Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Free

Let\'s make our predictions now


#1

Let us know make our definitive predictions just for fun on the matter of Acell.

For those that believe this will create a way to produce a cosmetically acceptable growing head of hair regardless of extent of loss (NW 1-7) say: Yea

For those that believe that this product will fail, due to either safety or efficacy (how well it works) say: Nay

I recommend basing your answer on logic, not emotion.


#2

» Let us know make our definitive predictions just for fun on the matter of
» Acell.
»
» For those that believe this will create a way to produce a cosmetically
» acceptable growing head of hair regardless of extent of loss (NW 1-7) say:
» Yea
»
» For those that believe that this product will fail, due to either safety
» or efficacy (how well it works) say: Nay
»
» I recommend basing your answer on logic, not emotion.

I predict that (this version/iteration of) Acell will regrow hair in the donor area but wont match the original density and consistency.


#3

Nay


#4

» I recommend basing your answer on logic, not emotion.

yea, because … well, yeaaaaaaaaa :smiley:


#5

» Let us know make our definitive predictions just for fun on the matter of
» Acell.
»
» For those that believe this will create a way to produce a cosmetically
» acceptable growing head of hair regardless of extent of loss (NW 1-7) say:
» Yea
»
» For those that believe that this product will fail, due to either safety
» or efficacy (how well it works) say: Nay
»
» I recommend basing your answer on logic, not emotion.

I’m not sure yet but it looks like it will produce a full head of hair for everyone with mpb who has dense thickness in his donor area. Remember some mpb sufferers thin out even in their donor areas. They still have hair in their donor area but the hairs get thin and short and sparse even in their donor area.


#6

» Let us know make our definitive predictions just for fun on the matter of
» Acell.
»
» For those that believe this will create a way to produce a cosmetically
» acceptable growing head of hair regardless of extent of loss (NW 1-7) say:
» Yea
»
» For those that believe that this product will fail, due to either safety
» or efficacy (how well it works) say: Nay
»
» I recommend basing your answer on logic, not emotion.

with extreme efforts it imho could. Though just imagine that you would have to go through series of woundings and HT’s to fix any visible imperfections wherever it fails to work and risk permanent scars close to FLAP surgeries.

Also low NW guys will hate it, diffuse thinners will hate it. Basically I’m pretty sure that most guys will stay reading this forum and waiting for something better :slight_smile:

What I’m saying is that it will work but will not be an easy and straightforward cure. If you have a lot of time and lot of money, then this can help you to stay away from body hair. Thats all I expect.


#7

» Let us know make our definitive predictions just for fun on the matter of
» Acell.
»
» For those that believe this will create a way to produce a cosmetically
» acceptable growing head of hair regardless of extent of loss (NW 1-7) say:
» Yea
»
» For those that believe that this product will fail, due to either safety
» or efficacy (how well it works) say: Nay
»
» I recommend basing your answer on logic, not emotion.

Logic? Ok.

  1. There has been NO proof that Acell will have any effect on human hair.

  2. If Acell did work on human hair, it would only be applicable within the framework of a HT, in which case you’d have to have 20,000-40,000 plugs, at a cost of somewhere around $60,000-$100,000+. None of you could afford that, because if any of you could, you wouldn’t be on this board - you’d be out, making money and getting laid.

So, logically, Acell is not the answer. But you don’t want logic. You want me to say “yea”.


#8

» Logic? Ok.
»
» 1. There has been NO proof that Acell will have any effect on human
» hair.
»
» 2. If Acell did work on human hair, it would only be applicable within
» the framework of a HT, in which case you’d have to have 20,000-40,000
» plugs, at a cost of somewhere around $60,000-$100,000+. None of you could
» afford that, because if any of you could, you wouldn’t be on this board -
» you’d be out, making money and getting laid.
»
» So, logically, Acell is not the answer. But you don’t want logic. You
» want me to say “yea”.

You want logic huh? here’s some logic:
1. You favor to sabotage news flow rather than discussing it. That’s makes you ignorant
2. You come to a hairloss forum which indicates you’re not happy with your hair. In other words, you’re no different than the rest of us, yet you’re under the impression you’re somebody special. That makes you delusional.
3. You only stalk the Research section meaning (by your own logic) you can’t afford HT, and thusly you can’t get laid. That makes you a hypocrite.
4. You keep telling us we’re nuts, yet you still interact with us. That makes you desperate.
5. You said you wouldn’t post here again. That makes you a liar.

