As per request of certain members, on HS and other forums,
Kindly find pics of the first patient selected for nw1/2 transformation,
Will shortly post pics of, four more patients ,who are ready to update their progress…
Who are, nw6/7 for nw1/2 transformation with combination of HM /DP cultures and doubling…
If anyone wants any more pics,before we start the case on 15th ,let me know …it should not be a problem…as his office is near to the clinic.
I will also shoot his single shot video on HD camera.
Will give the details of his donor area, number of available grafts,donor density,Recipient area to be covered etc.with the case presentation later…
NW6/7 transformation to nw1/2 will not need any analysis…as the result would be obvious…
Mr.Js
1)Below is the first case,whose HM,DP cultures and doubling will begin on 15th september. He is the bank manager of the bank opposite my clinic at mumbai…He is 50 plus …he got his medical fitness and blood test today…
Once again, let us review the definition of NW 2 so there is no controversy. Please nobody try to muddy up the definition with BS. Lets keep the definition straight.
A NW2 is a person with approximately 75000+ hairs on his head. You’re born with a total of 100K hairs and by adult NW2, you should have 75K+ terminal hairs in tact.
Let us also review what is NOT the definition of NW2.
NW2 is not some low density sparse hair transplant with a combover to give the illusion of NW2. That kind of fake NW2 look you can get with the run of the mill hair transplant. The results in real life (3D) look quite fake. So that is NOT a NW2.
With the above in mind and assuming no idiot tries to muddy up the definition, I hope we will see from Dr. Nigam a true NW6 to NW2 transformation in the days ahead.
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Freddie555[/postedby]
Once again, let us review the definition of NW 2 so there is no controversy. Please nobody try to muddy up the definition with BS. Lets keep the definition straight.
A NW2 is a person with approximately 75000+ hairs on his head. You’re born with a total of 100K hairs and by adult NW2, you should have 75K+ terminal hairs in tact.
Let us also review what is NOT the definition of NW2.
NW2 is not some low density sparse hair transplant with a combover to give the illusion of NW2. That kind of fake NW2 look you can get with the run of the mill hair transplant. The results in real life (3D) look quite fake. So that is NOT a NW2.
With the above in mind and assuming no idiot tries to muddy up the definition, I hope we will see from Dr. Nigam a true NW6 to NW2 transformation in the days ahead.[/quote]
Freddie basically what you say it’s right even if I’m sure that you can get a good REAL result even if you don’t have 75,000 hairs on your head but even something close to 60,000 (75,000 hairs could be consider “perfection”)
However, as far as I know, an adult should have 100,000 hairs more or less. So, if you exclude the hairs which are not involved in the balding process, we could approximally say we need to take care of 50,000 hairs only.
So we can say that a follicle can produce even 2/3 hairs per time so if you divide 50,000 for 2 you will see you need 25,000 hair follicles to get the perfection …however I’m sure that even with 15,000 you can get a really interesting result!
exactly… you do not have to exaggerate expectations… 12’000-15’000 grafts would probably offer pretty good results already.
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by AleMB81[/postedby]
Freddie basically what you say it’s right even if I’m sure that you can get a good REAL result even if you don’t have 75,000 hairs on your head but even something close to 60,000 (75,000 hairs could be consider “perfection”)
However, as far as I know, an adult should have 100,000 hairs more or less. So, if you exclude the hairs which are not involved in the balding process, we could approximally say we need to take care of 50,000 hairs only.
So we can say that a follicle can produce even 2/3 hairs per time so if you divide 50,000 for 2 you will see you need 25,000 hair follicles to get the perfection …however I’m sure that even with 15,000 you can get a really interesting result![/quote]
Great patient selection this time Dr Nigams. My congratulations. Now please seize this chance and document this case correctly. Get a good photographer. Shave his scalp. Get us photo’s in which we clearly can count all grafts. If you do it like that and you can show us it works, then the whole world will be on that plane to India. On the other hand, if you once again get us blurry and/or incomplete pictures, I’m sure that most people will forget about you. This is your last chance. Please do seize it.
One thing that I don’t understand though. Maybe I’m just over critical here, but I guess one can not be critical enough when it comes to prove new hairloss therapies. When I zoom in on for example picture 3, on the temples, I see a lot of ‘dots’. Points where it seems that there once was hair. I just looked at my own temples, on some highres photo’s I shot and even when I zoom in, I just don’t see any similar dots at all. The skin is just smooth, even at points where once grew hair.
I can’t help but think this looks like extracted hair. Again, maybe I’m seeing ghosts here and am I overly critical … But again, my own case looks very different, that’s why I ask.
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Freddie555[/postedby]
Once again, let us review the definition of NW 2 so there is no controversy. Please nobody try to muddy up the definition with BS. Lets keep the definition straight. A NW2 is a person with approximately 75000+ hairs on his head. You’re born with a total of 100K hairs and by adult NW2, you should have 75K+ terminal hairs in tact…With the above in mind and assuming no idiot tries to muddy up the definition, I hope we will see from Dr. Nigam a true NW6 to NW2 transformation in the days ahead.[/quote]
Where did you find this hair count definition for a NW2? I’ve never seen it before. Didn’t you just make it up because that number sounds good to you? That is as perfect an example of muddying up the definition with BS as we are likely to see. The Hamilton-Norwood scale has to do with patterns of baldness, not hair counts.
