# Hair Transplants > Hair Transplant: Start Your Own Topic >  ACell, a Current Review of Applications in Hair Transplant Surgery

## John P. Cole, MD

I’m issuing this response because I am beginning to get phone calls requesting treatment with plucked hairs that are tainted with ACell based on presentations by Dr. Jerry Cooley and Dr. Gary Hitzig along with irrational exuberance on the part of some physicians who incorrectly feel these presentations represent a clinical breakthrough in the treatment of hair loss.  

*My Use of ACell*

I first looked at ACell in the spring of 2007.  In June of 2007, I began to research it in terms of treating horses for their lacerations since I own several horses.  Horses are somewhat hirsute critters sort of like mice.  Mice seem to grow hair when you apply butter. While ACell can regrow hair in horse wounds, it may simply be their predisposition to hair growth in general that is a work.  I waited until ACell became FDA approved prior to considering it for use in humans.

I will begin by relaying my experience with ACell and then discuss the presentations of Dr. Cooley.  When I began using ACell, I really did not expect much other than improved donor extraction site healing. Obviously, I knew there was a potential for regeneration of extracted follicles, but since only the ectodermal stem cells would be residual in the donor area, I did not consider them to have a enough regenerative capacity by themselves.  I started to apply it into extraction sites from FUE.  The greatest challenge was how to deliver the product.  The product originally came in two versions that were FDA approved for use in humans. One was a thin sheet and the other was a cluster of tiny particle that poses attractive electrostatic charge to one another and most any other object they come in contact with as described by Coulomb’s law.

More recently Acell offered a fine powder.  The real challenge was how to get the small particles into extraction sites because the particles have a good bit of static electricity on them as previously described. This makes them somewhat sticky to the jeweler forceps, one another, hair, or anything else in the universe.  Subsequently, I began cutting the thin sheets into small pieces and putting a small piece in as many extraction sites as possible.  The greatest difficulty was noting which extraction sites had already been treated because you have to constantly look away to pick up another piece of ACell and it is often difficult to see the small pieces once you have placed them in the extraction sites.  I’m quite sure that many sites were not treated as a result of this difficulty.  Similarly, many sites were most likely treated more than once.   Suffice it to say that I did the best I could given such a challenge. Later, I began mixing the small particles in a hyaluronic acid gel and forcing a small drop of the gel mixture to the extraction sites using a 1 cc syringe and an 18 or 19 gauge needle that I ground the sharp tipoff of. 

When the fine powder became available, I switched to using this in the hyaluronic acid gel. The fine particles were a major breakthrough in terms of delivery.  I found the ideal mixture was 60 mg of powder in 2 cc of the hyaluronic acid gel or 30 mg per cc of hyaluronic gel. One cc will usually treat well over 800 extraction sites. I often pre-treat the extraction sites with PRP and then drop the gel in to the extraction sites.  Once again treating a non-shaven donor area with ACell particles is very difficult due to static electricity. 
The particles want are attracted to the hair, as well as the jewelers forceps.  The gel mixture facilitates the delivery of ACell to these tiny individual extraction sites.  One question that remains is whether ACell will become active once the gel sets up and “hardens”.  The premise is that the hyaluronic acid will be degraded and leave the ACell to do its job.  Will the hyaluronic acid degrade fast enough for the ACell to be affective?  I tried mixing the ACell in PRP, but it just clumped and was impossible to administer to my extraction sites. Thus, the optimal option to date is the Acell/hyaluronic gel suspension at this point.  Currently, I am working on a superior suspension of Acell in hyaluronic acid, as well as a better delivery method.  

I also began mixing 30 mg of the tiny particles in 30 cc of normal saline and injecting this into the recipient areas to include donor scars.  I often treat these areas with PRP and microneedling, as well.  I then activate the PRP by making incisions in the scalp or by injecting the patient’s thrombin or bovine thrombin into the recipient areas as taught by Joe Greco, PA, PhD.  I have often added the ACell ECM to areas treated with PRP without grafts as Joe Greco has noted an improvement of pre-existing hair coverage in up to 70&#37; of individual treated with a combination of ECM and PRP without grafting.  I have noted the same in some of my patients, but follow up is difficult due to the distance between my clinic and the homes of my patients.  Joe Greco has his own proprietary ECM that he obtains from the patient. Joe Greco has not released this ECM to other physicians yet.  Joe is a wealth of knowledge and research with regard to PRP and eager to share this information. 
I often add ACell particles to my grafts by placing 25 grafts at a time in a ring cup that we hold on our finger during placement of the grafts along with particles of Acell in the cup.  This way the grafts are directly exposed to Acell and many pick up a few particles during storage in the ring cup due to attractive electrostatic forces.  The hope is that such exposure and tainting will improve survival of transected hair and possibly improve the survival of the grafted hair in general. We have not seen any documented benefit of this procedure yet, but we are still evaluating it.  

What I’ve noted so far is that ACell has the capacity to eliminate hypopigmented spotting in some FUE extraction sites.  Those extraction sites that remained hypopigmented might not have responded or we might not have treated them with ACell.  Again, it is impossible to know if all the sites are treated with ACell when you are using the powder or the cut up pieces of Acell.  This is why I more recently began working with a gel because it is much easier to administer he gel suspension and it is far easier to verify that we have treated all the extraction sites.  Acell also may have the ability to induce hair regrowth in some FUE extraction sites. I did not expect this to occur, but we were able to achieve some regeneration.  For example, in a patient who had over 2000 grafts extracted, the number of hypopigmented spots were significantly fewer than the number of extractions, many extraction sites exhibited normal skin tone, and there were not as many empty extraction sites as one would expect following over 2000 extractions.  In other words healing was better and some evidence of follicle regeneration was exhibited.  Not all patients exhibit hypopigmentation with FUE, but those that do generally have hypopigmentation in all the extraction sites.  The presence of both hypopigmented extraction sites and normal skin tone extraction sites suggests, but does not confirm, that Acell played a hand in improving the appearance of many extraction sites.  Based on my experience in FUE, I also noted far fewer empty extraction sites than I would have expected following extraction of over 2000 grafts. This suggested, but did not confirm, that Acell may play a role in regeneration of hair follicles in extraction sites.  I have also noted in other examples that an injection of a PRP and ACell combination can induce improvement in coverage of native hairs affected by androgenic alopecia in the absence of grafting.  We also often treat these native areas with microneedeling and add thrombin to help activate the platelets in the PRP in areas of native hair that are not grafted.  Again this practice has improved coverage in some, but we do not have statistically significant data to support our findings yet.  A study in Korea showed that the PRP treated side resulted in faster graft growth than the untreated side of the grafted recipient area.  Though I have not specifically evaluated this Korean finding, I have not seen confirmation of this Korean PRP study in my anecdotal evaluations.   
As another example I had one patient who underwent a large session of body hair transplantation.  He had excellent growth of his beard hair, but his chest hair did not grow well.  In a follow up procedure, I treated his donor scars with chest hair, but this time injected the scars with ACell/Saline 1mg/cc and PRP.  The chest hairs grew well this time and grew faster than areas treated with PRP alone with chest hair as well as beard hair.  Did the Acell, PRP injections promote a better yield of body hair and did they promote faster regrowth of the body hair? This is yet another question that needs to be answered.  

I have been slow to release my findings simply because it is too early and I do not want to stimulate irrational exuberance. We may not be able to confirm these findings though I feel very comfortable stating donor healing will be better with FUE extraction sites treated with Acell.  

In summary, I have found the following, but I have not clinically confirmed them:

1.             ACell plus PRP can induce improvement in coverage of native hair.  Further evaluation is needed though Joe Greco’s findings combining PRP and an ECM are similar in terms of improved coverage.

2.             ACell in the donor extraction sites can improve the healing of these extraction sites, reduce hypopigmentation, and induce follicle regeneration of follicles in extraction sites.  This will require further evaluation and study. These are simply preliminary findings without scientific confirmation as yet.  

3.             I have not seen any benefit yet from treating grafts with ACell prior to implantation, but it may improve the survival rate of some grafts and some hair.  This will need further evaluation. 
4.                  A combination of ACell and PRP seems to help speed up body hair growth and improve body hair yield in some patients though this needs further evaluation and confirmation.  

Despite these initial findings, it is too early to make any firm decisions regarding ACell with respect to FUE.  While initial findings are impressive, we still need to discover a better deliver method to the extraction sites.    


I remain highly skeptical of all this.  Body hair has taught me to be careful with any predictions with regard to new treatment modalities.  My single criticism of Dr Woods is that he practiced body hair transplantation for many years, but did not reveal that the results were not consistent.  Such a revelation would have been important information to both physicians and patients.  His failure to report this was negligent in my opinion.  If he has a method, which I can not imagine, that results in consistent yields from body hair, then he has an obligation to present such a method.  My first body hair transplants were a great success, but some follow up transplants resulted I poor yields and a poor coverage.  Perhaps a combination of Acell and PRP will improve results, but it is too early to make any predictions based on a limited number of results.  PRP alone does seem to speed the healing of body hair extraction sites including the beard, however.  
 I have no way at this point of determining if the ACell results are simply anecdotal findings.  I need more patient follow up, which is difficult when most of your patients come from out of state.  For this reason, I have been very cautious in my reports on ACell because I know all to well what can happen from irrational exuberance.  All patients with limited donor areas want the Holy Grail.  This is what body hair was supposed to be.  It turned out that it was not.  

*A Review of Dr. Cooley’s Reports on Acell*
I called Dr. Jerry Cooley in September to discuss his results and to relay my experience.  I also published some of my findings in September on the Internet.  Dr. Cooley was very helpful.  My understanding from that conversation was that he noted the strip scars were not as wide when treated with ACell.  Interestingly, he did not mention this in his published Internet presentations, but he did say that it made a good closure better presumably because the scar was softer and easier to excise in follow up strip procedures.  He did state that ACell will not save a bad closure, but fails to note that the majority of strip scars are not ideal, fine lines. Rather they are usually 2 to 3 mm wide with a hairless gap.  This is normal healing and ACell will not prevent or treat it based on his findings.  The bad closures he refers to are simply bad technique.  In other words, if you take out too much tissue such that you are forced to close under excessive tension, the scar will be wider than 5 mm in width. Scars up to 5 mm in width are completely normal and simply reflect the unpredictability of strip scars in terms of width even when closed properly by skilled physicians.  He also relayed that they scars were more normal in consistency (softer) in punch scars and in strip scars.  He did not discuss hair plucking with me during this phone call. 

 I did review Dr. Cooley’s abstract for Boston.  I did not see any results in this manuscript.  I then fastidiously reviewed what he has published on the Internet. I studied all his photographs and presentations carefully on both HTN and Bald Truth.  I also considered his conclusions based on the results he presented.  I would like to express my thoughts with regard to what he has published.  First, I do not feel he has shown that plucked hairs grow better with ACell or without ACell.  He has not shown that plucked hairs that result in growth in the recipient area also regrow in the donor area.  It is impossible to show that the donor area heals better to feel and he has not shown that scars heal better in other regards due to ACell.  He has not shown that transected hairs in a punch wound grow better with ACell.  He has shown that plucked hairs do produce some yield, but we have known this since the Dr. Hitzig presentation in 2004 in New York.  We have also known that plucked hairs don’t always grow and that this method of treatment was never popularized due to the inconsistencies in growth.  He has shown that plucked hairs often result in a finer hair diameter even with ACell treatment.  He has failed to provide conclusive evidence that grafts tainted with ACell result in more “robust” growth.  I do feel he has some evidence that punch biopsy healing is better in the presence of ACell.  In other words, I fail to see any reason for irrational exuberance at this time with regard to “autocloning” as there is no evidence what so a thing occurs or exists.  Furthermore, the yields from plucking hair may indeed be worse than transplanting hair.  We already know the hair is finer so where’s the benefit especially if there is less than 100% regrowth in the donor area and less than 100% yield in the recipient area?   

If Dr. Cooley had wanted to show that plucked hairs treated with ACell resulted in better growth, he should have treated two boxes in a completely bald crown.  One box should have contained ACell treated plucked hairs while the other box should have contained non-treated plucked hairs.  He did not do this.  What he did was treat plucked hairs with ACell and then implant them into hair bearing areas.  The before photographs were over exposed with light, which makes the areas look more bald than they are.  The after photos were less well exposed, which makes them appear to have more hair.   This technique will always make the after photos appear to have more hair.  In addition, because he chose to treat hairy scalps, one must be aware that that styling can make a difference.  Therefore, I feel it is impossible to evaluate any of his plucked hair comparison photographs.  This is not to suggest that there was no growth from the plucked hairs.  Rather it is impossible to discern how much growth there was from the plucked hairs.  Since Dr. Cooley did not perform a comparison study of ACell treated Vs. non-ACell treated plucked hairs, it is impossible to determine whether ACell had any effect on the growth of plucked hair.  This is not to take away from the efforts of Dr. Cooley.  Rather, I wish to attenuate the excitement of patients who are enticed by the unscientific findings of Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig, whose presentations were directed primarily at the lay public. Furthermore, there are other physicians who have irrationally interpreted these results as a major scientific break through similar to cloning when in fact there is no scientific data to support such illogical interpretation by physicians.   

Dr. Cooley stated that his initial study on plucked hair treated with ACell resulted in a 20% yield.  As he became better at plucking hair, his yields increased.  I surmise that he became more adept at plucking intact follicles.  Intact follicles or nearly intact follicles are known to grow in the absence of ACell.  In other words, he has only reported that he is able to improve survival of the plucked follicles through improved technique in plucking.  He has not shown that improved plucking technique and ACell result in a better survival.  Again, he did not evaluate the results of improved plucking with Acell tainting in comparison to improved plucking without Acell.  

Dr. Cooley suggests that ACell will improve the survival of transected follicles.  While I believe this is possible, transected follicles are known to survive in the absence of ACell.  In other words, he has not proven that ACell will improve the survival of transected hairs.  All he has shown is what we already know.  Transected hairs are capable of regeneration.  Whether ACell had any affect on this regeneration, we cannot predict, as he did not set up a study to evaluate the difference in survival rate for transected hair with and without ACell.  

Dr. Cooley suggests that ACell can improve the appearance of strip scars.  He has not proven this.  He does state that strip scars are pink following treatment with ACell due to angiogenesis.  Well, strip scars are always pink following surgery with or without ACell. Moreover, strip scars can stay pink or red indefinitely or permanently without ACell.  Therefore, I don’t have any idea what he is alluding to when he mentions an association between a pink scar following treatment with ACell. Dr. Cooley states that the line of hypopigmentation persists following strip surgery treated with ACell. Therefore, the only benefit appears to be a softer feel to the strip scar.  Well performed strip surgery in the absence of hypertrophic scarring does not result in a palpable or noticeable difference in the donor area. Hence, I have no idea what he is eluding to with regard to a better feel.  In fact, I often have a difficult time finding my strip scars and certainly cannot feel a change in “feel” as I run my fingers through the vast majority of my strip scars.  There is a way to quantitatively assess the hardness of scars treated with ACell, but all Dr. Cooley offers is a subjective assessment that I do not understand with regard to most of my patients. What he needs to do is a force comparison test measuring the Newtons of force required for a sharp instrument to penetrate both the Acell treated and the non-Acell treated scars and then statistically analyze the data.  He did not do this.  Dr. Cooley suggests that ACell can make a poor closure better, but presents no evidence to support this conclusion.  

Dr. Cooley also states that strip scars tend to be wider with tight closures. Taking out a wider strip than the scalp allows does have a propensity toward wider scars.  Never the less, patients with tight scalps and resulting tight closures based on their tight scalps tend to have the finest scars. In other words, as long as you do not over extend the width of your excision in a tight scalp, the scar will tend to be fine.  Loose scalps on the other hand usually close with minimal tension yet such loose scalps are the ones most prone to a wide scar.  This is a basic tenet to strip surgery.  Acell should not have an overall impact on this biologic predisposition.  The suggestion by Dr. Cooley to the lay public is that as long as the physician does not close with tension, a wide scar is not probable.  Such a conclusion is inaccurate on his part as he implies that the width of a strip scar is dependent on physician technique and judgment.  Loose scalps closed under minimal tension are the most prone to a wide strip scar.  Tight scalps closed under acceptable tight tension are least prone to wide strip scars. Certainly, if a physician takes a 2 cm (almost one inch) wide strip when the donor area allows for only 1 cm due to the tightness of the scalp, the patient may form a wider strip scar.  This would be poor physician judgement.  Still a patient with a loose scalp may allow for a 2 cm wide excision that closes under minimal tension, yet the patient may form a wide strip scar. In other words, Dr. Cooley has not expressed all the factors involved in the width of strip scars to the lay public.  Furthermore, Dr. Cooley did not discuss other parameters and their affect on the width of the strip scars in his presentation. For example, he did not discuss the tension of the scalp, the width of his excisions, the use of a double layer closure, or the use of a trichophtic closure.  In essence, his lack of information makes his conclusions worthless to the medical community and misleading to the lay public.   