.


#9

» 2. If Acell did work on human hair, it would only be applicable within
» the framework of a HT, in which case you’d have to have 20,000-40,000
» plugs, at a cost of somewhere around $60,000-$100,000+. None of you could
» afford that, because if any of you could, you wouldn’t be on this board -
» you’d be out, making money and getting laid.

I don’t know why people are stuck with ACELL will only work with HT. If ACELL works with HT, it should work with dermabrasion as well because essentially in both cases it will be regenerating hair follicle. If you don’t agree, Please enlighten me with your wisdom!

On the plus side, ACELL + dermabrasion would save you the cost & headache of a HT.


#10

»
» You want logic huh? here’s some logic:
» 1. You favor to sabotage news flow rather than discussing it.
» That’s makes you ignorant
» 2. You come to a hairloss forum which indicates you’re not happy
» with your hair. In other words, you’re no different than the rest of us,
» yet you’re under the impression you’re somebody special. That makes you
» delusional.
» 3. You only stalk the Research section meaning (by your own logic)
» you can’t afford HT, and thusly you can’t get laid. That makes you a
» hypocrite.
» 4. You keep telling us we’re nuts, yet you still interact with us.
» That makes you desperate.
» 5. You said you wouldn’t post here again. That makes you a liar.

None of that was logic, and all of it was an ad hominem attack. Do you know what that means? Its a type of fallacy by which, rather than addressing a critique, the rebuttal focuses on the source of the critique. It is employed when one is unable to formulate a rebuttal.

I believe the OP requested a logical prediction. I’m still waiting for yours.

As for you others, just provide me with one piece of scientific evidence (or even a hypothesis postulated by someone attached to Acell) that suggests Acell will work on human hair. Not dog fur, not horse fur, human hair.


#11

»
» I don’t know why people are stuck with ACELL will only work with HT. If
» ACELL works with HT, it should work with dermabrasion as well because
» essentially in both cases it will be regenerating hair follicle. If you
» don’t agree, Please enlighten me with your wisdom!
»
» On the plus side, ACELL + dermabrasion would save you the cost & headache
» of a HT.

I don’t know why people are stuck on Acell at all.

Again, who said Acell will work with a HT? That’s my wisdom.

People are acting like its a for-gone conclusion that it will, when there is in fact NO evidence that it does, or that it should. Just pictures of dogs’ fur and horse legs.


#12

» None of that was logic, and all of it was an ad hominem attack. Do you
» know what that means? Its a type of fallacy by which, rather than
» addressing a critique, the rebuttal focuses on the source of the critique.
» It is employed when one is unable to formulate a rebuttal.
»
» I believe the OP requested a logical prediction. I’m still waiting for
» yours.
»
» As for you others, just provide me with one piece of scientific evidence
» (or even a hypothesis postulated by someone attached to Acell) that
» suggests Acell will work on human hair. Not dog fur, not horse fur, human
» hair.

Relax over there with your regurgitation of your first college level Logic,Reasoning, And Pursuasion class. Using big words that come straight from your class text makes you sound like a tool.

How is anyone going to know if it works on humans if it doesnt get tested? Thats whats being done now on humans…no ridiculous back-door trials where ambigous results are ambiguously worded in power point presentations. Just hair transplant docs attempting to see if it helps in any way.

Why are you so mad that this is going on? Noone on this site is claiming it works…we’re all hoping. Why are you hoping it fails?


