I think I speak for a lot of people when I ask why Dr. Cole’s evidence of donor regeneration has not made a bigger collective splash on the HT world in the last couple of years.
I speak here all due respect and no attempts to attack anyone’s credibility. But if one of these hair multiplication operations was claiming to be able to pull 1 graft from the donor area and somehow produce 1.5 or 2 grafts in the recipient area from it on average, it would have sent shockwaves through the HT world. That is functionally what Dr. Cole is claiming to see just by using Acell & PRP on low-depth FUE extraction wounds.
I think at least a couple years have gone by since Dr. Cole was first saying this stuff and it has made little impact on the industry. Your clinic is also not posting “WOW” final result HT cases that suggest you have achieved a notable improvement in the ratio between recipient hair gained versus donor hair lost during the HT process.
Has Dr. Cole not yet “swung for the fences” on anyone? Has he not yet attempted to use this regeneration technique to push the limits on how much total MPB restoration is possible for high-Norwood patients?
I could understand that cautious outlook, especially with what is admittedly an inconsistent technique with no long-term data. (What if the regenerated donor follicles eventually succumb to old age decades earlier than normal? etc.) But there are plenty of guys with more hair loss & money than cautiousness and Dr. Cole is making no bones about this regeneration happening - haven’t any of his patients wanted to see what this can really do for them?
Are there no other clinics showing interest in what your clinic has been observing with this? Has nobody else tried to test it, etc?
Some respected FUE clinics aren’t as interested in cutting-edge HM techniques as others. But this technique/phenomenon seems to offer a huge potential benefit and require very little additional expense/trouble/difficulty/risk to achieve it. There wouldn’t be much learning curve, etc, for other clinics to implement it. And the risk of over-harvesting the donor area (betting too high on getting too much regeneration after a given HT session) would not become significant until they were already pushing far enough to see clear evidence that the technique does work to some extent.
Any feedback would be appreciated.