Dr. Cooley states that ACell in FUE extraction sites improves the healing, but there is no regeneration of hair.  In my experience ACell can improve the healing of a FUE extraction site, regenerate some follicles, and reduce hypopigmentation, but Dr. Cooley has not evaluated FUE extraction sites in his presentation.  He has evaluated 4 and 5 mm punch biopsy sites, which are 4 or more times larger than an FUE extraction site.  In a presentation on the Hair Transplant Network he has taken an approximate 4 mm punch biopsy from the scalp and states that the healing is better with ACell, but there is no regrowth of the hair.  He goes on to state that this is a typical FUE extraction site. This is not true.  No one I am aware of performs FUE with a 4 mm punch.  Frankly, he should retract this statement because it is misleading to the audience it is directed to, the lay public.  FUE has never caused the carnage that resulted from this 4 mm punch biopsy. In attributing such donor damage to FUE, Dr. Cooley’s assessment of the healing of a 4mm punch biopsy site could alarm patients considering FUE because an enormous hairless gap was created in the donor area.  I think he should correct this statement immediately.  How do we know this is a 4 mm punch?  We can only assume, but the punch size is approximately equally to one half the diameter of the black circle.  The black circle is a 0.5 sq cm reticule that fits on a dermlite.  The radius or one half the diameter of this circle is 4 mm.  Thus, the punch is approximately 4 mm in size.  It is far less likely that ACell will regrow hair in a full thickness punch biopsy where all the stem cells, follicles, adipose, dermis, and epidermis are removed, just as it is far less likely that ACell can promote hair growth in a strip scar where a 1 cm or wider full thickness excision of all the stem cells, follicles, adipose, dermis, and epidermis occurs.  In FUE, we are removing only the upper portion of the surrounding tissue.  We are not performing a full thickness extraction.  The inferior portion of the follicles is eased out.   Thus stem cells are left behind.  This is most likely why we see some evidence of regeneration of follicles in the donor area using ACell in FUE extraction sites.  Furthermore, in FUE only a single follicular group is removed unlike the extraction of multiple follicular groups demonstrated by Dr. Cooley.  When you ask Acell to do a little, it can.  When you ask it to do more than it is capable of, Acell will not.  You can regrow the tip of your thumb, but you are not going to regrow an arm amputated at the elbow with Acell. Similarly with Acell, you might regrow a single follicular group extracted with a 1 mm minimally invasive FUE punch technique such as I practice, but you are not likely to regrow multiple follicular groups extracted via a full thickness skin biopsy using a 4 mm punch that harvests up to 15 follicular groups collectively at one time.  

Dr. Cooley has shown a reduction in the hypopigmentation that is characteristic with 4mm punch grafts or biopsies. He has demonstrated that Acell may improve the appearance in these biopsies.  My findings suggest that Acell improves the healing of FUE extraction sites.  Both Dr. Cooley’s 4 and 5 mm wide full thickness skin biopsies, as well as, my evaluations of FUE minimally invasive extraction site healing lack statistically significant data to support their findings.  Never the less, they are corroborative findings in that hypopigmentation is reduced and the resulting scar is more normal in appearance.  Both need more thorough study, however the cumulative data is positive.

Dr. Cooley also states that the plucked hairs are finer in diameter.  In other words, they will not cover as well as transplanted hairs that are thicker in diameter. Plucked hairs will more resemble body hair in their potential coverage as body hair tends to be finer.  The only reason to consider plucked hair is if it were to increase the potential donor area hair.  Has Dr. Cooley shown that successfully plucked hairs that grow in the recipient area also grow back in the donor area?  No, he has not.  In fact his one example of donor regrowth was on one of his staff members, a female who wanted eyebrows.  How many hairs did he pluck for an eyebrow hair transplant?  I did not see many grafts in his example, but lets assume it required 200 hairs in total, as this appears reasonable given Dr. Cooley’s presentation.  The growth was quite good though and I think it was the most impressive example of plucked hair growth that he presented.  It still does not mean that Acell had any influence on the growth.  The improved growth might have been due to improved plucking (intact scalp hairs are easier to pluck than intact beard hairs).  Unfortunately, we still do not know if the growth was better due to improved plucking technique or treatment with ACell prior to insertion of the plucked hair.  We do know that plucked hair will grow in the absence of ACell as Dr. Hitzig demonstrated as far back as 2000.  In the donor comparison shots for this female, Dr. Cooley shows an area at the top of the right ear and behind it.  The photograph is so over exposed that they woman’s hair appears blonde. The entire region appears to be void of hair.  In the center of this circle of hairlessness, is a needle holder that obscures the view of the central plucked region.  When I first examined this photograph, my assumption was that the patient would have been upset to have so much hair plucked because it left a large bald area.  Closer evaluation shows that the area really looks fully plucked only due to overexposure by the camera settings (F stop and ISO) and lighting rather than due to plucking hair.  The follow up photo shows a woman with brown hair (as opposed to blonde hair) because the photograph is not over exposed. The region in the donor area that is depicted is above the area that was plucked.  The two areas are entirely different regions in the donor area. Yet, we are to believe that the hair that was plucked grew back.  Suppose that you pluck 200 hairs to transplant to the eyebrows.  Do you honestly think you could identify the identical 200 hairs you plucked a year later so that you could verify that they grew back?  Absolutely not! In other words, Dr. Cooley has not demonstrated that successfully plucked hairs that grow finer in the recipient area have the capacity to also regrow in the donor area.  In other words, there is no demonstrated benefit from plucking hair.  You may only deplete your donor area in an effort to grow finer hair in the recipient area. The whole concept of autocloning is merely an aberration or a slight of hand based on photographic manipulation. 

With regard to beard hair, I have evaluated Dr. Cooley’s photographs closely.  Only a single hair in all his examples resembles a typical beard hair graft.  The remaining examples have fine and straight hair.  These are not typical for beard hairs and cause concern on my part as I have considerable experience grafting beard hair. Beard hair grafts tend to grow wavy and the hair is much coarser than scalp hair.  If you put a beard hair graft beside a single scalp hair graft, you would see that beard hair is about twice the diameter of a scalp hair. Furthermore, the grafted beard hair wave or curl is quite distinguishable from finer straight grafted scalp hair even when the hair is wet.  When I compare the beard hair side of Dr. Cooley’s photographs to his scalp hair side in the same patient, I do not see any difference in the quality of hair.  As such I can conclude only three possibilities.  One is that the beard hair he transplanted lacked the normal characteristics of scalp hair, which is unlikely as he presented several examples that lacked the typical appearance of beard hair. The second is that plucking results in a modification of beard hair such that it is finer and lacks the characteristic curl or wave.  In this scenario the beard hair would produce less coverage than a typical beard hair graft.  The final possibility is that the beard hair did not grow at all. Regardless of the possibility, it is clear that plucked beard hair does not cover as well as transplanted beard hair. Furthermore, there is no evidence that a plucked beard hair grows back at an acceptable yield. Dr. Cooley did present one patient with a bald vertex who grew a single beard hair.  This would have been his best option to show that Acell had an impact on plucked hair survival.  He also could have demonstrated the survival rate for both beard and scalp hair with and without Acell.  Instead, all he did was biopsy the single beard hair that he depicted to show that a transplanted hair has a normal expected histological structure, which one would expect of any transplanted hair.  It is a shame that he missed the opportunity to present more valuable information with this patient. One note for Dr. Cooley is that the non-growing beard hairs are foreign bodies.  He needs to remove these as they will ultimately lead to cyst formation and can affect the yield of his transplant.   These are dead hairs and need to be removed. There is no reason to wait for a growing hair to expel these dead hair, foreign bodies.  These dead “whisker hairs” are potentially damaging to the transplant so Dr. Cooley needs to remove them as opposed to be intrigued by them.  

Finally, Dr. Cooley suggests that grafts treated with ACell result in more “robust” growth. He presented two examples.   One appeared to have no hair loss and the follow up photograph after one year simply presented a different styling option along with roots that needed bleaching.  The second example was of a gentleman who got a result consistent with the number of grafts transplanted.  The before photos were with wet hair.  The after photos were with dry hair.  The before photos had the hair styled back to conceal a balding crown and expose loss in the front.  The after photos had the hair combed forward, which exposed a balding crown and made the front look thicker.  The overall result was consistent with the number of grafts placed.  Moreover, the patient entered into the procedure with a retained frontal hairline and a retained frontal forelock, which always make amy result look better than it would had he started with no pre-existing hair on the frontal hair line.  There was also a consideral amount of pre-existing hair in the entire grafted area, which is additive to any hair transplant result.  His follow up comparison showed nothing to suggest more “robust” growth of the grafts.  

*In final summary,* 

1.            There is evidence that ACell improves FUE healing and full thickness 4 mm punch graft healing in terms of skin color.

2.            There is evidence that ACell can regenerate hair in FUE extraction sites, but more work is necessary to insure this is not an isolated anecdotal occurrence.  

3.            There is no evidence that ACell improves the growth of plucked hair.

4.            There is no evidence that ACell makes the growth of transplanted hair more “Robust”.

5.            There is no evidence that ACell improves strip scar appearance.

6.            There is qualitative evidence that ACell improves the feel of a strip scar in some instances, but it is difficult to understand how Dr. Cooley arrived at this conclusion .

7.            There is no evidence that ACell induces transected hairs to regrow, but it might.

8.            There is no evidence that plucked hairs regrow in the donor area, but they might.

9.            There is evidence that plucked hairs will grow finer and result is poorer coverage than transplanted hair.  
10.                  There is no evidence to conclude that “autocloning” occurs.  

*What Can We Expect from the Use of Acell with Plucked Hair?*

There currently is irrational exuberance with regard to ACell.  We need some real scientific data to support the benefits. In the interim, patients need to exercise caution with regard to plucking hair and the use of ACell. Such efforts may not result in more hair and may even jeopardize the potential coverage you can get by reducing the diameter of the hair shafts and reducing the regrowth of follicles in the donor area.  IN OTHER WORDS YOU COULD BE IN WORSE SHAPE BECAUSE YOU UNDERWENT A PLUCKED HAIR SESSION OF “AUTOCLONING” USING ACELL.  There are no studies yet to document the yield you can expect from plucking hair in the recipient area and no studies to show that it is safe to the hairs that are plucked from the donor area.  Until Drs. Cooley and Hitzig can produce more scientific and statistically conclusive data, patients should proceed with caution with regard to plucking hair.  My recommendation is that they avoid the plucking session with or without Acell altogether.

Now that I’ve discussed the scientific conclusions one may draw from the use of Acell, we should consider the limited probability that a successfully plucked hair will regrow in it’s donor region. Recall that Dr. Cooley stated his initial plucked hair success rate was only 20%.  He noted an improvement in his yield as he improved his plucking skills.  He also demonstrated the difference between a good plucked hair and a poor plucked hair. Essentially, a good plucked hair encompasses the entire follicle with the exception of 1/6th of the external internal (lower) portion of a follicle.  The plucked hair is almost a completely intact follicle. What remain behind in the donor area are the lowest portion of the external root sheath, a very thin sheet of the internal root sheath adherent to the external root sheath, and the dermal papilla. At best only 1/6th of the entire follicle remains behind the donor area.  With “autocloning” the nearly intact follicle is tainted with Acell.  The residual tiny fragment of the follicle that remains in the donor area is not treated with anything other than nature’s magic wand.  Why would anyone think that this tiny residual fragment of the follicle would result in nearly 100% regrowth?  Perhaps if they treated the donor area with Acell, as well, we might see an improvement in the yield.  Unfortunately, Dr. Cooley has already shown that plucked hairs that regrow in the recipient area are finer than transplanted hairs and finer than the original hair.  The most important factor in terms of coverage is the diameter of the hair because diameter has an exponential affect on coverage. Consider that doubling the diameter of a hair quadruples the volume a hair provides at any length of growth. Halving the diameter reduces the volume to 1/4th of the donor hair. Doubling the number of hairs grafted simply doubles the volume of coverage.  Thus, the last thing we want to do is reduce diameter except on in some instances on the hairline or specialty grafting such as the temple points because coverage is adversely affected in an exponential manner.  

Now let’s turn our attention to the data with transected single hair grafts obtained by FUE and their growth in the recipient area, as well as their regrowth in the donor area.  Suppose you transect a follicle at the lower 2/3 such that you transplant the upper 2/3 and leave the lower 1/3 in the donor area.  The growth rate of the transplanted upper 2/3 without Acell would be 41.3% with a range of 33.3-53.3%.  The growth rate of the lower 1/3 would be 53.3% with a range of 46.6-80%.  In hair plucking you are removing more than 3/4ths of an intact follicle. You are leaving behind only the lower 1/6th of the ectodermal portion of the follicular sheath and the dermal papilla.  In other words, you have at least a 41.3% chance of regrowth of the transplanted portion without Acell. With Acell tainting you might increase this yield, but the hair would grow in finer and may lack curl or wave.  Transection at the lower 1/3rd will result in a yield of 53.3%. With plucking however, you are not leaving all the cellular components of the lower 1/3rd. Rather, you are leaving only the lower 1/6th  of the external root sheath and the dermal papilla and you are not adding Acell to the donor area.  In other words, you should have less than a 53.3% chance of regrowth of hair in the donor area.  Why do I say less than a 53.3% probablility?  Simply because survival of a single hair scalp follicle in the donor area decreases as you reduce the residual fraction of an amputated hair follicle, which is based on this same single hair transection study in FUE.  If you leave a residual lower 2/3rds of the follicle in the donor area the survival rate is 84% (range 66.6-93.3%).  If you leave the lower &#189; of the follicle in the donor area, the survival rate of the lower &#189; is 68% (range 53.3-86.6%).  Again, if you leave the lower 1/3rd of the follicle in the donor area, the survival rate of the lower 1/3rd is only 53.3% (range 46.6-80%).  With plucking you are leaving only the lower 1/6th of the external root sheath, a tiny layer of adherent internal root sheath, and the dermal papilla.  This suggests that you might regrow a fraction of the plucked hairs (perhaps only 50% of the plucked hair) and what regrows in the recipient area will be finer.  You also might regrow at best 50% of the donor hair and it might be finer too.  Alternatively, in the donor area you might regrow far less of the hair that was plucked from the donor area.  With beard hair, Dr. Cooley has suggested that the yield of plucked hair is less than with scalp hair and what grows is finer.  We might assume from this finding that the yield of regrowth in the beard donor area is even less than the yield of scalp hair in the donor area.  
Suppose you pluck 100 hairs, taint them with Acell, and transplant them to your totally bald recipient area.  You could expect approximately 50 or more finer hairs to grow in the recipient area.  You also might expect fewer than 50 finer hairs to regrow in the donor area where no Acell is applied.  You very well could wind up with 50 finer hairs in the recipient area and 40 finer hairs in the donor area.  Of course you very well could wind up with a much lower yield in the donor area as so little formative tissue remained in the donor area.  In essence you might expect to have no more the same number of hairs as you started with (100) with &#189; in the bald recipient area and less than &#189; in the donor area.  Unfortunately, you could expect that all remaining hairs would be finer.  As such, you would be worse off than had you done nothing what so ever because the remaining hair would be finer.  Since you might not even regrow 50% in the donor area in, you would be much worse off than had you practiced traditional FUE or strip surgery.  

Beard hair obtained by FUE heals remarkably well with little evidence of extraction when proper technique is followed. Beard hair transplanted to the scalp from FUE has a mean survival rate of about 60% though higher and lower yields are possible.  Therefore, you are more likely far better off to obtain beard hair from FUE than from plucking beard hair because the survival rate is acceptable and because the quality of the hair is far better than is possible from plucking. Of course tainting beard hair obtained by FUE with Acell and pre-treating the recipient area with PRP might improve the survival rate of beard hair.  This is something that should be studied.  In addition, the healing along with the potential for regeneration of the donor hair by adding Acell to the extraction sites seems to make this modality a far superior route.  