#13

» » None of that was logic, and all of it was an ad hominem attack. Do you
» » know what that means? Its a type of fallacy by which, rather than
» » addressing a critique, the rebuttal focuses on the source of the
» critique.
» » It is employed when one is unable to formulate a rebuttal.
» »
» » I believe the OP requested a logical prediction. I’m still waiting for
» » yours.
» »
» » As for you others, just provide me with one piece of scientific
» evidence
» » (or even a hypothesis postulated by someone attached to Acell) that
» » suggests Acell will work on human hair. Not dog fur, not horse fur,
» human
» » hair.
»
» Relax over there with your regurgitation of your first college level
» Logic,Reasoning, And Pursuasion class. Using big words that come straight
» from your class text makes you sound like a tool.
»
» How is anyone going to know if it works on humans if it doesnt get tested?
» Thats whats being done now on humans…no ridiculous back-door trials where
» ambigous results are ambiguously worded in power point presentations. Just
» hair transplant docs attempting to see if it helps in any way.
»
» Why are you so mad that this is going on? Noone on this site is claiming
» it works…we’re all hoping. Why are you hoping it fails?

Ouch. The whole bit about philo 101. Well done.

The only “mad” ones around here are the eternal optimists who have multiple threads about Acell’s inevitable success. “When will you get an Acell transplant”; “When I get my Acell hair”; etc., etc., etc. There’s no proof that Acell has any relevance, and yet its Gho/ICX all over again. One needs no proof that most of this board is once again crazed other than the immediate and vicious personal attacks that befall anyone who dare question the validity of some of these “theories”. You guys never learn. But do continue - its quite entertaining.

Here’s the hard facts:

  1. ICX is dead
  2. Follica will require at least 5-10 years of trials
  3. There is no proof Acell works on human hair

I know its hard to face, and I feel for you. I know its easy for me - a NW 2 - to bring a harsh but rational voice to these discussions. But its better that you maintain some reasonable level of skepticism than continually set yourselves up for disappointment. If this board is indeed for discussion about research, you people wouldn’t be foaming at the mouth screaming, “It works! I can feel it! Now lets prove it!”.

As an aside, why is it that, when someone begins employing vocabulary above the fifth grade level, people assume that its being copied verbatim from a thesaurus? Just because you struggle to put together a coherent sentence doesn’t mean we all do.


#14

None of that was logic, and all of it was an ad hominem attack. Do you know what that means? Its a type of fallacy by which, rather than addressing a critique, the rebuttal focuses on the source of the critique. It is employed when one is unable to formulate a rebuttal.

I believe the OP requested a logical prediction. I’m still waiting for yours.

After that rant, my NEW “logical” prediction is that you’re a spam filled troll.

.


#15

» None of that was logic, and all of it was an ad hominem
» attack. Do you know what that means? Its a type of fallacy by which,
» rather than addressing a critique, the rebuttal focuses on the source of
» the critique. It is employed when one is unable to formulate a rebuttal.
»
»
» I believe the OP requested a logical prediction. I’m still waiting for
» yours.

»
»
» After that rant, my NEW “logical” prediction is that you’re a spam filled
» troll.
»
»
»
»
»
» .

Wow. You have a lot of free time on your hands.

I know it hurts. I know it must be tough to be bald with no relief in sight. I know that you must be very lonely. I only ask that you be rational.

So I’ll ask again: what proof do you have that Acell works on humans? You’ve replied twice, but have yet to answer the question. Will you dodge again, or will you man-up and address the issue?


#16

» Wow. You have a lot of free time on your hands.

I’m a sucker for hard luck cases.
In fact, I’m willing to help you find a new bridge to live under.
Trolls like bridges… don’t they?


#17

» » Wow. You have a lot of free time on your hands.
»
» I’m a sucker for hard luck cases.
» In fact, I’m willing to help you find a new bridge to live under.
» Trolls like bridges… don’t they?
»
»

I think your inability to point to one rational reason for your optimism over Acell speaks volumes. You won’t even mention the animal pictures so many claim as proof of concept (which is laughable). But if it helps you stay sane, then I guess its doing some good. I’m sure some equally fantastic discovery will surface, and you’ll have a new fad to chase. Until then, you and your buddies can sit around and offer absolute conjecture as fact, all the while ignoring reality.


