» [color=purple]Do you have before-after pictures of your donor and
» recipitent area???/[/color]
My pics were posted back in 2002. That’s when I had the procedure done. I only had about 200 grafts to touch up the left temple. No complaints there. It met my expectations back then.
I only had before and after pics of the recipient. No donor pic because I have no desire to shave my back for no reason at all. When I am ready for my next procedure, I would be happy to ask the doctor to take pics of my donor.
I never claimed to experience donor regrowth of any sort from his procedure. There is no way for me to prove that. As a matter of fact, I can feel that a portion of my back being distinctively thinner than before the procedure.
Again, the problem is that there is no way for the patient to verify if there is indeed donor regeneration or not. I couldn’t tell if I had 10% or 80% donor regrowth. A big selling point for his technique is donor regeneration. But if there is no way to verify that, then all that we are paying for is a “promise” and nothing more.
» » »
» » » How can someone promote something thay doesnt work, surely there must
» » be
» » » some sort of control over advertising etc. Have you asked the patient
» » to
» » » complain bverotti as this is quite an allegation you are making here.
» »
» » What we stated are facts, not fiction. We informed the patient about
» it,
» » it is up to him wether or not he takes a legal ride.
» »
» » Think of it : if the technique would work as promised, where are the
» » patients with full restauration ?
»
» As its a new technique it says photos arent available on the website yet.
»
»
» Are you saying that the whole Stemcell replacement technique is a fake and
» doesnt work bverotti? Thats quite an assumption considering you are a
» Consultant in this field.
Let me say that legally our institute, as well as any other institute in the world can claim to perform hair stemcell transplantation. Yes I know it is a word game, but no HT can succeed if the stemcells are not transplanted, period.
» » » »
» » » » How can someone promote something thay doesnt work, surely there
» must
» » » be
» » » » some sort of control over advertising etc. Have you asked the
» patient
» » » to
» » » » complain bverotti as this is quite an allegation you are making
» here.
» » »
» » » What we stated are facts, not fiction. We informed the patient
» about
» » it,
» » » it is up to him wether or not he takes a legal ride.
» » »
» » » Think of it : if the technique would work as promised, where are the
» » » patients with full restauration ?
» »
» » As its a new technique it says photos arent available on the website
» yet.
» »
» »
» » Are you saying that the whole Stemcell replacement technique is a fake
» and
» » doesnt work bverotti? Thats quite an assumption considering you are a
» » Consultant in this field.
»
» Let me say that legally our institute, as well as any other institute in
» the world can claim to perform hair stemcell transplantation. Yes I know
» it is a word game, but no HT can succeed if the stemcells are not
» transplanted, period.
Bverotti, I don’t think that is the point. I think everyone realizes that all HTs involve a transplantation of hair stem cells.
Gho’s point is that when he does the transplantation, he extracts hair in such a way that some of the donor hair stem cells are left behind. These “left behind” hair stem cells are then able to renegerate a new hair follicle, as thick and as long as it was before, so you don’t lose any hairs.
I was reading Dr. Rassman’s blog and someone asked him for his view on Gho. Rassman also seemed to miss the point completely, because his reply was something along the lines of “well all HTs transplant stem cells”.
Bverotti, if there is a one reason why you don’t think Gho’s method works, I am open to hearing it.
» » [color=purple]Do you have before-after pictures of your donor and
» » recipitent area???/[/color]
»
» My pics were posted back in 2002. That’s when I had the procedure done. I
» only had about 200 grafts to touch up the left temple. No complaints
» there. It met my expectations back then.
»
» I only had before and after pics of the recipient. No donor pic because I
» have no desire to shave my back for no reason at all. When I am ready for
» my next procedure, I would be happy to ask the doctor to take pics of my
» donor.
»
» I never claimed to experience donor regrowth of any sort from his
» procedure. There is no way for me to prove that. As a matter of fact, I
» can feel that a portion of my back being distinctively thinner than before
» the procedure.
»
» Again, the problem is that there is no way for the patient to verify if
» there is indeed donor regeneration or not. I couldn’t tell if I had 10% or
» 80% donor regrowth. A big selling point for his technique is donor
» regeneration. But if there is no way to verify that, then all that we are
» paying for is a “promise” and nothing more.
Hairsite, I was wondering if you can give me your views on Dr. Gho - good and bad.
Also, based on your experience, were you happy with your HT with Gho?
» Thanks for sharing that. But how could you tell where the 1600 grafts were
» extracted from in the donor site? In order to prove that there is no
» regrowth in the donor, wouldn’t you need to examine EXACTLY the spots that
» were harvested?
I agree 100%. The old FM procedure was said to grow between 20 and 80% of the donor hair. Thus, I would expect that examination of the donor site after the procedure would reveal hairs were taken that did not regrow. The reason why the HT surgeon who “verified donor regrowth” could not say that donor regrowth occurred is because he did not perform before/after hair counts. Thus, it was impossible for him to verify donor regrowth. Thus, if he intended to prove anything one way or the other, his study had an enormous logical flaw.
I have previously posted an independent study showing that a percentage of donor hair regrows when you leave the lower third of the follicle in the skin. Furthermore, this percentage is consistent with Dr. Gho’s claims, which were made several years in advance of the independent study being performed.
The physical body of evidence supporting donor regrowth is currently strongly weighted in Dr. Gho’s favor.
To the original poster. I have no doubt that Dr. Gho is capable of obtaining donor regrowth. The bigger question is how mature is the technology, and do you stand to get a worthwhile real-world benefit from the technology? It is important to keep in mind that obtaining a certain percentage of donor regrowth is only a small part of any HT procedure that you receive. Many other factors are just as or more important. For instance, notice that the surgeon who posted the verification of results commented that he was unsure why Dr. Gho would move so little hair to such a bald area?
» However, the two things he did which utterly ruined his credibility
» amongst the more rational posters were firstly to put Hair Transplant
» Patients on the “waiting list” for his HM procedure, a procedure he knew
» full well was never going to happen.
Actually, I’m not sure there ever was really a list that existed. As I recall, and I could be wrong, Gho stated that his former and current patients would be first in line for HM when it was released because they were already affiliated with his clinic. That seems like a fair statement to me, and I cannot see how the statement is in any way unethical. In fact, the argument could be made that if Gho intended to allow new patients to get HM before existing patients, that would be considered unethical. I know if I were his patient, I would certainly take issue with a newbie getting HM before I did. That would speak to me of greed, lack of appreciation, and disloyalty.
As for Gho knowing all along that his HM procedure was never going to be released to the market, I believe you fabricated that statement out of thin air. It is these types of unproven hyped up claims passed off as proven facts that have helped to fuel the fire of the Gho debate in the first place. Having made such groundless attack-oriented statements yourself, you should strongly consider whom you refer to as acting unethically. There is an old saying about the pot calling the kettle black.