The physicians who are enamored with plucked hair tainted with Acell are the same ones who have worried about the survival rate of “skeletonized” follicles obtained by FUE.  What they fail to recognize is that there are minimal requirements for follicle growth.  This includes an intact dermal sheath surrounding the follicle.  FUE grafts are not skeletonized follicles. They are the components required to produce a hair follicle. Surrounding adipose that is present from strip surgery only adds to the volume of tissue that is extracted from the donor area and the volume of tissue implanted in the recipient area.  This adipose adds nothing to the potential for follicle regrowth.  With “autocloning” you are disassembling the follicle such that it not longer has the minimal requirements for growth and praying that Acell will make up the difference. What is left in the donor area is a mere fragment of the original follicle, yet these FUE skeptics feels this tiny residual fragment will routinely regrow hair in the donor area. Their conclusions defy logic. My suggestion for those considering “autocloning” is for them to proceed with caution at this point.  I would not have more than 500 grafts placed in the initial procedure.  Then you should evaluate the results both in terms of your expectations and those expectations of your physician twelve months later.  Only if you are both happy with the results, should you enter into a follow-up procedure of “autoclonning”.  My personal feeling is that “autoclonning” will result in unacceptable results, however.  I hope I am incorrect in this assumption, but logic and experience dictate that my predictions are accurate.

----------


## wolvie1985

Hahahahahaha. With respect, please take your infamous ego and sour grapes somewhere else, doctor. 

Rather than try to help advance the science of using plucked hairs with ACell yourself, you have chosen to sit in the backseat and criticize the driving of others without having taken the wheel yourself. Your 'experience and knowledge' is based on old methods and science that predates the application of ACell to plucked hairs, or combining the ACell with arterial blood. 

You say: "With “autocloning” you are disassembling the follicle such that it not longer has the minimal requirements for growth and praying that Acell will make up the difference. What is left in the donor area is a mere fragment of the original follicle, yet these FUE skeptics feels this tiny residual fragment will routinely regrow hair in the donor area."

First of all, what is left in the donor is the follicle that has simply been plucked. Not a fragment. Unless you know something that the entire hair removal industry has yet to discover, plucked hairs grow back. Ask any woman who has had a brazillian. 

Secondly, no need to 'pray' that Acell makes up the difference. It DOES. Cooley and Hitzig have DONE IT. And they say it works and have proven it works. You have not even tried their methods, and yet you think you are entitled to say they are wrong. 

You also suggest that the Acell hairs that grow in the recipient area are thinner than regular hairs. Cooley and Hitzig have never said this. 

CIT is the new laserdisc. Please deal with it instead of crapping all over your colleagues' ingenuity and courage.

----------


## tbtadmin

> Hahahahahaha. With respect, please take your infamous ego and sour grapes somewhere else, doctor. 
> 
> Rather than try to help advance the science of using plucked hairs with ACell yourself, you have chosen to sit in the backseat and criticize the driving of others without having taken the wheel yourself. Your 'experience and knowledge' is based on old methods and science that predates the application of ACell to plucked hairs, or combining the ACell with arterial blood. 
> 
> You say: "With autocloning you are disassembling the follicle such that it not longer has the minimal requirements for growth and praying that Acell will make up the difference. What is left in the donor area is a mere fragment of the original follicle, yet these FUE skeptics feels this tiny residual fragment will routinely regrow hair in the donor area."
> 
> First of all, what is left in the donor is the follicle that has simply been plucked. Not a fragment. Unless you know something that the entire hair removal industry has yet to discover, plucked hairs grow back. Ask any woman who has had a brazillian. 
> 
> Secondly, no need to 'pray' that Acell makes up the difference. It DOES. Cooley and Hitzig have DONE IT. And they say it works and have proven it works. You have not even tried their methods, and yet you think you are entitled to say they are wrong. 
> ...


 We understand that this is a very passionate topic, and all opinions are certainly welcome, however, we ask that our forum users post all commentary in a respectful manner.

Thank you.

----------


## wolvie1985

You're right. I apologize for the tone. But I stand by the substance of my comments.

----------


## Westonci

Im also wondering where dr Cole got his info from regarding the "supposed" plucked scalp hairs being thinner than normal scalp hair. Im sure that Doctor Rassman or Doctor Bernstein as well as others who attended the ISHRS meeting in Boston and spoke with Jerry Cooley would have heard about it and mentioned it in their analysis, but they have not heard of this yet.

----------


## Winston

I think its good to have a balanced perspective and not to over hype any of these new breakthroughs, but in my mind there is only minor scientific data coming from either side of this discussion. So far we have some decent data coming form Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig, and more of an opinion, based of his observations, coming from Dr. Cole. I guess only time will tell.

----------


## Bakez

Unfortuntely, what Dr Cole has posted is what I suspected. Obviously he has backed it up, but just based on pure logic I feel as though this won't work, and I sort of doubt that 'A-Cell' even does anything at all - is there actually any proper evidence at all that is has been used anywhere succesfully?

----------


## wolvie1985

"The whole concept of autocloning is merely an aberration or a slight of hand based on photographic manipulation."

The only thing manipulative is Dr. Cole's manifesto which I suggest is designed to undermine this massive advancement and slow down the massive stampede away from his own techniques. I'm sorry, it's hard to standby and let this go unchallenged. 

Dr. Cole: tell us where and when Dr. Cooley told you that the autocloned hairs grow back thinner. That is a very serious claim and needs to be substantiated. 

Either confirm this claim or apologize for this misinformation.

----------


## CIT_Girl

Wolvie1985, Dr. Cole does not have a whole lot of extra time to check-up on the forums but I think I can answer that question for you.

If you look at the 4th in the series of Dr. Cooley's video presentations http://www.iahrs.org/news/dr-jerry-c...tion-part-3-4/, around 6:40, he shows a photo of a combination of FUE and plucked grafts and says verbatim "If you look at the photograph on the left, the close-up photograph, some of those thicker hairs are the FUE grafts and then some of the finer hairs within it are the plucked hair grafts".  

Plucked hairs are essentially transected follicles and though transected follicles can grow when transplanted (as long as they are nearly intact), the resulting hair will generally grow in finer due to the damage.  Despite all the hype over 'autocloning', there is nothing truly novel about this.

----------


## wolvie1985

Dr. Cole has manipulated this section of the presentation. Those hairs were finer because they were just starting to grow in - like all transplanted hairs do. Dr. Cooley has confirmed repeatedly that those fine hairs mature into normal thickness and that 'you cannot tell the difference between an autocloned hair and a regular one'. Dr. Cole should have done some further research into the matter, or further discussed his 'concern' with Dr. Cooley, rather than cherrypicking a slide and twisting it to suit his agenda. Your contention that there is nothing novel about this is both hilarious and disturbing.

----------


## Gubter_87

CIT_Girl:

Okay so if we all agree that plucked hairs can actually form functional follicles in rare cases.
Wouldn't you agree that if A-cell can be used to raise the rate of success to about 75 &#37;, that it would definately be a major breakthrough.

I am 23 and am about NW4, with thinning in a NW6-7 pattern, not the average ideal candidate for a traditional hair transplant. 

However if plucked hairs can be used (even if they grew in thinner than regular hairs, which is something that Dr. Cooley does not seem to have observed) maybe even in conjunction with a regular transplant - that could change everything especially for all the young balding guys out there.

----------


## CIT_Girl

Gubter_87, I didn't mean to come across as flippant about the potential that this could be an amazing breakthrough for hair loss sufferers- I personally would love that as  much as anyone.  I just don't have my hopes up, with the evidence that has been presented so far, that this will be THE answer to everyone's prayers.  By saying there was nothing 'novel', I meant in the notion that transacted follicles (plucked hairs) can regrow.  We'll have to see side-by-side studies (on a bald head) to know for sure whether ACell actually has the ability to affect the survival rate of plucked hair.  Further studies (or explanation from Dr. Cooley) are also needed- for example, to determine what constitutes a viable plucked hair: how much of the formative tissue must be left behind to achieve regrowth in the donor area and how much must be removed to actually get it to grow in the recipient area?- before people get too emotionally invested in this 'breakthrough'.

----------


## Gubter_87

Unless Dr. Cooley is lieing, he has been able to achieve a survival rate of 75 &#37; for plucked hairs. If it is because of A-cell (which is probable) then great. However if this has nothing do to with the use of a-cell, and the good succes rate is just because of Dr. Cooleys plucking technique - then even better! I don't really see the issue.

Fact is if Dr. Cooley technique achieves these results - it is a major breakthrough for hair loss sufferers as it greatly increases the donor making it basically infinite.

Sure - we need to see more evidence. But I see no reason to doubt Dr. Cooleys initial findings as he is a reputable hair loss suregon.

----------


## ejj

just my opinion , if i only got 75% growth i would be pretty upset !
regards 
ejj

----------


## meridius

> just my opinion , if i only got 75% growth i would be pretty upset !
> regards 
> ejj


 Really? I would be thrilled if I got 75% growth from plucked hairs. That would be much more valuable than 100% growth from FUE or strip because the donor reserve would still be intact. 

As long as the vast majority of the plucked hairs grow back which they should, I really cannot see a reason to be this dismissive of the new approach. 

And I certainly cannot understand how someone can justify that it is okay for the donor hairs to be taken out in FUE not to grow back ever again in the donor area, and then make such a big deal about the plucked hairs coming back weaker. Is it because the survival rate is higher for FUE? What if this new method comes close or even better catches up with it? Given that it already achieves 50-75% despite being so new, why not?

----------


## wolvie1985

The autocloned hair does not come back weaker. A simple email or phonecall to Dr. Cooley's office would confirm this. The donor grows back and the recipient grows in approx. 75% of the time. These are the facts that Dr. Cole is trying so desperately to muddy.

----------


## Winston

I don't know why you guys are so up in arms about Dr. Coles post, its simply his point of view. It doesn't change the fact that Dr. Cooley is still experimenting with Acell and it doesn't change what Dr. Cooley believes about its effectiveness. Time will tell if this is the breakthrough that we have all been hoping for.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> I don't know why you guys are so up in arms about Dr. Coles post,* its simply his point of view*. It doesn't change the fact that Dr. Cooley is still experimenting with Acell and it doesn't change what Dr. Cooley believes about its effectiveness. Time will tell if this is the breakthrough that we have all been hoping for.


 Just for instance: A comment like that 




> He did not discuss hair plucking with me during this phone call.  *He did relate his own personal experience by having his nurse punch into his scalp* in an ACell treated area of scar and a non-ACell treated area.  He said the punch crunched into the non-ACell scar site while it slid softly into the ACell scar site without making a characteristic crunching noise that is audible to the patient.  The ISHRS has issued a position paper.  The position paper clearly states that it is the opinion of the ISHRS that only licensed physicians should be punching into the scalp or performing FUE.  This is simply food for thought as Dr. Cooley is now the ISHRS president.


  has absolutely NOTHING to do with its simply his point of view. Absolutely nothing!

By the way: Dr. Cole is talking here (quote/comment) about this subject:

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=3528

But here Im talking about that subject  the ISHRS called it unprofessionally cat fight:

http://www.ishrs.org/articles/position-1.htm

----------


## HairRobinHood

> But here Im talking about that subject  the ISHRS called it unprofessionally cat fight:
> 
> http://www.ishrs.org/articles/position-1.htm


 "This is simply food for thought", Mr. Cole!

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

New grafts do tend to grow in finer initially, but often take on a thicker diameter as they mature.  I would expect a similar course with plucked hair.  Weve had enough time to evaluate hair diameter, but like much of the material Dr. Cooley has presented, he has not taken enough time to draw any conclusions with respect to diameter, and he has not assessed diameter in a scientific manner.  Dr. Cooley has not presented any evidence that plucked hairs are as coarse as the donor hair.  In fact, one of the few comparison hes made at all is the scalp plucks to  the beard plucks.   Here the beard plucks were much finer than traditional beard hair and as fine as the scalp hair plucks.  This simply does not occur based on my considerable experience grafting beard hair.   In other words, the direct comparison photographs clearly show a finer nature to plucked beard hair grafts.  Measuring hair shaft diameter requires specialized equipment if you are going to get reliable results.  I own it and would be more than happy to assist Dr. Cooley in a scientific study that evaluated hair shaft diameter.  Thus, far, however, Dr. Cooley has presented no scientific evidence that indicates that plucked hairs typically grow in as coarse as the donor hair source.  What he has done is say that plucked hairs grow in finer than FUE hair.  If he wants to alter this statement, he would need to provide me with scientific evidence that supports his conclusions.  

Many of the results depicted were in their infancy.  If something changes in their appearance over time, I would be the first to accept this as an improvement in the technique, but there still would be a complete lack of scientific data. In the mean time, we have direct comparison of grafts obtained by FUE and grafts obtained by plucking.  In Dr. Cooleys own words, the FUE hairs were thicker than the plucked hairs. If the grafts were placed at the same time, then you would expect them to be on a similar maturation schedule.  We can leave it to Dr. Cooley to follow his results and evaluate the diameters over time.  He can then report them.  His goal should be to measure the diameters before transplantation and then again after transplantation.  I do not know if he has the equipment to perform this study in his office, but as I stated, I have it in mine.  

What is missing from all these presentations is reputable science.  Ill discuss this as it relates to autocloning.  

    1.  A study must include an introduction, methods, results, and a discussion.  The conclusions in the discussion should be based on the results and they should answer the questions you create when you design the study.  When you start the study, you must determine what you want to prove.  Then you must design a method that will allow you to gather results that will support or disprove your hypothesis.  Both Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig skipped the methods, presented unconvincing results, and came to conclusions that were not supported by their results.  Their entire effort was flawed from the beginning due to poor scientific method.   

There is no direct comparison of plucked hairs treated with Acell and plucked hairs untreated with Acell in a bald crown.  Therefore, not only do we have no idea whether Acell impacted the growth of viable plucked hairs, we also do not know if Acell alone impacted the growth because the grafts were predominately place in hair bearing zones.  Isnt possible that Acell alone induced growth? One must isolate variables if they want to evaluate them individually.
There is no evidence that hairs plucked from the donor area regrow in the donor area.  In order to have cloning, you need to create more than one hair.  Not only have the physicians failed to verify this, we have no evidence what so ever that a single hair re-grew in the donor area.  Am I the only one who finds this comical?  From my perspective I see the advocates eulogize their logic this way.  They plucked some hair, put some Acell on it, put the pluck in the recipient area, showed them some growth, and told them it grew back in the donor area.  Theyll be too trusting or too stupid to ask Dr. Cooley to show them the proof because of the physicians reputation.  Sure theyll have to pluck 200 hairs to get 80 that grow, but who cares.  Lets toss in the word cloning and theyll be so excited that they wont care that they did not follow a scientific method or prove a single point they made.  Bernie Madoff would have loved some guys who swallowed this stupid pill.  You might still be able to invest money with Intercytex too.  Even body hair works better than their potions, but some people simply become delusional when they hear the words, hair multiplication or cloning.  
What are the methods.  You cant have a study without first defining the methods.  This includes the technique you use to pluck a hair and what constitutes a viable plucked hair.  How are you going to verify that a plucked hair actually regrows in both the recipient area and the donor area?  How are you going to identify the plucked hair in the donor area.  Suppose you have a two hair follicular unit and one hair is resting in the exodus stage.  All you see is a single hair.  You pluck it.  You come back 3 months later and see a hair.  Was that the hair you plucked or the hair that was in the exodus stage.  

Other questions Id like answered would be the yield.  You cant simply throw out a number and say, I wish I knew the specific number, but I think it is 75%.  Thats not science.  Furthermore, some cases might have good yields and some might have poor yields.  I learned this the hard way with body hair.  The same could occur with plucked hair.  How many plucked hairs survive with Acell and how many survive without it.  If you pluck 100 hairs, how many will regrow in the donor area and in the recipient area.  How many hairs do you have to pluck in order to get 100 viable hairs.  Do we need to pluck 500 hairs to get 100 that are viable plucked hairs?  What happens to the non-viable plucks.  What percentage of these non-viable plucks survive in the donor area?  Sure we know that plucked hairs can grow back, but we also know that they do not always grow back.  Why do women often need eyebrow transplants?  Their plucked hairs did not always grow back!  Why do people with a compulsion to pluck their hair, trichotillomania, often present for hair transplants?  Their plucked hairs did not always regrow.  Dont mislead yourself.  Plucked hairs do not always regrow!