#18

» » Let us know make our definitive predictions just for fun on the matter
» of
» » Acell.
» »
» » For those that believe this will create a way to produce a cosmetically
» » acceptable growing head of hair regardless of extent of loss (NW 1-7)
» say:
» » Yea
» »
» » For those that believe that this product will fail, due to either
» safety
» » or efficacy (how well it works) say: Nay
» »
» » I recommend basing your answer on logic, not emotion.
»
» Logic? Ok.
»
» 1. There has been NO proof that Acell will have any effect on human
» hair.
»
» 2. If Acell did work on human hair, it would only be applicable within
» the framework of a HT, in which case you’d have to have 20,000-40,000
» plugs, at a cost of somewhere around $60,000-$100,000+. None of you could
» afford that, because if any of you could, you wouldn’t be on this board -
» you’d be out, making money and getting laid.
»
» So, logically, Acell is not the answer. But you don’t want logic. You
» want me to say “yea”.

  1. I could afford that, so you are not right at this point.

  2. Well this is more serious point of course. Yes there is absolutely no guarantee that it will work for hair. All we know is that it worked on other mammals, none of them had male pattern baldness, just missing skin & flesh, that regrew with hair. I dont know if it will work. But I admit that If I didnt know that it grew fingertip with nail and bone, I would laugh off everyone who would even have suggested that possibility. And you know what? It did grow a fingertip with nail and even perfect fingerprint.

So although there is absolutely no guarantee, chance is, it might work. If this does work for everything but human hair, then we are fubar for decade probably.


#19

» » » Let us know make our definitive predictions just for fun on the matter
» » of
» » » Acell.
» » »
» » » For those that believe this will create a way to produce a
» cosmetically
» » » acceptable growing head of hair regardless of extent of loss (NW 1-7)
» » say:
» » » Yea
» » »
» » » For those that believe that this product will fail, due to either
» » safety
» » » or efficacy (how well it works) say: Nay
» » »
» » » I recommend basing your answer on logic, not emotion.
» »
» » Logic? Ok.
» »
» » 1. There has been NO proof that Acell will have any effect on human
» » hair.
» »
» » 2. If Acell did work on human hair, it would only be applicable within
» » the framework of a HT, in which case you’d have to have 20,000-40,000
» » plugs, at a cost of somewhere around $60,000-$100,000+. None of you
» could
» » afford that, because if any of you could, you wouldn’t be on this board
» -
» » you’d be out, making money and getting laid.
» »
» » So, logically, Acell is not the answer. But you don’t want logic. You
» » want me to say “yea”.
»
»
» 1. I could afford it so you are not right in this point.
»
» 2. Well this is more serious point of course. Yes there is absolutely no
» guarantee that it will work for hair. All we know is that it worked on
» other mammals, none of them had male pattern baldness, just missing skin &
» flesh, that regrew with hair. I dont know if it will work. But I admit that
» If I didnt know that it grew fingertip with nail and bone, I would laugh
» off everyone who would even suggest that possibility. And you know what? It
» did grow a fingertip with nail and even perfect fingerprint.
»
» So although there is absolutely no guarantee, chance is, it might work. If
» this does work for everything but human hair, then we are fubar for decade
» probably.

  1. If you could afford it, do you have any idea what an inconvenience it would be to go through multiple, invasive, painful procedures to get a true full head of hair from current hair transplant techniques? Have you seen the pics in the HT forum? Most of those guys look like Frankenstein for 6 months or more before their transplanted hair takes, never mind that its a totally unregulated specialty. Anything that includes a HT is not a cure, just as current HTs are not a cure.

  2. The fingertip issue has been debunked numerous times. His finger tip would have grown back on its own without the assistance of an Acell-like product, as would have the fur of those animals.

Its Follica or something else, and both those possibilities are at least 10 years out.


#20

» » 2. If Acell did work on human hair, it would only be applicable within
» » the framework of a HT, in which case you’d have to have 20,000-40,000
» » plugs, at a cost of somewhere around $60,000-$100,000+. None of you
» could
» » afford that, because if any of you could, you wouldn’t be on this board
» -
» » you’d be out, making money and getting laid.
»
» I don’t know why people are stuck with ACELL will only work with HT. If
» ACELL works with HT, it should work with dermabrasion as well because
» essentially in both cases it will be regenerating hair follicle. If you
» don’t agree, Please enlighten me with your wisdom!
»
» On the plus side, ACELL + dermabrasion would save you the cost & headache
» of a HT.

I necessarily dont agree with this goata. There is some probability that the wound will need to go deep into dermis for the acell to start regrowing skin with follicles (hair inductive cells). And that would be much deeper then dermabrassion is.