Nice Chat!!!:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Those <> vitamins must be very strong! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
» Nice Chat!!!:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
»
» Those <> vitamins must be very strong! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
disruptive = someone who doesnt agree with everything we say and join the cheerleading squad 
» Hey guys, let me make it clear and end this question.
»
» Direction would have been an issue only (let me make it clear)
» only if the new hairs grew the other way, that is towards the skin
» and scalp. Then and only then direction would have been a problem.
»
» Since such a case has not been arisen we have no direction issues.
»
» This is a fact. Otherwise it would have been brought up by Intercytex as a
» safety issue to be resolved.
»
» Let me phrase it in a scientifically way.
» If this was the case (direction towards the skin) HM would have been still
» in phase I since a growing hair inside the skin creates topical
» inflammations and this is a safety issue!
direction is an issue if the hair is misdirected
if the hair on the side of the head, instead of growing DOWN, like it naturally does, grows sideways, or UP, then it is misdirected and this is a problem
you guys have failed to answer the question of, if ICX results are so great where are the pics?
where are the hair COUNTS? not percentage regrowth which is misleading
where are the numbers of TERMINAL hairs …listed
transparency is the issue and they are not being open with their results
If they have reported the above in their results, then post the results
Before you say something look at the post at least!:waving:
» Before you say something look at the post at least!:waving:
guess that means you cannot answer the questions
thanks for confirming this
wait I know the answers…
ICX would not lie to us and we trust if there were problems with hair direction they would have told us, and Im sure they will come out with more detailed results with hair counts or perhaps it was an accident on their part, after all ICX would never lie
» » Nice Chat!!!:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
» »
» » Those <> vitamins must be very strong! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
»
» disruptive = someone who doesnt agree with everything we say and join the
» cheerleading squad
You know what Hangin… after re-reading all of your posts, I have to admit… you are definitely still the same pessimist you came off as in the first place. I’ll be sure to dial you up next time my soup is too hot you chilling bastage!
It seems HangInThere you are blind too. (nice point Tkshreve)
Ok here is what i haved posted.
I am tired reading all this post declaring the direction issue as a major problem! Let me make it clear and end this question.
Direction would have been an issue only (let me make it clear) only if new hairs grew the other way, that is towards the skin. Then and only then, direction would have been a problem.
Since such a case has not been arisen, we have no direction issues.
This is a fact. Otherwise it would have been brought up by Intercytex as a safety issue to be resolved.
Let me phrase it scientifically.
If this was the case (direction towards the skin) HM would have been still in phase I since a growing hair inside the skin creates topical inflammations something that would have brought up a safety issue!
Since we have not heard such a issue we are only left with the direction “issue” in follicular neogenesis as follicular rejuvenation takes place in existing follicular units where direction is constant.
So if the problem is in the “neogened” follicles that their direction may vary +/- 90 degrees I don’t know what else should I say!
I bet that this won’t stop me from getting HM and I think that this wont stop all others either…
» It seems HangInThere you are blind too. (nice point Tkshreve)
»
» Ok here is what i haved posted.
»
» I am tired reading all this post declaring the direction issue as a major
» problem! Let me make it clear and end this question.
»
» Direction would have been an issue only (let me make it clear) only if new
» hairs grew the other way, that is towards the skin. Then and only then,
» direction would have been a problem.
»
» Since such a case has not been arisen, we have no direction issues.
»
» This is a fact. Otherwise it would have been brought up by Intercytex as a
» safety issue to be resolved.
»
» Let me phrase it scientifically.
» If this was the case (direction towards the skin) HM would have been still
» in phase I since a growing hair inside the skin creates topical
» inflammations something that would have brought up a safety issue!
»
» Since we have not heard such a issue we are only left with the direction
» “issue” in follicular neogenesis as follicular rejuvenation takes place in
» existing follicular units where direction is constant.
»
» So if the problem is in the “neogened” follicles that their direction may
» vary +/- 90 degrees I don’t know what else should I say!
»
» I bet that this won’t stop me from getting HM and I think that this wont
» stop all others either…
go drink the koolaide
does ICX pay for your family vacations or do you just have relatives working there, or perhaps a big chunk of stock
not to say you are biased
» » » Nice Chat!!!:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
» » »
» » » Those <> vitamins must be very strong! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
» »
» » disruptive = someone who doesnt agree with everything we say and join
» the
» » cheerleading squad
»
» You know what Hangin… after re-reading all of your posts, I have to
» admit… you are definitely still the same pessimist you came off as
» in the first place. I’ll be sure to dial you up next time my soup is too
» hot you chilling bastage!
pessimist can be convinced with evidence
we are just not faithful swallow everyones BS with no proof…like you guys appear to be
I would love to see a financial con artist pitch you an investment that would drain all your life savings, you guys would fall for it hook line and sinker , no questions asked or proof required
you are a con artist’s dream