Here is another example of an unscientific study that lacked methods designed to evaluate a hypothesis.  With regard to scar width, Dr. Cooley presented one example of a 2 cm wide scar that resulted from another physician.  The other physician excised the scar once more and it returned to a 2 cm wide scar.  Then Dr. Cooley excised the scar and added Acell.  The resulting scar was 6 to 7 mm at 4 months with Acell.  The plan was to excise the scar again and hope for an even finer result due to the affects of Acell.   My comments are as follows:  An acceptable width for a strip scar is 0.5mm to 5 mm.  A strip scar that is 2 cm wide is the result of poor physician technique, it is iatrogenic.  Dr. Cooley feels that the reduction in the width of the scar to 6 to 7 mm in his hands was due to Acell because the original physicians attempt at revision failed and produced another 2 cm wide scar.  There are multiple factors that can affect the width of a scar revision.  In 1993 I began closing my revisions in two layers.  In almost all instances, the width of the scar decreased by 50% or more.  With every scar revision that Ive done, Ive told patients that the scar may resume its original width, be wider, or finer.  Usually they are 50% their original diameter or less.  In fact, I have never revised a scar left by another physician that did not reduce in diameter though I tell every patient the scar could be the same width or wider.  The point is that there are multiple factors that can affect the width of a scar other than Acell.  If you dont know the technique used by another physician, you cant compare your technique to that of the other physician.  Examination of a strip scar that was 2 cm in diameter immediately tells me that the other physician did not use excellent technique.  Thus you cant compare the two scar widths based on Acell alone.  Furthermore, I can tell from the photos that the revision performed by Dr. Cooley was in multilple layers.  Otherwise, the wound would have been much wider than 2 cm rather than finer when he was placing the ACell.  Might the use of two layers alone have decreased the scar diameter?  Of course.   In addition, some physicians attempt to get additional grafts out with a revision.  Perhaps rather than excising the scar alone, the original physician excised more than 2 cm and put unacceptable tension on the wound at closure.  In other words, we dont have enough information to make a determination if Acell improved this scar.  Closing one side with Acell and the other without Acell using the same method of closure other than Acell would have given us an idea, but we would have required a minimum of 6 months to make the initial observation.  Once again, no methods were mentioned and no comparison was performed.  The methods were not designed properly to evaluate the hypothesis.  We cant evaluate this result.  Never the less, Dr. Cooley drew the conclusion that Acell improved the width of the scar even though the results did not verify the conclusion.  All we can do is be happy for the patient as the scar is finer.  This too is an immature result, however.  Scars do not begin to widen until the 3rd month usually.  When they do widen, they continue widening out to the 6th month.  We need to wait until at least 6 months to evaluate the results of this closure.  

As an example suppose I want to reduce blood pressure.  I could surmise that the sugar in the gum a patient chews is elevating blood pressure because it has more calories, elevating his weight, and increasing resistance on his vasculature.  Therefore, I start my patient on sugarless gum and 6 months later we find that his blood pressure drops from 160/110 to 140/80.  We then present our findings and conclude that sugarless gum lowers blood pressure because it has fewer calories.  What we failed to disclose was that we also routinely put our hypertensive patients on a 1800 calorie per day diet and hire a personal trainer for each patient.  Would the drop in pressure be the same without the diet and exercise?  Who knows, but we certainly cant attribute it strictly to sugarless gum once we know all the variables that were not disclosed in the study.  The only way to evaluate a single variable is to isolate it and study it under a strict scientific methods.  The lack of a scientific method is exactly what we find in all these examples.  There are no independent variables.  Without isolating the variables we cannot evaluate them.  

I can go back to every example that Dr. Cooley presented and show a disconnect between the results and the conclusions based on a lack of scientific method.  The presentation is interesting and nothing more.  The conclusions are humorous.  

In the mean time there is no evidence that autoclonging exists.  If it did, I would expect Dr. Cooley to cease performing strip surgery altogether and simply pluck hair.  I suspect he is a long way from that point as there are simply too many unanswered questions.  The most important question is whether anything grows back in the donor area when you take an almost completely intact follicle or of the donor area.  What we do with FUE is take out completely intact follicles.  In the absence of Acell, they do not grow back in the donor area.  In the absence Acell an almost completely intact follicle has about as much chance of regrowing in the donor area as a fully intact follicle.  One question he is seeking is whether these nearly intact follicles that would have grown without Acell might not regrow the next cycle.  They will follow the same cycle as a fully intact follicle most likely.  Im not sure he understands exactly what he is doing, which is transplanting nearly intact follicles.  Acell might improve survival in the recipient area of nearly intact follicles, but Acell is not going to affect the life cycle of a nearly intact follicle, because it is essentialy a normal transected follicle that grew on transplantation and will continue cycling most likely.  There is no magic here.  

Now, wolvie, let me make something clear to you.  There is no scientific data to prove a single conclusion you allude to.  There is no evidence that the plucked hairs grow back at the same diameter as they were in the donor area.   There is absolutely no evidence what so ever that anything similar to autoclonning occurs.  Dr. Cooley performed no survival studies so there is no evidence that the survival rate is 75%.  You seem to have a great deal of difficulty connecting the dots.   Read my lips...Dr. Cooley presented no data what so ever to indicate that even a single viable plucked hair grew in both the donor area and the recipient area.  I have no idea what your agenda is, but your conclusions are simply a leap of logic or hallucination.  We all want to believe hair plucking works including myself, but no one can draw scientific conclusions based on faulty studies.  Now, if you want to pull the Dr. Cooley card on me, feel free to have him give me a call or debate me on a forum.  Were not enemies or competitors.  Were colleagues who are both interested in making lives better.  I welcome evidence that refutes my position simply because it will improve the possibilities for all individuals with hair loss.  If it does not pan out, however, the impact on the finite donor area would be deleterious.  Dont count me to be on the bridge of that ship.  In other words, show me the science.  

Suffice it to say that if he is proven accurate, we are all going to stop traditional harvesting methods and start plucking hair.  The aesthetic benefits are as valuable as the potential for an unlimited donor supply.  There are about 100,000 hair transplants in the USA each year and the majority of them will be plucked hair.  They will certainly benefit from technology that expands their donor area while minimizing scar formation.  Until then, patients should proceed slowly with this technology.  I think 200 plucked hair is a good number for a procedure at this time.  We need conclusive science before anyone becomes more aggressive with this technology.

----------


## mlao

It's good to hear both sides of the conversation. I think we should sit back and wait for more results from Doctors Cooley and Hitzig. In addition lets see how the studies that Doctors Bernstein and Rassman are entering into go. I had a consult with Dr. Bernstein once and he seemed to be a very pragmatic individual so I'm pretty sure if he sees promise in the procedure he will say so.
Until then I will keep on my meds.

----------


## gmonasco

Realistically, this scenario is exactly what you want to see when it comes to medical breakthroughs: researchers who are testing out a new treatment to see if it has potential, and skeptics who are asking the tough questions about whether (and how well) that treatment is actually working.

----------


## Jerry Cooley, MD

I thank Dr Cole for his interest in our work.  As Ive stressed repeatedly, my work consists of preliminary anecdotal observations about the use of ACell in hair restoration surgery.  Of course it would be nice to have large clinical studies with control groups which would provide a higher level of proof.  Any physician who has participated in formal clinical studies knows the difficulty and complexity involved in such work.  These are especially difficult with hair restoration surgery, and there are almost no such studies done in our field.  The bulk of what we do has developed over time based on the anecdotal observations of forward thinking surgeons who went on to share these results with their peers.  

With a product like ACell that is entirely new to our field, most physicians would be lost as to where to begin looking at possible applications within the spectrum of hair restoration procedures.  Hopefully our work will provide a starting point for others to do controlled studies.   Im glad Dr. Cole is now working with ACell and is able to share his anecdotal observations with us.  That is how progress occurs in our field.

In reference to autocloning, our work continues.  As each new patient comes in for followup with positive results, I become more excited about the future of this procedure.   None of our patients have complained of thinning in the areas that were plucked, and none of my test sites with plucked hair without ACell subsequently grew hair.  Dr. Cole is right that occasionally Dr. Hitzig had success with plucking alone, but the fact that he saw a big difference after he began using ACell and only does it this way now is rather convincing to me that ACell is making a difference.  The hair diameter certainly appears normal but I have not scientifically tested that.

In reference to the many points raised by Dr. Cole, I can sum up my answer by saying, 'time will tell'.  I know he has faced similar criticisms over the years in regards to body hair transplants;  nevertheless he has tenaciously carried on.  That is our intention too.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

I too thank Dr. Cole for his detailed skepticism. When analyzing his extensive report, one should not miss that he too saw impressive results with ACell in some of his body hair patients. I think Dr. Cooley's message is on target.
It is very important that ACell be used correctly to achieve optimal (and even satisfactory) results. Suspending ACell powder in saline is not optimal. One of the advantages of PRP and related mediums is that they have high concentrations of Adult Stem Cells. These are the cells that ACell, when in direct contact, converts back to the Active Progenitor Cells and are instrumental in taking over the healing process by duplication instead of scarring. ACell is unique in that it is the only ECM (Extracellular Matrix) that is Bi-Modal and incorporates the recruitment of both Epithelial and Endothelial Cells needed for skin and hair duplication. It also provides a scaffold for the process to occur which is temporary and then disappears allowing the newly recruited cells to do their work.
ACell also contains a multitude of Growth Factors as well as proteins needed to support Hair Growth-this is most likely why it has dramatically increased plucked hair survival. Plucked hairs do not grow thinner-at least not in my experience of over 10 years with them.
Let me also make it clear that my original and still use of plucked hairs has been for repair of old transplants with depleted donor areas or small areas of transplant fill-ins. It is a tedious procedure although improving as our techniques do.
My greatest fear has been the worry that judgements will be made of a discovery based on improper employment of it. Sometimes it is easier to shoot the product than the surgeon.
I applaud Dr. Cole for his intense scrutiny, but the "empirical" results, as Dr. Jerry Cooley has said, are very real and multiplying daily.

----------


## Westonci

> I thank Dr Cole for his interest in our work.  As I’ve stressed repeatedly, my work consists of preliminary ‘anecdotal’ observations about the use of ACell in hair restoration surgery.  Of course it would be nice to have large clinical studies with control groups which would provide a higher level of proof.  Any physician who has participated in formal clinical studies knows the difficulty and complexity involved in such work.  These are especially difficult with hair restoration surgery, and there are almost no such studies done in our field.  The bulk of what we do has developed over time based on the ‘anecdotal’ observations of forward thinking surgeons who went on to share these results with their peers.  
> 
> With a product like ACell that is entirely new to our field, most physicians would be lost as to where to begin looking at possible applications within the spectrum of hair restoration procedures.  Hopefully our work will provide a starting point for others to do controlled studies.   I’m glad Dr. Cole is now working with ACell and is able to share his anecdotal observations with us.  That is how progress occurs in our field.
> 
> In reference to “autocloning”, our work continues.  As each new patient comes in for followup with positive results, I become more excited about the future of this procedure.   None of our patients have complained of thinning in the areas that were plucked, and none of my test sites with plucked hair without ACell subsequently grew hair.  Dr. Cole is right that occasionally Dr. Hitzig had success with plucking alone, but the fact that he saw a big difference after he began using ACell and only does it this way now is rather convincing to me that ACell is making a difference.  The hair diameter certainly appears normal but I have not scientifically tested that.
> 
> In reference to the many points raised by Dr. Cole, I can sum up my answer by saying, 'time will tell'.  I know he has faced similar criticisms over the years in regards to body hair transplants;  nevertheless he has tenaciously carried on.  That is our intention too.


 Dr. Cooley why not add WNT proteins to the mix of Acell/PRP. Its been shown by Dr. Cotsarelis and Histogen and Angela Cristiano and others that injury+WNT proteins cause new hair growth.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> Dr. Cooley why not add *WNT proteins* to the mix of Acell/PRP. Its been shown by Dr. Cotsarelis and Histogen and Angela Cristiano and others that injury+WNT proteins cause new hair growth.


 And wherefrom should he get Wnt proteins? In a supermarket?  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wnt_signaling_pathway

----------


## Westonci

> And wherefrom should he get Wnt proteins? In a supermarket? 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wnt_signaling_pathway


 http://www.genwaybio.com/all_protein...77386bc323cca2

Scroll to the bottom to see the WNT proteins. I think doctors would have access to such material.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> http://www.genwaybio.com/all_protein...77386bc323cca2
> 
> Scroll to the bottom to see the WNT proteins. I think doctors would have access to such material.


 Ok. And which one should he choose and add? All availabel Wnt proteins? Or just a specific combination/mix thereof?

Concerning "Wnt proteins" - basically you're right; Dr. George Cotsarelis (Follica) brought this subject up in this field, followed by Dr. Gail Naughton (Histogen) and so on. BUT *none* of them ever discussed "adding" of any "Wnt proteins" to mammals for any therapeutical purpose. It's just all about "Wnt SIGNALING" and not about adding any "Wnt proteins". But feel free to read it yourself:

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?...DISPLAY=CLAIMS 
-------------------------
EXCERPT
"79. A method for producing pigmented hair on a subject, said method comprising comprising (i) generating a hair follicle on said subject according to the method of any of claims 47-78; and (ii) *suppressing an expression of a Wnt protein* in said hair follicle.

80. The method of claim 79, wherein the step of *suppressing an expression of a Wnt protein* comprises inducing an expression of a Dkkl protein. 
-------------------------

So as you can see, they do not mention something of "adding" of any Wnt proteins. They just talk about "suppressing" an expression of a [specific) Wnt protein.

----------


## HairRobinHood

@Westonci  My previous post (yesterday) about the Wnt subject, was just a quick response out of my memory. I just read it again and checked what I wrote. But besides some grammar mistakes (I guess), everything I mentioned is basically  correct:




> Nilofer Farjo, MBChB Manchester, England
> *Wnt signaling: a review*
> One of the current buzz words in the literature, in meetings, and on the Internet is wint; but, what exactly is wnt and how does it fit into our understanding of hair follicle physiology? And, more significantly, will it lead to a new generation of treatments for alopecia?
> When we talk of wint, we are in fact referring to two different things: the wnt gene family and wnt proteins. Wnt genes are structurally similar genes (19 wnt genes in humans have been identified on different chromosomes) that produce signalling proteins also referred to as wnt. These signaling molecules regulate cell-to-cell interactions during embryogenesis and control normal physiological processes in adults; some of these wnt proteins are specific to certain cells and tissues.
> Histogen Inc. has been conducting studies using the *concepts of increasing wnt signaling* to promote hair growth in clinical trials. Below I interview their founder and CEO, Dr. Gail Naughton, on these recently completed trials.
> 
> Source: Hair Transplant Forum International, Jul/Aug 2009, page 120


 Dr. Gail Naughton (Histogen Inc) mentioned in this interview, that they produce specific types of Wnt proteins (e.g. Wnt 7a) in their own labs, as well as other hair-regeneration-related proteins (e.g. follistatin) under specific and controlled conditions. Thereby specific cell types (fibroblasts) INCREASE their production of specific Wnt proteins, and during the production of these Wnt proteins, the cells also secret a variety of wound healing growth factors (e.g. KGF, VEGF etc). All in all results in a special medium which they simply call Hair Stimulating Complex (HSC). Thats all  isnt it?

Concerning abnormalities in Wnt signaling or formations of tumors/cancer, particularly related to Wnt 5a proteins, Dr. Gail Naugthon mentioned in this interview, that they have to adapt the growth conditions to down-regulate Wnt 5a proteins and to up-regulate Wnt 7a proteins and so on.

So I ask you once again: Which Wnt protein type should Dr. Jerry Cooley add to the mix of Acell/PRP, and finally, for what reason? Wnt 7a proteins? Down-regulated proteins or up-regulated proteins? How much should they be up-regulated? Is it possible that too much up-regulated Wnt 7a proteins signal other proteins in your body to be e.g. Wnt 5a proteins or to be any other (risky) protein type, simply with the intention just for fun?

How about just adding of the mentioned growth factors ?

----------


## Jerry Cooley, MD

Westonci and HairRobinHood

Thank you for the lively discussion of WNT.  Doubtlessly the WNT pathway is critical in the formation of hair follicles.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the WNT pathway is activated when ACell coated plucked hair is implanted in the skin.  However, I would be very cautious about adding exogenous WNT proteins as this may disturb the delicate balance of stimulatory/inhibitory factors present in this context.  For example, it is well known that activation of WNT/beta-catenin is associated with tumor formation, which is why Cotsarelis' approach is requiring such careful animal studies and will be subjected to close regulatory scrutiny.  In the past, some thought that Sonic Hedgehog stimulation had potential for hair loss treatment, but I believe that tumor formation occurred which shut down any further work on this.  It may be that the Histogen approach, which uses a mix of embryonic proteins secreted by neonatal fibroblasts, is more desirable because that stimulatory/inhibitory system is already built in. 

Regardless, use of either approach would require FDA supervised studies and should not be done by the surgeon at this time just to 'see what happens'.  ACell is already FDA approved for wound healing and can be safely used as an adjunct to transplanting plucked hairs.

Thanks again for the thought provoking discussion.