Does this mean if Dr Nigam is able to give these men 10,000 new follicles (a “mere” 25,000 new hairs or so) you will refuse his procedure and wait for your ideal? Will you call him a failure?
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Freddie555[/postedby]
Once again, let us review the definition of NW 2 so there is no controversy. Please nobody try to muddy up the definition with BS. Lets keep the definition straight. A NW2 is a person with approximately 75000+ hairs on his head.
[postedby]Originally Posted by RickH[/postedby]
Where did you find this hair count definition for a NW2? I’ve never seen it before.
Stop being absurd.[/quote]
Agreed, a normal NW6 have a bald area around 200-250 cm2, let’s say 250.
A a full head of hair is around 200 hairs for cm2, very good coverage without spot at all could be around 100-150.
So let’s say 250x150=37500. No way near to 75k
Said that, 150 hairs for cm2 are more than 75 uf for cm2.
No one could implant at that density, you must lower your expectation further. Rahl or H&W or Feriduni made dense pack at 60-70 cm2 no further.
Surgical restoration in very good case give you a illusion of density, in small cases extra give you good approximation to normal density.
Most guys don’t even notice they are thinning (let alone balding) until they are already down to maybe 60% of their original density. If you can get 60% of your original density restored with HTs then there isn’t much to complain about as long as you aren’t trying to be a shampoo model for a living.
Also, quite a few guys with “60 grafts/cm2” transplants . . I think some of the numbers aren’t representative. Either they are getting ripped off and charged for more grafts than they received, or else the clinic transplanted that many grafts without adequate concern for how many of them actually survived. Maybe some of both, I don’t know.
But there are guys who have paid to have 3000 FUE grafts put into areas that could barely contain 1500 dots from a fine felt-tip marker. That kind of packing, in one single session no less? Something is wrong. Is it any surprise that these cases usually don’t end up looking much fuller than 1500 grafts would have looked from another doc in that area?
IMHO it’s also not even worth evaluating a “max possible density” case that was all done with a single session. Any doc that packs the truly maximum possible density onto bare balded skin the first session is being reckless IMHO. There’s too much risk of tissue dying, excessive scarring, etc.
What I am trying to say is that the typical “max density packing” from a single session is probably not as much as the patient could have gotten in two sessions over the same spot, even if the first session was enough to satisfy him not to do a second pass.
so then are you suggesting that Dr. Nigam’s staff plucked the hairs out of the guy’s head so that it would like he’s a NW6 but that the guy is really a NW 2 or 3 if his hair hadn’t been plucked out? Is this what you’re saying? Doesn’t that really sound kind of crazy?
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by myself2[/postedby]
One thing that I don’t understand though. Maybe I’m just over critical here, but I guess one can not be critical enough when it comes to prove new hairloss therapies. When I zoom in on for example picture 3, on the temples, I see a lot of ‘dots’. Points where it seems that there once was hair. I just looked at my own temples, on some highres photo’s I shot and even when I zoom in, I just don’t see any similar dots at all. The skin is just smooth, even at points where once grew hair.
I can’t help but think this looks like extracted hair. Again, maybe I’m seeing ghosts here and am I overly critical … But again, my own case looks very different, that’s why I ask.[/quote]
[quote]so then are you suggesting that Dr. Nigam’s staff plucked the hairs out of the guy’s head so that it would like he’s a NW6 but that the guy is really a NW 2 or 3 if his hair hadn’t been plucked out? Is this what you’re saying? Doesn’t that really sound kind of crazy?
[postedby]Originally Posted by jarjarbinx[/postedby][/quote]
It does sound really crazy. Totally agreed. But if somebody expects to make multi millions out of it ? Does it still sound that crazy ?
Not too long ago I read in the newspaper about this woman they caught on a German airport, who had a breast enlargment, only not filled with silicone, but with cocaine. How crazy does that sound ? To cut yourself open and put bags of cocaine under your skin ? For what, 10k usd maybe ? The crazy sh*t people do for a little bit of money …
But let’s not speculate here. I’m not saying Nigams did this. Just would like somebody to show me a picture of a natural balding scalp showing the same type of dots and I’ll shut up again
Also look at this picture, I copied a copy of the temples into it: http://s11.postimg.org/4n3eh19mr/picture.jpg
Quite similar right ? Only this guy is not really bald, he shaved his head.
Anyway, I don’t know. Maybe it’s nothing, just some pores. But can’t help to notice it looks quite odd. I’ve compared it to my own skins pores and it looks quite different. The closest thing it looks like to me are cut-off hairs (like in that picture: http://s11.postimg.org/4n3eh19mr/picture.jpg )
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.
