their view at the end of the year.
Isn’t this all just OBVIOUS ? - after all if Dr Gho can prove this and patent it he can make a fortune.
| 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.