----------


## Westonci

> Westonci and HairRobinHood
> 
> Thank you for the lively discussion of WNT.  Doubtlessly the WNT pathway is critical in the formation of hair follicles.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the WNT pathway is activated when ACell coated plucked hair is implanted in the skin.  However, I would be very cautious about adding exogenous WNT proteins as this may disturb the delicate balance of stimulatory/inhibitory factors present in this context.  For example, it is well known that activation of WNT/beta-catenin is associated with tumor formation, which is why Cotsarelis' approach is requiring such careful animal studies and will be subjected to close regulatory scrutiny.  In the past, some thought that Sonic Hedgehog stimulation had potential for hair loss treatment, but I believe that tumor formation occurred which shut down any further work on this.  It may be that the Histogen approach, which uses a mix of embryonic proteins secreted by neonatal fibroblasts, is more desirable because that stimulatory/inhibitory system is already built in. 
> 
> Regardless, use of either approach would require FDA supervised studies and should not be done by the surgeon at this time just to 'see what happens'.  ACell is already FDA approved for wound healing and can be safely used as an adjunct to transplanting plucked hairs.
> 
> Thanks again for the thought provoking discussion.


 Sorry for bombarding you with millions of questions, but Im wondering how much you are charging per plucked hair. Even if you are not sure, could you estimate how much it would cost  so that  we could have an idea how much we should be saving for such procedure (and yes im aware that the results may or may not be permanent at this time).

Having said that, God bless you Dr. Cooley for your hard work, and I know that your name and Dr Hitzigs will go down in the history books for your contributions in this feild.

----------


## wolvie1985

Westconi, I may be wrong but I get the sense that pricing questions are probably best directed to Dr. Cooley's office directly. It is just a phonecall after all!  :Smile:  Dr. Cooley, thanks again for your participation here as well as your patience. Class act all the way.

----------


## wolvie1985

I forgot to shout out to Dr. Hitzig as well! Sorry, Dr., I didn't see that you posted on here too. You're truly a pioneer in your field and given new hope to millions.

----------


## cim98mk6

http://www.prweb.com/releases/haircl...web4840684.htm

In an upcoming article submitted to the Hair Transplant Forum International, Hitzig states, Early results in transplant patients (where it is easier to obtain arterial blood from the surgical donor area) have shown that when MatriStem plus spun down arterial blood plasma or PRP are combined and then injected in thinning areas of the scalp that have not previously received a hair transplant, miniaturizing hairs appear to re-grow. The results are still very early, but make sense in light of previous reported PRP injection results.


I haven't seen anyone discuss this press release in the forum yet. Increase regrowth in thinning areas seem to be another area where ACELL can be applied.

----------


## Gubter_87

I've been in contact with Dr. hitzig earlier and he recommended that if I have a transplant to use an injection of A-cell and PRP to prevent further loss.

I've never heard of these two being used as a preventative treatment before? Does anyone have anymore information about it? Does it work better/worse than propecia?

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Whenever our Plastic Surgeons perform a Transplant utilizing ACell, we automatically inject the surrounding thinning areas with the combination of ACell mixed in PRP or Arterial Serum plus Buffy Coat (where the Adult Stem Cells and Platelets plus nutrients are). We of course inform all patients of this addition and why we are doing this (preventative or possible regrowth of miniaturizing hairs). There is no extra charge for this either. By adding this to the transplant procedure since the patient is numbed anyway, we are getting good clinical feedback of it's efficacy. We have been very excited with the early (8 month) results, and are now performing independent injections of PRP plus ACell to those candidates with early or moderate thinning but obviously no shiny bald area. Propecia is an adjunct to this procedure and should not be stopped until we learn more about the mechanism of it's action. We hope this will be a better answer to thinning as we have not had to repeat any of these injections to date. Time will tell!

----------


## Gubter_87

Thank you for your reply Dr. Hitzig.
Are you planning on displaying the results from these injections anywhere soon?

I always think it's encouraging when people actually take steps to develop the field of hair loss treatments. Because to be honest, for someone like me who is 23 years old, NW4, thinning in a NW6 pattern and possibly aiming for a full NW7 - there basically do not seem to be many options.

So I'd just like to say thank you to you, Dr Cooley and everyone else who are actually trying to come up with innovative new solutions.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Yes, I will post results.Give me until after the holidays as people are very engaged and unavailable. In January you will start seeing the "early" 9 month injection results. As I have combined transplants with injections in the thinning areas, I will point out the transplants vs. the injection only sites. Please bear with me, January will be here very soon.

----------


## tbtadmin

Dr. Gary Hitzig Responds To Recent Concerns and Criticisms About The Use of ACell MatriStem In Surgical Hair Restoration. 

*Listen To The Segment*

----------


## Don'tDoIt

With all this talk about Acell, I am surprised that no one on this forum, including Spencer, has brought up the news this week about stem cell research.

I am referring to the report that stem cells have been used, for the very first time, to create a living hair follicle. This report comes from Ronald Lauster at Berlin Technical University. The news has been reported in the popular media during the past few days. Spencer, what do you think about this news?

----------


## Westonci

> With all this talk about Acell, I am surprised that no one on this forum, including Spencer, has brought up the news this week about stem cell research.
> 
> I am referring to the report that stem cells have been used, for the very first time, to create a living hair follicle. This report comes from Ronald Lauster at Berlin Technical University. The news has been reported in the popular media during the past few days. Spencer, what do you think about this news?


 hopefully he discusses it during his radio show tonight

----------


## Don'tDoIt

> With all this talk about Acell, I am surprised that no one on this forum, including Spencer, has brought up the news this week about stem cell research.
> 
> I am referring to the report that stem cells have been used, for the very first time, to create a living hair follicle. This report comes from Ronald Lauster at Berlin Technical University. The news has been reported in the popular media during the past few days. Spencer, what do you think about this news?


 Correction:  The guy's name is Professor Roland Lauster.

----------


## MG63

hello all -- last spring Dr. Cole performed micro-needling with PRP /Acell on my crown. I was generally pleased with the amount of regrowth. I'm hoping to undergo another treatment with Dr. Cole to achieve higher density in the crown as well as gain some in the front were I have a number of grafts from CIT. I will also add that i had some grafts in the front last spring and Dr. Cole use PRP / Acell on the grafts. The result was a higher yield of follicles.  Once a graft began to grow - 3-4 new hairs grew in around the transplanted hair. this was great news and very welcomed.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

It's great to see independent substantiation of what Jerry Cooley and I are showing. If used properly, these result reports will multiply. ACell indeed results in what you have experienced. I am now working with a Surgical company that has successfully isolated the Adult Stem Cells and several important growth factors from the PRP to mix with the ACell and inject into the recipent as well as donor areas. PRP as a whole can be redundant in what it offers. ACell contains all of these and more. The key is to isolate the Adult Stem Cells and specific Growth Factors (ie: VRGF). ACell will also uniquely construct the scaffold necessary for tissue remodeling rather than healing by scar formation.
Good luck with your next procedure-you are following the right track

----------


## mlao

> hello all -- last spring Dr. Cole performed micro-needling with PRP /Acell on my crown. I was generally pleased with the amount of regrowth. I'm hoping to undergo another treatment with Dr. Cole to achieve higher density in the crown as well as gain some in the front were I have a number of grafts from CIT. I will also add that i had some grafts in the front last spring and Dr. Cole use PRP / Acell on the grafts. The result was a higher yield of follicles.  Once a graft began to grow - 3-4 new hairs grew in around the transplanted hair. this was great news and very welcomed.


 I thought that Dr. Cole was very Skeptical of Acell and its advantages?

----------


## CIT_Girl

To clarify, he's skeptical of the 'plucking' concept and ACell as it relates to that but he's very optimistic that ACell has other beneficial applications for the hair transplant industry.  He's been using ACell in conjunction with CIT procedures since early 2010 and seen numerous benefits, particularly related to healing (detailed in his original post).

----------


## mlao

> hello all -- last spring Dr. Cole performed micro-needling with PRP /Acell on my crown. I was generally pleased with the amount of regrowth. I'm hoping to undergo another treatment with Dr. Cole to achieve higher density in the crown as well as gain some in the front were I have a number of grafts from CIT. I will also add that i had some grafts in the front last spring and Dr. Cole use PRP / Acell on the grafts. The result was a higher yield of follicles.  Once a graft began to grow - 3-4 new hairs grew in around the transplanted hair. this was great news and very welcomed.


 So the above poster is saying that he had re-growth with just micro-needling and the combination of Acell and PRP on his crown. If I am reading it correctly, He did not have any grafts placed there?

----------


## KeepHoping

One of the pictures shown on your website shows a man who received 500 grafts over a large balding area of the scalp and the growth seems to be impossible for such a small number of FU's.  Do you think Acell/PRP (Or your special version of PRP with the isolated growth factors that you're using now) is the answer for those with diffuse thinning in a MPB pattern.  I'm 23 years old and have diffusely thinned on top but still have the back and sides, with those kind of results, it would seem I could only use like 500-1000 grafts and use PRP/Acell and get amazing results with excellent coverage for the time being.

I read a while back that you're going to post more results of your procedure done with Acell/PRP and show the amazing growth you've seen, I'm excited to see the results.  Thank you for your research and for all the work you're putting into the hair loss community, it is greatly appreciated.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

If I am thinking of the right patient you refer to, he was indeed a Class 7+ that I would have been reluctant to transplant prior to ACell. We transplanted the frontal third area of his scalp only. The afters are 6 months post procedure and are indeed "robust". There is no question in my mind that the ACell Mixture that we injected was responsible for the quick intense result. I believe the key is pre-mixing the Matristem with one's own concentrated Adult Stem Cells using the correct size particles and the correct formula and then injecting this "pre-activated" progenitor suspension into the wound sites we create.

The Holidays are both gladly and sadly over- so now back to work and yes further examples are forthcoming.

----------


## KeepHoping

As you said before though, you are seeing a 3x or more than the amount of hair transplanted...  Does that mean this is actually waking up dormant follicles and making them terminal hairs again?  If that's the case then shouldn't just injecting Acell along with PRP without transplantation be a solution for diffuse thinners to strengthen their follicles that have miniturized and wake up the dormant follicles that are lying in the scalp?

----------


## HairRobinHood

> As you said before though, you are seeing a 3x or more than the amount of hair transplanted...  Does that mean this is actually waking up dormant follicles and making them terminal hairs again?  If that's the case then shouldn't just injecting Acell along with PRP without transplantation be a solution for diffuse thinners to strengthen their follicles that have miniturized and wake up *the dormant follicles that are lying in the scalp*?


 I think you refer to the NEW study by Dr. Cotsarelis & team?

http://www.jci.org/articles/view/44478

Related article:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-mpb010311.php 

btw - GREAT work, Dr. Hitzig!

----------


## KeepHoping

I saw that news earlier today on a different forum, it seems we all, including those who have MPB, have the same amount of stem cells remaining in the scalp as those who do not so I was wondering if a mixture of Acell and PRP could in fact assist in the activation of stem cells converting to progenitor cells and reawakening the dormant/miniturized follicles throughout the balding scalp?

Disclaimer:  I'm totally curious about this and do not have much background in cellular biology, this is nothing more than hypothesis but the fact that there are reports that people are getting 3x the amount of hair than that was transplanted when the FU's are moved into a recipient area that was treated with PRP/Acell would mean it is either creating brand new follicles or reactivating dormant ones to become terminal again...

Any thoughts?

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

No, the multiplication far exceeds the number of catogen or telogen (dormant) hairs that could normally be accounted for. We believe these are new "cloned" hairs. We also believe that without proof that the ACell + PRP acts as an androgen receptor competitive inhibitor, that perhaps it acts by resetting the time clock by which the follicles react to the DHT. Time and further work will tell. I hope what we are doing inspires others to help prove the answer. In the meantime, the progress and excitement continues. In my 35 + years in this field, this has been the the most exciting time I have been fortunate to be a force in.
GH

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

This is a great Article (Journal of Clinical Investigation) and may offer additional insight into the reason why the addition of ACell is so significant with PRP in injections as well as in the Surgical Transplant Process.

Thank You

----------


## KeepHoping

Thanks for responding Doc, I'm looking forward to the new pictures and the results.  My last question is do you think with this technology doctors can and or should start transplanting more aggressively, lower hairlines, better coverage with less FU's?

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

I believe Doctors can try small areas of more aggressive transplanting and compare results to surrounding areas. We have certainly been more aggressive; however it took a long time and careful evaluations for this to occur. Doctors need to learn how to use Matristem first-you can't just read the label like a microwave dinner and expect it to work.
 As far as hairlines go, you can always lower a hairline but it is near impossible to raise it once transplanted ,so safety in choosing the hairline level is always paramount.

Once again Happy New Year

GH

----------


## HairRobinHood

> *Body hair* has taught me to be careful with any predictions with regard to new treatment modalities.  My single criticism of Dr Woods is that he practiced body hair transplantation for many years, but did not reveal that the *results were not consistent*.  Such a revelation would have been important information to both physicians and patients.  His failure to report this was negligent in my opinion.  If he has a method, which I can not imagine, that results in consistent yields from body hair, then he has an obligation to present such a method.  My first body hair transplants were a great success, but some follow up transplants resulted I poor yields and a poor coverage.


 Just for the record (from another hair loss board) 
-------------------------------------------------
» Dear x_man,
» I am glad that you have found solution for your hair regrowth problem.
» It is not really my place to debate Dr. Gho's methods because I am not
» privy to the details of his work.
»
» However, I would look forward to see results for any claims from anyone,
» Dr. Gho included, in any method of hair regrowth.
» Regards and best wishes,
» Dr. A

Dear Dr. Arvind,

Therere always a plenty of people out there who are interested in body hair transplants (BHT), but simultaneously they are always concerned about BHT.

Recently, Dr. Cole mentioned the following concerning BHT:

Dr. Cole: Body hair has taught me to be careful with any predictions with regard to new treatment modalities. My single criticism of Dr Woods is that he practiced body hair transplantation for many years, but did not reveal that the results were not consistent. Such a revelation would have been important information to both physicians and patients.
His failure to report this was negligent in my opinion. If he has a method, which I cannot imagine, that results in consistent yields from body hair, then he has an obligation to present such a method. My first body hair transplants were a great success, but some follow up transplants resulted I poor yields and a poor coverage.

Anyway, therere also a plenty of people who claim that youre a skilled body hair transplant doctor as well  and actually, I have no doubts about that. But I think the same here: Where are your revelations concerning BHT?


Concerning HST 
http://www.hasci.com/uploads/downloa...%20Neumann.pdf

HST is a scientifically proven HT technique and has found its place in the medical literature:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20388024

But besides that, and whats actually more important, Dr. Ghos clinics work along ISO 9001:2000 guidelines, and since 2005, they always work under the supervision of the inspection of the health organization in their country; and neither they, nor Ghos patients, reported ever any complaints. Zero.

And now, please let me ask you one simply question:

Im pretty sure, that you have no problems to obtain such 0.5 and/or 0.6 hollow-needles, as described in Dr. Ghos study. So do you really think, that HS readers or an average skilled person is thinking, that an experienced and skilled physician like you is unable to check *FOR HIMSELF*, as well as within a few minutes + 1-2 weeks, whether or not something is growing back (including the same hair characteristics) or not, IF someone like you is removing FUs in such a (simple) way, as described in Dr. Ghos study?

Have a nice weekend, Dr Arvind.
-------------------------------

Again - Just for the record ...

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

?--Is there a question---?

----------


## Westonci

> ?--Is there a question---?


 Hello Dr. Hitzig, thank you so much for your contributions to finding a cure for hair loss.

From what ive heard about PRP alone is that it works best in the crown, okay in the mid scalp, and not so good in the hair line.

My question is would Acell + Arterial Blood/PRP work just as well on the hairline as it does on the mid scalp and crown?

Thanks again.

----------


## rapunzal

> I believe Doctors can try small areas of more aggressive transplanting and compare results to surrounding areas. We have certainly been more aggressive; however it took a long time and careful evaluations for this to occur. Doctors need to learn how to use Matristem first-you can't just read the label like a microwave dinner and expect it to work.
>  As far as hairlines go, you can always lower a hairline but it is near impossible to raise it once transplanted ,so safety in choosing the hairline level is always paramount.
> 
> Once again Happy New Year
> 
> GH


 Dr Hitzig, first can I say thank you for the work you are doing in this area. 

Have one point for clarification, what do you mean when you say you have certainly been more aggressive ? Are you suggesting because you are starting to become confident that donor supply is becoming less of an issue that you can commence being a little more aggressive in your transplants ?

Cheers

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

With experience over the past 2+ years comes more confidence. We have slowly increased the size of the Transplant sessions gaining further security as the results have come in. One should crawl before they walk, we have done both

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

We have seen results in all areas of the scalp. Very recent research indicates that MPB begins with DEFECTIVE STEM CELLS in the affected areas of the scalp. I believe that the combo works because we are injecting activated Adult Stem Cells into microwounds that we create with the injection needles thereby initiating a repair process that uses healthy uninjured stem cells to re-model the hair follicles. Time will tell but the early results are promising.

----------


## Westonci

> We have seen results in all areas of the scalp. Very recent research indicates that MPB begins with DEFECTIVE STEM CELLS in the affected areas of the scalp. I believe that the combo works because we are injecting activated Adult Stem Cells into microwounds that we create with the injection needles thereby initiating a repair process that uses healthy uninjured stem cells to re-model the hair follicles. Time will tell but the early results are promising.


 Thank you for your response, I was just wondering will you be posting your 9 month Acell+Arterial Blood/PRP results photos soon.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> We have seen results in all areas of the scalp. Very recent research indicates that MPB begins with DEFECTIVE STEM CELLS in the affected areas of the scalp. I believe that the combo works because we are injecting activated Adult Stem Cells into microwounds that we create with the injection needles thereby initiating a *repair process that uses healthy uninjured stem cells* to re-model the hair follicles. Time will tell but the early results are promising.


 Dear Dr. Hitzig,

Which type of grafts do you use for the normal HT procedure part?

I mean, when you dissect/prepare hair follicles/grafts under the microscope, which type of FUs do you finally use for implantation? Do you use/prefer skinny (skeletonized) grafts, rather than chubby grafts? 

If the latter (chubby), I would be surprised that the ACell/PRP suspension you inject is able to 1) use healthy uninjured stem cells *from the transplanted grafts* (through migration/signaling), what 2) finally would explain the additional (healthy) hair follicles in the recipient side. 

imho, the type of grafts as well as storage time and storage medium (e.g. ACell/PRP combo) surely plays an important role too for any cloning (additional hairs) in the recipient side. The type of injection (HOW you inject the suspension) might play a role too. I think only some small comparison procedures (i.e. any imaginary boxes in the crown etc) in the recipient side brings more light into this issue.

All in all, I believe that just a ACell/PRP or ACell/arterial blood combo for injection *alone* (without HT grafts from the back of the head) is NOT able to grow a damn healthy thing in bald areas. That's the other point.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Yes, I will be posting pictures soon. There was a constructional accident to my office building around Thanksgiving forcing an emergency evacuation (the building is on stantions and was in danger of collapse). We are getting back in today and this has significantly delayed our work).

   As far as grafts, I was talking only about injections, not transplants. Mixing one's own isolated adult stem cells with ACell results in a pre-activated progenitor cell suspension which forms a temporary scaffold and structure for remodelling the hair follicles. The injections also serve to damage the follicles to initiate the repair process. This can only work in areas where alive miniaturizing hairs exist, and please forgive me if I gave the wrong impression in a prior post. You can't revive the dead, either human or hair follicle.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> ... and please forgive me if I gave the wrong impression in a prior post. You can't revive the dead, either human or hair follicle.


 Oops, sorry Dr. Hitzig, I’ve just noticed that it's not your fault but mine, because I thought you’re talking about a combination procedure (traditional HT procedure + in addition ACell/PRP injections between the transplanted grafts). 
So this type of approach concerning reactivating (“re-model”) *miniaturized follicles* – that's REALLY INTERESTING, I have to say.

Anyway, THANKS for your response!

p.s. "You can't revive the dead, either human or hair follicle."
And what represents -per definition- a "miniaturized follicle" vs. a "dead follicle"?  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 
Is a dead follicle like a dead mouse in a trap and is a miniaturized follicle like a mouse with a broken neck in a trap, but the mouse is still alive?

----------


## gmonasco

> You can't revive the dead, either human or hair follicle.


 But is it true that the follicles are really dead, or are they still alive but non-productive?  As one of the many recent articles about the research from the University of Pennsylvania said:




> Men with male-pattern baldness still have hair - it's just very tiny and delicate. Their follicles are much smaller and they produce "vellus" hair shafts that are correspondingly smaller and gossamer-thin.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> p.s. "You can't revive the dead, either human or hair follicle."
> And what represents -per definition- a "miniaturized follicle" vs. a "dead follicle"? 
> Is a dead follicle like a dead mouse in a trap and is a miniaturized follicle like a *mouse with a broken neck* in a trap, but the mouse is still alive?


 By the way ...

Hair follicle stem cells repair nerves & spinal cord - Part 1 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_KYKp0EyoI 

Hair follicle stem cells repair nerves & spinal cord - Part 2 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enSPW3cMdNU 

The question is, what happens if you apply just "ACell" to the mouse's nerve or spinal cord? I guess in this case, ACell could have the ability to repair the nerve and/or spinal cord - maybe. BUT concerning hair follicles (you can't compare this mini-organ with nerves or a spinal cord) you simply need HEALTHY hair-follicle-stem-cells nearby a "weak" follicle, or simply replace them through healthy hair-follicle-cells. Actually, there is no need to test that, because this has already been tested several times by different research groups - of course successfully. E.g. Dr. Jerry Cooley demonstrated that (more or less "by accident" during his punch harvesting test with the usage of ACell and "freed" hair follicle cells in the wounded environment).

----------


## HairRobinHood

> Actually, there is no need to test that, because this has already been tested several times by different research groups - of course successfully. E.g. Dr. Jerry Cooley demonstrated that (more or less "by accident" during his punch harvesting test with the usage of ACell and "freed" hair follicle cells in the wounded environment).


 Dr. Hitzig, YOU yourself demonstrated that with your "special" wound closure technique. Because this part of your work alone demonstrates the GENIUS inside you!  :Smile:

----------


## rapunzal

> No, the multiplication far exceeds the number of catogen or telogen (dormant) hairs that could normally be accounted for. We believe these are new "cloned" hairs. We also believe that without proof that the ACell + PRP acts as an androgen receptor competitive inhibitor, that _perhaps it acts by resetting the time clock by which the follicles react to the DHT_. Time and further work will tell. I hope what we are doing inspires others to help prove the answer. In the meantime, the progress and excitement continues. In my 35 + years in this field, this has been the the most exciting time I have been fortunate to be a force in.
> GH


 Dr Hitzig

Perhaps plucking and reimplanting a miniturizing(ed) hair (assuming it can provide the cells required) could help prove if this is the case IF the new hair grows terminal. It might not be conclusive as you would need to observe the hair over many years, however if it regrows miniturized then you might be able to rule it out. Maybe you have already tried this with results ? or perhaps miniturized plucked hairs did not regrow ?

Cheers

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Not sure where we cross the line but I think vellus hairs are essentially like dead plants-they are noticable but if you water them they are still gone.
Miniaturizing are more like plants that are alive but noticiably in need of some form of resuscitation. Hopefully ACell combined with PRP will be their EMS. I am starting to work with a company that can specifically isolate the adult stem cells from the PRP mixture. Their deeds will confirm their words.

----------


## rapunzal

Dr Hitzig
On a related matter, but slightly different direction. Are you happy with the number of clinics that have commenced trials to either prove/disprove the plucking technique with the potential of developing it into a viable product. I mean, there is a real threat from the hair multiplication world (Aderans, Histogen, Follica) that HM could come to the market in around 2014-15. What will this do to the business of the traditional hair transplant clinics if they suddenly loose 50% of their customers to say e.g. Bosley because they have a product (hybrid transplant+Aderans) that is far superior (unlimited donor, potentially scarless, high density, etc) than traditional transplants. I know myself, if I was in the business and wanted to remain competitive I would be looking to develop a product that was at least equal or at worst a niche product to be used as an adjunct to superior hair multiplication products. Autocloning with Acell I believe (my own belief that is) is the only hope that exists for many clinics if they want to remain in the game unless they can get in on the hair multiplication action. Yet my feeling from what I read is that it is experimental and we will wait and see in a few years. Are these guys actually doing any form of trials ? Are they sharing detailed information on these trials ? From the accounts on the internet is seems like perhaps 6 or so clinics unless of course others are doing it in secret. Time is ticking for this industry before a major HM shake-up , traditional hair transplant clinics need a new product, and they need it very soon. Consumers are not silly, they will vote with their feet and buy the best product on the market and the contest between limited vs unlimited donor is a no brainer.  Either the owners of the traditional HT clinics are completely aware of the treat to their business or have become complacent. If they choose not to collaborate and develop a better product then perhaps it will be a lesson for them to collaborate when it comes time to update their curriculum vitae for their next jobs.
Anyway, just food for thought.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Only a handful of Physicians have reached out to me--and those are the ones who want to learn how to use ACell in specific instances, such as in keloid improvement after a botched laser tatoo removal attempt. Physicians such as Dr. Mcgrath, Dr. Niebloski, and Dr. DeYarmin have reached out multiple times to help them understand the product and its correct application as well as how to keep out of trouble and obtain the best possible results. The ones conducting their "Clinical Studies" have not!

In my practice, we have been working with ACell and its various applications in hair regrowth and duplication, wound healing, scar improvement, beard and scalp hair plucking, combination with PRP/Arterial Blood serum etc. since it was approved by the FDA in wound healing in September, 2008. Jerry Cooley and I have kept the whole idea quiet for over 2 years while we slowly learned the correct way to use the product. We didn't become experts overnight!

As you are sure to see, the ones who "fail" in their so called Clinical Trials will be quick to blame the product, not the practitioner---Sad But True.

We are constantly moving on. For example,we are now starting to work with  an established Company that can isolate and concentrate one's own Adult Stem Cells from the PRP/Arterial Serum. We will be starting this month combining this with Specific particle size Matristem (Yes not all Acell is the same--most don't know this) prior to scalp injections--Exciting Stuff especially in light of the recent research released last week. This Bolus of Adult Stem Cells should help improve the speed of recovery and perhaps the results---Keep Tuned

----------


## Westonci

> Only a handful of Physicians have reached out to me--and those are the ones who want to learn how to use ACell in specific instances, such as in keloid improvement after a botched laser tatoo removal attempt. Physicians such as Dr. Mcgrath, Dr. Niebloski, and Dr. DeYarmin have reached out multiple times to help them understand the product and its correct application as well as how to keep out of trouble and obtain the best possible results. The ones conducting their "Clinical Studies" have not!
> 
> In my practice, we have been working with ACell and its various applications in hair regrowth and duplication, wound healing, scar improvement, beard and scalp hair plucking, combination with PRP/Arterial Blood serum etc. since it was approved by the FDA in wound healing in September, 2008. Jerry Cooley and I have kept the whole idea quiet for over 2 years while we slowly learned the correct way to use the product. We didn't become experts overnight!
> 
> As you are sure to see, the ones who "fail" in their so called Clinical Trials will be quick to blame the product, not the practitioner---Sad But True.
> 
> We are constantly moving on. For example,we are now starting to work with  an established Company that can isolate and concentrate one's own Adult Stem Cells from the PRP/Arterial Serum. We will be starting this month combining this with Specific particle size Matristem (Yes not all Acell is the same--most don't know this) prior to scalp injections--Exciting Stuff especially in light of the recent research released last week. This Bolus of Adult Stem Cells should help improve the speed of recovery and perhaps the results---Keep Tuned


 Can you give us a ballpark estimate of how much Acell+Arterial Blood/PRP injections would cost.

I know that for PRP alone is about $1000

----------


## KeepHoping

Dr. Rassman who is conducting his big trail with Acell has not contacted you or Dr. Cooley to ask about how to go about the plucking procedure!?  This would be a disappointment, I don't understand why he wouldn't contact at least one of you to understand how to do the procedure.  I'm wondering how he could possibly know how to conduct the trail efficiently without prior knowledge of the product he's utilizing.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

I believe the injection procedure costs between $2-3000 when utilizing a large amount of ACell and of course depending on the size of the area to be treated. Each case is individualized.

Dr. Rassman passed me in Boston at the meetings after my presentation several times, looked at me but never stopped to talk. Dr. Limmer made a point of sitting with me and discussing it along with several other well known practitioners. Dr. Rassman has never contacted me then or since. I believe he had a very brief general phone conversation with Dr. Cooley. I guess he doesn't need any further guidance for his "Clinical Study"

----------


## KeepHoping

With the amount of cloning that goes on with the implementation of the Acell/PRP/Needling could you estimate that 500 grafts looks more like a transplant of 1000 grafts or more?  There are claims that it's 3 hairs to every 1 implanted, is this empirical data or documented hair counts?  I feel like if you are really getting so much more hair than is actually transplanted it's time for me to take the plunge, I'm going to wait to see the pictures and the results that come over the next few months but I'm hoping this new type of procedure comes to fruition sooner than anticipated.  Thanks for working so hard and responding to these posts.  I want to tell you hair loss is extremely difficult to deal with as I'm sure you know and I myself and I assume many others are immensely grateful for your work.

----------


## ejj

I met Dr Rassman about ten years ago. At the time he was very enthusiastic about larger transplant sessions , he showed me a patient in surgery who was having a session of about 3000 grafts .Not many Drs could do this back then , however Dr Rassman` embraced` the technology / procedure and offered it to his patients to limit the amount of procedures  they may need .

I would find it strange being the type of Dr that he is , that he would dismiss any new technology that could be of benefit to his patients .

Perhaps he feels that the long term results of (acell /plucking remain`unknown ` and is taking a cautious approach .
Regards 

Ejj

----------


## Bakez

Lets be honest, at the moment we have no proof from Dr Hitzig.

If anyone has learnt anything about hairloss, it is that you should treat pretty much everything as utter BS until you see it with your own eyes.

Dont believe it until your see it.

----------


## rapunzal

Thank you Dr Hitzig for taking the time to respond.

It confirms what I can see as an outsider looking in. The HT industry as it currently stands is very fragmented, disorganised and because of this will be too slow to adapt come the change in business conditions in the hair multiplication era possibly 2014-15. Im sure the industry and hair loss sufferers appreciates the work that yourself and Dr Cooley have done regarding the auto cloning concept as well as what Dr Rassman and Dr Bernstien are doing to prove the concept actually works, however I would be suprised if you guys alone without large R&D budgets would be able to develop it as a stong alternative product in the short time that remains. You need a coordinated approach with the collective assistance from many clinics to chip in some time and effort to help build a successful product. Lets face it, keloid scar repairs is not going to be a clinics "killer" product that keeps the business in the black.

Does every clinic need to reinvent the wheel ?
If the concept is proved, who will be working towards making the extraction process of plucked hair cost and time efficent, less labour intensive, high yields, high density, etc and finally developing the standards that allow every clinic to replicate the process 100% of the time. If clinics are doing this indepedently possibly someone might have a product ready for marekt in 2020 which should have been ready by 2013.

Clinics are already well aware that HM developers already have a strategy to distribute their HM devices outside the tradition hair restortion channels, that alone should be an industry warning sign. As they say in politics, "Disunity is Death".

Cheers

----------


## Bakez

Why doesnt Dr Hitzig ring these doctors up if they are using his methods incorrectly?

----------


## HairRobinHood

> Why doesnt Dr Hitzig ring these doctors up if they are using his methods incorrectly?


 Why didn't Bill Gates call the MAC producers and told them that they're doing something wrong?

----------


## rapunzal

> Why doesnt Dr Hitzig ring these doctors up if they are using his methods incorrectly?


 I believe the issue goes a lot deeper than whether or not a doctor is following the correct procedure for a trial because it will all amount to zero in the end if nobody in the industry has belief or vision that this technology can produce a viable alternative product thats stacks up to products over the horizon.

If there are visionaries in the industry that do believe that there is potential, now would probably be a good time to consider playing a leadership role and bring some of the like minded surgeons together for a discussion. More will be achieved as a collective than as individuals.

----------


## KeepHoping

When performing a plucked hair transplant with Acell, is it typical to see higher hair counts than the amount of hairs moved as well as with traditional transplantation methods?

----------


## gmonasco

> Why didn't Bill Gates call the MAC producers and told them that they're doing something wrong?


 Because Bill Gates had a vested interest in beating Apple.  That scenario doesn't apply here.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Doubt is always constructive. Although I believe that most know what I say is anything but BS (as was stated by Bakez), and I believe we have demonstrated enough (Dr. Cooley and Myself) to validate this. People will always believe the cup is half empty rather than half full. It is not my job to call up everyone who is attempting to use ACell to make sure they understand it, but rather for those who wish to study it to contact those who have more experience with it. I enjoy talking with most of you, but the conversation needs to be constructive and discussion oriented, not accusitory. 
Perhaps Bakez has some ties to Dr. Rassman. It would be better to inquire than attack. 
Attack is not the venue I intend to follow.

----------


## Westonci

> Doubt is always constructive. Although I believe that most know what I say is anything but BS (as was stated by Bakez), and I believe we have demonstrated enough (Dr. Cooley and Myself) to validate this. People will always believe the cup is half empty rather than half full. It is not my job to call up everyone who is attempting to use ACell to make sure they understand it, but rather for those who wish to study it to contact those who have more experience with it. I enjoy talking with most of you, but the conversation needs to be constructive and discussion oriented, not accusitory. 
> Perhaps Bakez has some ties to Dr. Rassman. It would be better to inquire than attack. 
> Attack is not the venue I intend to follow.


 Im seriously thinking of flying over to Long Island to get the Acell + Arterial Blood/PRP by Dr. Hitzig.

Im just waiting to see the pictures before I make any further plans

----------


## rapunzal

> Dr. Rassman passed me in Boston at the meetings after my presentation several times, looked at me but never stopped to talk. Dr. Limmer made a point of sitting with me and discussing it along with several other well known practitioners. Dr. Rassman has never contacted me then or since. I believe he had a very brief general phone conversation with Dr. Cooley. I guess he doesn't need any further guidance for his "Clinical Study"


 How about this for a novel idea ? Clinics that intend to conduct various trials could publish in a public forum how they intend to undertake the trials, what protocols they will use, procedures, goals, etc, etc. Why ? so that every clinic that wants to be involved doesnt simply duplicate another clinics work which is a wasted effort. If one clinic is doing a trial one way, perhaps another clinic can then opt to use a slightly different protocol. At the end results will be published and the better approach debated and adopted. Why should two clinics build two identical roads from point A to B when one could commence building a road from B to C.

Perhaps this mindset is just too forward thinking in a non transparent industry that is still too busy thinking about how to improve a trichophytic closure.

 :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## SilverSurfer

Rapunzal,
It is weird how you have been trying to shift the topic over and over again focusing on what interests you the most. Are you somehow related to this industry and are looking to find out how the ACell and autoplucking etc works but have been hesitant of contacting Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley? Because if you are, you would be better off giving them a call instead of ranting about the future of the HT industry, distribution channels for HM possibilities, making a blog for 'clinics' to post their procedures, protocols, etc etc.(In other words, please I want to know how it works, tell me tell me but I am afraid of asking)

We are all here interested in asking Dr Hitzig questions about these new procedures and their benefits, if you are good. If your interest is economical or otherwise, please be straight forward and honest about your intentions. :Wink: 
'How about this for a novel idea?'

----------


## SilverSurfer

Dr Hitzig,
Thanks for the advances you and Dr Cooley have made possible in the field.  I am very interested in the autoplucking technique since my donnor was depleted and compromised by a pseudo FUE clinic. I would like to fill in my hairline (it has a gap of a bout 1.5 cm by 15 cm or 22 sq cm) and some of the space between the midscalp and frontal third(about 10 sq cm) Do you think something like this would be possible through the autoplucking technique? What about trying to fill in some of the bald areas in my donnor also?
Again thanks for everything.

----------


## rapunzal

> Rapunzal,
> It is weird how you have been trying to shift the topic over and over again focusing on what interests you the most. Are you somehow related to this industry and are looking to find out how the ACell and autoplucking etc works but have been hesitant of contacting Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley? Because if you are, you would be better off giving them a call instead of ranting about the future of the HT industry, distribution channels for HM possibilities, making a blog for 'clinics' to post their procedures, protocols, etc etc.(In other words, please I want to know how it works, tell me tell me but I am afraid of asking)
> 
> We are all here interested in asking Dr Hitzig questions about these new procedures and their benefits, if you are good. If your interest is economical or otherwise, please be straight forward and honest about your intentions.
> 'How about this for a novel idea?'


 Hi Silversurfer
You have raised a great point. Yes I am connected to the industry, in fact the most important part of the industry .. the consumer, just like yourself.
As a consumer I would like to see a better product on the market. Here is the product I would like to buy that as it currently stands the industry can not provide nor will it provide in the near future:-
-	Original density
-	Choice of where I want my hairline
-	Natural looking
-	Cost effective
-	Minimal downtime
-	Non invasive (or minimal)
-	Long lasting
Now the reason why I target the industry is because its an industry problem. Yes, Dr Cooley and Dr Hitzig are pioneers and if you read my previous posts their work has been acknowledged and am grateful with what they have achieved and the work that is ahead of them. My concern is that progress to the ideal product could be made a reality sooner if there was more of a coordinated and efficient development program implemented across the board. This would benefit both the consumer and the clinics. Content clients will only mean more people walk through the doors of the clinics which will boost their bottom lines, its a WIN-WIN outcome for the consumer and the provider.
I have no interest myself in how the clinics themselves undertake their trials, as I dont work in the industry, I do however have an interest in the product I mentioned above and I just feel the more other clinics are involved the more likely it will become a reality. In the end the benefit will go back to the consumer, that you, me, and every other person on this discussion board.
My intention is not to high-jack the discussion and I apologise if that is how I have come across but its not my intention so I am sorry. I am only putting forward my view and it is related to the topic as Acell has the potential to be the technology that achieves the ideal product. Its purpose is to generate a discussion, in no way have I been self promoting or promoting others so why is this a problem ?
As for my own personal aspirations, yes I have contacted one of the two clinics you mentioned as well as followed the development of this story since October 2010. I wouldnt use the forum to discuss my own circumstances, however the forum is a platform to discuss and share opinions do you not agree ? 
With all due respect if anyone would like me to no longer post my views on this thread just let me know and I will stop participating.
Cheers

----------


## SilverSurfer

It's funny to see how you are trying to turn things around now playing the victim card. You say you are 'just a consumer' but all of your questions are more directed at the business part. If you are a consumer like me, good. Then lets focus on the main topic. 

As a consumer, I do have a lot of questions and as I said before I was screwed by a pseudo FUE clinic. My donnor is gone and I was never able to accomplish the hair restauration I was opting for. I am grateful for Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley and the time they are taking to answer the questions, so why not ask? You see? I tried contacting his clinic but it might have been during the days when they were not in the building so I am doing it now. I hope you understand that others are indeed trying to learn more about this procedure since we really NEED it. Just some 'food for thought'.  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## rapunzal

Hi Silversurfer

I am sorry to hear of your situation and I wish you all the best and hope you achieve your goals.

No I am not playing the victim. I dont come here for sympathy, just to engage in discussion. However I do symapthise with many that have had hair transplant where their lives have been devastated.

The sooner a product comes to market the better for all, Im just trying to look at the bigger picture and hope that clinics can start as well.

Have a great day.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Thanks for your heartfelt feelings, your benevolence is so transparent, what was I thinking... 

Now could you please stop engaging in petty arguments and if you are truly interested in the ACell+PRP and autocloning technique, lets hear what Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley have to say.

Cheers  :Smile:

----------


## SilverSurfer

Again, Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley, thanks for all the advances you have developed and are in the process of developing for the HT industry.

1)In regards to the autoplucking, would it work behind the hairline?

2)What if one has a thinning crown, would you recommend the ACell + PRP or would you suggest a small session of autoplucking there as well?

3)What is your view in regards of trying to fill in a donnor area depleted by FUE with autoplucking?

Thanks Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley

----------


## rapunzal

> Thanks for your heartfelt feelings, your benevolence is so transparent, what was I thinking... 
> 
> Now could you please stop engaging in petty arguments and if you are truly interested in the ACell+PRP and autocloning technique, lets hear what Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley have to say.
> 
> Cheers


 i dont know, but i can see why you forgot because i doubt you do it very often

petty arguements ? refer to your comment 89 above

finally all i have to say to you is 6,21 (hint: alphabet)

----------


## SilverSurfer

Thanks for making it clear to everyone what your real intentions are.
Also thanks for showing your true colors and letting your bully personality come out and insult everyone. It is people like you that with their own questionable interests (because you are certainly more concerned with other things) come here and ruin this thread. WAKE UP!!!!

There are others that were ruined and need this, so again please don't keep ruining these threads for everyone with your hidden agenda and let the experts on the topic inform us. We don't need a clown trying to play smart asking about the industry and trying to create fear because of disunity. If you have some sort of knowledge you will come to the understanding that the market will regulate itself and that for every product offered there will be consumers who have certain needs for it. It is not all black and white so stop being so pessimistic. HT will always be around even if HM arises, FUE, Strip, they all have applications for different patients. Each case is different. Now Donkey(from Shrek), give me one of your mediocre arguments so I can keep practicing my typing skills.

----------


## rapunzal

sure silverturd, i will respond to you with my intentions via a private message because my response will no longer be on-topic .. donkey ? bet you spent all day thinking about that one

----------


## rapunzal

doesnt allow me to private massage .. so forget it

----------


## rephairing

Please take your arguments to a different place . I am pretty sure a doctor would not want his name associated with this bickering . Thanks for ruining the thread guys .

----------


## SilverSurfer

NO DONKEY NOOOO!!!!DOWN DONKEY!!!!
You haven't figured out what the process for messaging is? Go figure. No, with your rants it is so easy that it came to mind immediately. Go ahead, tell your intentions 'burro'.

*Rephairing you are absolutely right and I apologize to you and the rest of the forum. This is exactly what I was trying to avoid but got sucked into it. Maybe you can start another thread about the Autoplucking and ACell+PRP/Arterial Blood so we can keep getting updates about these new procedures.*

----------


## KeepHoping

I see the new pictures of the Acell/PRP injection results that went up on your website Dr. Hitzig but are you going to put up pictures of patients that have had both Acell/PRP and transplantation?  I would really like to see the results and how much hair is coming out in correlation to how much is being transplanted.  Thanks Doc!

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Will do--Have done that previously and was now posting pics related to injections only. Will get to those others shortly as I just got back into my office after it was closed from a constructional accident

----------


## wolvie1985

Dr. Hitzig, have you done any studies or taken any photos whereby you inject the Acell/PRP mixture on one part of the scalp and then just PRP on another? I'm curious as to whether these results are simply the result of PRP (a la Feller or Greco) or whether Acell is having an effect at all. Cheers.

----------


## Gubter_87

Dr Gary Hitzig: I was very intrigued by the two case studies you have presented on your webpage. However these were both two patients with quite advanced hair loss.
I would be very interested to see if you have used this treatment in any younger patient with not so advanced stages of hair loss - to get a better idea of what this treatment actually can do.

And once again.. thank you for your hard work in trygin to make advancements in the field!

----------


## tbtadmin

Dr. Gary Hitzig will be on The Bald Truth tonight 1/23/2011 at 8pm EST / 5pm PST. 

Call the studio line to speak with Dr. Hitzig directly:

888-659-3727

To watch the show visit, The Bald Truth.

Hope to see you there.

----------


## KeepHoping

Do they record them and have them archived or something, I want to hear what Hitzig had to say.

----------


## Bakez

I listened last night, and while what Dr Hitzig was saying was incredibly exciting, he said some outrageous things regarding timescale which quite frankly annoyed me.

I didn't catch all of it, but from what I remember Dr Hitzig claimed that he might have an optimised new treatment out of ACell/PRP/Plucking/Injection combinations within a few years (I hesitate to say 'cure').

When he said that, obviously I was excited, and I hope to God that he is right. Afterall I have no reason to not believe him. But then when I get back to reality all I have to go on is his word. It was discussed about how many times we've heard 'only 5 more years' etc, and now as far as I and many others should be concerned is that we won't believe anything until we see it with our own eyes.

----------


## rapunzal

my understanding was that the discussion was only about an enhanced version of acell+PRP, i dont think autocloning (plucking) was ever mentioned.
dr hitzig indicated that 1 to 2 years would be a cure (i presume he meant treatment) but didnt say if this would be from ACell+PRP or from autocloning. im going to assume its from autocloning because when he spoke to Spencer Kobren in an interview in December and thought that it would be about 1 year before autocloning became viable to be offered.
this was my interpretation, perhaps the good doctor could correct me if im wrong.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> I didn't catch all of it, but from what I remember Dr Hitzig claimed that he might have an optimised new treatment out of *ACell/PRP/Plucking/Injection combinations* within a few years (I hesitate to say 'cure').


 Cool - it seems he learns fast (at least faster than Cooley).

----------


## Bakez

> Cool - it seems he learns fast (at least faster than Cooley).


 I hope so.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

I find this interesting.  This is another FUE extraction site treated with ACEll in a hyaluronic acid mixture after 5 weeks.  It is still too early to tell if the hair might regrow in the extraction site though I have seen this.  It does appear that a single hair is forming in the extraction site, which appear as a black nub.  What is interesting is the appearance of a capillary in the skin.  These are usually missing following FUE and help lead to the loss of pigment in the extraction site.  I've done enough FUE to spot extraction sites anytime I look at a donor area even when no hypopigmentation occurs.  It is an observation based on experience with FUE.  With this donor area, I could not find any evidence that FUE was performed.  The red circle is where I would expect a follicular unit to be.  The entire donor area looked like this.  The black circle is 10 sq mm.  

The long hair after 5 weeks is a result of a completely non-shaven procedure of 1464 grafts.  I call this C2G.  It is still to early to say for sure because I need more results, but this is an example of what I have seen in donor areas treated fully with ACELL with my method of FUE where I use minimal depth control.  The initial problem was treating all the extraction sites with a powder.  I overcame this with mixing it in a viscous hyaluronic acid.  More recently I have been mixing in a more viscous cellulose.  I have a few comparative examples where I am looking at powder, hyaluronic acid, and cellulose.  Time will hopefully tell. I think the minimal depth incision technique along with Acell may result in better healing than a full depth incision.  Maybe we will see more hair regrowth over time.   Maybe not.  Still no one could comb through this donor area and find any evidence that a hair transplant had been done.  It appears that we really are coming full circle today.  Not only have we produced optimal results in the recipient area such that you cannot tell that a hair transplant has been done.  Even the trained eye cannot see evidence that a hair transplant was done in the donor area.  Still we need more results to confirm that such results will be consistent.

----------


## rapunzal

thanks for the post doc

can you briefly explain full depth extraction to partial depth ?
is partial the removal of the entire follicle with less surrounding tissue depth or does it leave a portion of the follicle behind which might contribute to the reformation of another follicle

----------


## HairRobinHood

> I find this interesting.


 I find this interesting too. Dr. Cole, frankly, your post and your whole ACell/CIT concept sounds like a 100 mhp driving Mercedes Benz with a missing wheel. I really wonder what good are all these Societies of Hair Restoration Surgery on this planet. It seems just to say each other  Hello, business colleague! once a year? I guess not even the last

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

A full depth incision would be from the surface of the skin to below the bulb.  In a recent morphometry study done by Paco Jimenez, he found the distance from the surface of the skin to the base of the hair bulb was 4.156 mm +/- 0.439 mm.  Thus a full depth incision around a follicle would be more than 4.156 mm deep on average.  Paco goes on to say that most of the stem cells are primarily located between 1 mm deep and 1.8 mm deep or roughly the length of the isthmus of the hair follicle based on the well known bluge stem cell marker CK15.  A minimal depth incision would be only as deep as necessary to extract a full intact hair follicle.  I avoid plucking hair follicles and I certainly do not like to amputate them.  
When I extract a full intact hair follicle, I ease it out.  I do not cut around it and remove it.  Easing the follicle out means that bits and pieces of the dermal sheath are left behind in the dermis and adipose.  These bits and pieces leave potential stem cells behind.  These stem cells have the potential to create new hair follicles.  

When you ask Acell to do little things, it is possible that it will.  When you ask it to do something on a large scale such as regrow an entire arm, you are not going to see it.  Im asking Acell to regenerate a tiny portion of dermis and epidermis.  We are seeing that Acell can do this.  We are also hoping that it will continue to be successful in promoting follicle stem cell neogenesis.  To me the latter is not as likely as.  

What we are seeing here is the formation of capillaries that are not usually seen following extraction of intact follicular units even with my minimal depth approach.  My theory was that with the loss of the hair follicles, the body did not need to regenerate the capillaries.  We also saw a decrease in pigmentation of the skin in many individuals following the removal of scalp hair follicles.  With Acell we are seeing normal pigmentation and the formation of capillaries.  In other words, it looks like normal skin.  It is very exciting to me.  In my opinion, the positive results we are getting with Acell are simply one more nail in the coffin for strip surgery.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

NY has been similar to Antarctica recently wreaking havoc with patients and office hours.
I have been very excited with my conversations with Artericyte (Please look them up). The feeling is that VEGF (Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor) is highly attractive for Adult Stem Cells which Matristem needs to convert to Active Progenitor Cells. Whether we need to utilize the wealth of stem cells from hip bone marrow aspirate is yet to be determined.Dr. Cooley will be working with the company as well as they have a principle in Charlotte. My team will be travelling to Philadelphia to learn the office technique. Where it may prove very valuable is in Auto-Cloning with Plucked hairs as it offers quick support and re-modeling of these somewhat skeletonized hairs. We will have to see.
I believe the early encouraging results from the enhanced PRP/ACell is even more exciting. If consistent, we have a "Vaccination" for hair loss.
One question we are trying to answer is how much micro-needling damage we need to create in the scalp with ACell injection to remodel scalp hair follicle stem cells to produce active progenitor cells--we may need to do more than one set of injections to achieve this. I believe the answers will come fast and furiously. 
I am glad Dr. Cole is seeing the fruits of ACell. The question comes if the donor area is remodelled with the subsequent production of skin and hair, why perform a tedious and costly FUE as opposed to a strip method that "repairs itself". I think all methods have their place and my job as I see it is to try to help solve the problem and let each apply that solution to their respective techniques.
Thank You all for your encouragement and feedback--you don't know how helpful it has been!

----------


## Bakez

Dr Hitzig,

Are there, or will there be problems controlling the direction of growth with your injections?

----------


## HairRobinHood

> In my opinion, the positive results we are getting with Acell are simply one more nail in the coffin for strip surgery.


 I guess you didn't see Dr. Hitzig's ACell-strip-closure results?

If I'm not completely wrong, and just from what I have seen so far from Dr. Hitzig concerning strip-closure with ACell, that was so far *the best I have  EVER seen* in my life concerning strip surgery - and basically I'm NOT really a "strip supporter", I have to add!

----------


## gmonasco

> I guess you didn't see Dr. Hitzig's ACell-strip-closure results?


 I don't understand your response; it seems something of a non-sequitur.

The point seems to be that if FUE surgery could be consistently accomplished with little or no loss of donor hair, why would FUT continue to be used?

----------


## tbtadmin

Dr. Gary Hitzig discusses his recent findings on last Sunday's The Bald Truth

----------


## HairRobinHood

> I don't understand your response; it seems something of a non-sequitur.
> 
> The point seems to be that if FUE surgery could be consistently accomplished with little or no loss of donor hair, why would FUT continue to be used?


 Check out Dr. Hitzig's presentation (part 2):

http://www.iahrs.org/news/acell-matr...inary-results/

I'm still asking myself, whether or not Dr. Hitzig has consistent results with new strip or old scar removal --> "partial closure" for 8 - 10 days --> full donor regeneration after some month, including regrown/ingrown/sprouting out hairs within the former "scar".

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

If you remove 1 cm of tissue or more from a donor area, you are removing it in block excision.  The entire dermis, follicle, and adipose come out. You close the area. This will result in a scar along with biological creep to some degree.  The biologic creep will be greatest in the adjacent 0.5 cm on each side of the scar.  As you move 2.5 cm above or below the scar, the biologic creep is less.  The biologic creep does not result in more hair follicles or more follicular units.  It does result in more skin with the same number of follicles and the same number of follicular units.  In other words, the hair and follicular density decrease on either side of the scar.  This has been documented many times including in studies that I have performed.  

The application of Acell in this wound is not gong to replace the 1 cm (it could be more or less) of tissue that was removed.  It might make the wound heal more like normal skin.  It is not going to replace the tissue that was removed.  

One other thing that Acell is not going to do is have any beneficial affect on the distortion of follicle growth direction that necessarily occurs with any strip procedure and increases with subsequent procedures.   Often times it is not only the progressive widening of scars that make the consequences of subsequent strip procedures worse, it is the progressive negative impact on hair growth direction.  At times the distortion of hair growth angles is the primary reason that strip procedures produce obvious evidence that a hair transplant was performed.  Acell, God, genetic engineering, nor magic can overcome this particular deleterious consequence of strip surgery.  Once you have it, you have it.  It is nearly impossible to resolve.  Sadly, too few recognize this complication of strip surgery.  For these reasons, I consider strip excision non sequitur, as well especially considering that we are getting better donor area healing thus far from a combination of Acell and FUE.  

I welcome clear evidence rather than fuzzy video photos that show a benefit from the use of Acell in the improvement of strip scars.  Again, Im all for it.  I have not seen the evidence yet in clear photographs.  I must say that I am listening and watching.  Many are both doing some really cool stuff and merit keen interest.  If you really want to impress me with your strip scars; however, treat the next 50 with Acell and then shave the donor area 6 months or longer thereafter. Take high quality images of each and present them in high quality format that anyone can enlarge rather than in grainy videos.  

On a more positive note, I had a patient come back today 6 months after his procedure.  We injected Acell into his strip scar and then grafted 50 beard hair that I extracted via FUE.  The yield was 46 out of 50 beard hairs.  I treated a different area of his multiple strip scars with 6 chest hair.  Both were simply tests, which I prefer to perform with body hair these days.  The 6 chest hair were not pre-treated with Acell.  None of the chest hair was growing at 6 months.  Of course one of his chief complaints was his strip scarring.  When ever his hair is wet, the scars are evident.  Like many of my patients he has multiple areas that need refinement and naturalization.   Ive devoted his limited donor area to resolving the pluggy, pitted appearance of his hairline.  This leaves his body hair to treat his 4 donor scars, at least for now.  He is physically active and spends a good deal of his time in physical activities such as cage fighting.  Sweating results in wet hair that reveals not only his pluggy hairline, but also his multiple, wide strip scars.  It is a complex scenario that requires good technique and a bit of luck.  

I have been using body hair for many years now.  The results are quite variable.  Sometimes they are good.  I call this good fortune.  Sometimes the results are poor not only because of yields, but because they can produce poor cosmetic results even when the yield is good.  Beard hair tends to have a better cosmetic impact than other sources, but the typical yield from beard hair is about 60% in ideal situations.  Here we had a yield of 92%.  Thats good in my experience.  Not only that, the lengthy was really good for 6 months follow up.  Thus far we have a bit more than good fortune at hand.  

That is not to say that chest hair or leg hair have not worked well in many instances.  Still the number of poor results is unacceptable.  We really need to increase the potential donor area so I hope we can get better results from other sources of donor area.  

A single case!  It means nothing really unless you are the recipient, in which case you can be elated.  It is impressive and suggests that further study is warranted to see if we can improve body hair yields in general along with the potential to improve the yields from scalp hair.  Today we grafted over 900 beard hair to the donor area.   We treated all the grafts with Acell powder and also injected the donor area with Acell.  He refused PRP, but I recommend it.  I also grafted another 8 chest hair, but this time added Acell to them.  Lets see what we have in another 6 months.  I hope it is good.  With body hair, I always tend to sit on the edge of my seat and pray.

----------


## Westonci

> If you remove 1 cm of tissue or more from a donor area, you are removing it in block excision.  The entire dermis, follicle, and adipose come out. You close the area. This will result in a scar along with biological creep to some degree.  The biologic creep will be greatest in the adjacent 0.5 cm on each side of the scar.  As you move 2.5 cm above or below the scar, the biologic creep is less.  The biologic creep does not result in more hair follicles or more follicular units.  It does result in more skin with the same number of follicles and the same number of follicular units.  In other words, the hair and follicular density decrease on either side of the scar.  This has been documented many times including in studies that I have performed.  
> 
> The application of Acell in this wound is not gong to replace the 1 cm (it could be more or less) of tissue that was removed.  It might make the wound heal more like normal skin.  It is not going to replace the tissue that was removed.  
> 
> One other thing that Acell is not going to do is have any beneficial affect on the distortion of follicle growth direction that necessarily occurs with any strip procedure and increases with subsequent procedures.   Often times it is not only the progressive widening of scars that make the consequences of subsequent strip procedures worse, it is the progressive negative impact on hair growth direction.  At times the distortion of hair growth angles is the primary reason that strip procedures produce obvious evidence that a hair transplant was performed.  Acell, God, genetic engineering, nor magic can overcome this particular deleterious consequence of strip surgery.  Once you have it, you have it.  It is nearly impossible to resolve.  Sadly, too few recognize this complication of strip surgery.  For these reasons, I consider strip excision non sequitur, as well especially considering that we are getting better donor area healing thus far from a combination of Acell and FUE.  
> 
> I welcome clear evidence rather than fuzzy video photos that show a benefit from the use of Acell in the improvement of strip scars.  Again, I’m all for it.  I have not seen the evidence yet in clear photographs.  I must say that I am listening and watching.  Many are both doing some really cool stuff and merit keen interest.  If you really want to impress me with your strip scars; however, treat the next 50 with Acell and then shave the donor area 6 months or longer thereafter. Take high quality images of each and present them in high quality format that anyone can enlarge rather than in grainy videos.  
> 
> On a more positive note, I had a patient come back today 6 months after his procedure.  We injected Acell into his strip scar and then grafted 50 beard hair that I extracted via FUE.  The yield was 46 out of 50 beard hairs.  I treated a different area of his multiple strip scars with 6 chest hair.  Both were simply tests, which I prefer to perform with body hair these days.  The 6 chest hair were not pre-treated with Acell.  None of the chest hair was growing at 6 months.  Of course one of his chief complaints was his strip scarring.  When ever his hair is wet, the scars are evident.  Like many of my patients he has multiple areas that need refinement and naturalization.   I’ve devoted his limited donor area to resolving the pluggy, pitted appearance of his hairline.  This leaves his body hair to treat his 4 donor scars, at least for now.  He is physically active and spends a good deal of his time in physical activities such as cage fighting.  Sweating results in wet hair that reveals not only his pluggy hairline, but also his multiple, wide strip scars.  It is a complex scenario that requires good technique and a bit of luck.  
> ...


 Dr. Cole what is you opinion on partially extracting  a portion of the hair follicle with 1 of the 2 sources of stem cells in the hair (Dermal papilla or bulge) that Dr. Gho is doing.

He claims that both sources of stem cells will result in a new hair follicle when implanted and that the donor hair will regow, so your getting 2 hairs from 1 hair.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Dr. Gho is probably right on a limited basis.  If you look at hair follicle transection yield studies across the board, you will find that transected follicles can result in more than one hair.  The problem is that neither fraction will produce a yield of 100&#37; nor quite often the combined yield of 90%.  Furthermore, there are many studies that show that fractionated follicles produce finer hairs. This is why many physicians do it at times to produce a finer hair result on the hairline or in the temple point region. Still, expect a lower yield than 60% from each fraction.  I prefer to cherry pick finer hairs for these functions rather than throw caution to the wind and hope that I get an acceptable yield from fractionated follicles.  

No one really knows what Dr. Gho is doing.  He claims that he is extracting a portion of the follicle and getting two to grow.  He probably is, but not on a consistent basis.  It is up to him to prove that all the science pre-dating his claims is inaccurate. Many have done this for years without complete success.  In other words, follicle transection rate studies result in lower than ideal yields from each fraction consistently in all studies to date.  Perhaps something like Acell will change the playing field for all of us, but in the interim, I would not put my donor area at risk.  

Enclosed is an image of a plucked hair follicle compared to an intact follicle.  If most of the stem cells are located in the upper portion and you fractionated this follicle somewhere between the upper and lower portion, you might have stem cells in both halves.  You would expect growth from both half.  Unfortunately, you don’t get this in human trials.  Furthermore, note how little tissue there is around a plucked follicle.  Acell might improve the survival of the transplanted hair, but what is going to improve the survival of the limited amount of tissue that is residual in the donor area from the plucked follicle.  I think you need to stimulate that too.  Still, I’d put my money on the intact follicle on the left and stimulate both the recipient area and donor area with Acell.  If Acell fails to work, at least you have the intact follicle working for you in the recipient area.  Note the plucked follicle on the right.  It is missing parts of the upper dermal sheath and the lower dermal sheath.  Until we prove Acell stimulates the recipient area with the naked follicle to produce a full diameter hair and the non-stimulated lower residual fraction of dermal sheath in the donor area also produces a normal diameter hair, I have to back the intact follicle and stimulate the donor area.  I see positive results in both the donor and recipient area doing the latter.  

Recall the study by Dr. Jimenez where he noted the stem cells are in between 1mm and 2 mm from the surface of follicle (between L1 and L2 as defined by Dr. Jimenez).  Why would we see growth from the upper portion and the lower portion, when you amputate a follicle at the lower portion of the follicle between L2 and L3?  There must be stem cells at the lower portion, as well.   Based on the study and the location of amputation, you get different yields.  I’ve also enclosed a photo from Dr. Jimenez’s paper on the morphometics of the hair follicle.  For the most part he says that the stem cells are located between L1 and L2.  Still you can get growth from the upper portion and the lower portion when you amputate somewhere between L2 and  L3.  None of it makes total sense.  What we do know is that in some studies the yield is better when you fractionate the follicle at the upper 1/2 from both portions. Other studies seem to refute these findings.  

It is up to Dr. Gho to clarify his work.  To date he has not.  It does not make sense to me.  That too often is the case in the field of hair transplant surgery, however.

----------


## Westonci

> Dr. Gho is probably right on a limited basis.  If you look at hair follicle transection yield studies across the board, you will find that transected follicles can result in more than one hair.  The problem is that neither fraction will produce a yield of 100&#37; nor quite often the combined yield of 90%.  Furthermore, there are many studies that show that fractionated follicles produce finer hairs. This is why many physicians do it at times to produce a finer hair result on the hairline or in the temple point region. Still, expect a lower yield than 60% from each fraction.  I prefer to cherry pick finer hairs for these functions rather than throw caution to the wind and hope that I get an acceptable yield from fractionated follicles.  
> 
> No one really knows what Dr. Gho is doing.  He claims that he is extracting a portion of the follicle and getting two to grow.  He probably is, but not on a consistent basis.  It is up to him to prove that all the science pre-dating his claims is inaccurate. Many have done this for years without complete success.  In other words, follicle transection rate studies result in lower than ideal yields from each fraction consistently in all studies to date.  Perhaps something like Acell will change the playing field for all of us, but in the interim, I would not put my donor area at risk.  
> 
> Enclosed is an image of a plucked hair follicle compared to an intact follicle.  If most of the stem cells are located in the upper portion and you fractionated this follicle somewhere between the upper and lower portion, you might have stem cells in both halves.  You would expect growth from both half.  Unfortunately, you don’t get this in human trials.  Furthermore, note how little tissue there is around a plucked follicle.  Acell might improve the survival of the transplanted hair, but what is going to improve the survival of the limited amount of tissue that is residual in the donor area from the plucked follicle.  I think you need to stimulate that too.  Still, I’d put my money on the intact follicle on the left and stimulate both the recipient area and donor area with Acell.  If Acell fails to work, at least you have the intact follicle working for you in the recipient area.  Note the plucked follicle on the right.  It is missing parts of the upper dermal sheath and the lower dermal sheath.  Until we prove Acell stimulates the recipient area with the naked follicle to produce a full diameter hair and the non-stimulated lower residual fraction of dermal sheath in the donor area also produces a normal diameter hair, I have to back the intact follicle and stimulate the donor area.  I see positive results in both the donor and recipient area doing the latter.  
> 
> Recall the study by Dr. Jimenez where he noted the stem cells are in between 1mm and 2 mm from the surface of follicle (between L1 and L2 as defined by Dr. Jimenez).  Why would we see growth from the upper portion and the lower portion, when you amputate a follicle at the lower portion of the follicle between L2 and L3?  There must be stem cells at the lower portion, as well.   Based on the study and the location of amputation, you get different yields.  I’ve also enclosed a photo from Dr. Jimenez’s paper on the morphometics of the hair follicle.  For the most part he says that the stem cells are located between L1 and L2.  Still you can get growth from the upper portion and the lower portion when you amputate somewhere between L2 and  L3.  None of it makes total sense.  What we do know is that in some studies the yield is better when you fractionate the follicle at the upper 1/2 from both portions. Other studies seem to refute these findings.  
> 
> It is up to Dr. Gho to clarify his work.  To date he has not.  It does not make sense to me.  That too often is the case in the field of hair transplant surgery, however.


 Thank you for your response, i know your probably tired as it is late at night, but i just have one last question that is slightley off topic.

I've seen scientist grow organs in vitro using cells and a scaffold. Organs ranging from Livers, ears, fingers, arteries and blood vessels.

ie. Dr. Anthony Atala from Wake forest University.




Although a hair follicle is complex, relative to other organs its actually quite simple. So why cant scientist grow hair follicles using dermal fibroblasts and bulge stem cells using a *3d biodegradable scaffold* of a hair follicle?

----------


## gmonasco

Westonci, could you please stop quoting multi-paragraph responses in their entirety?  It's really annoying to have to scroll through all of that for no purpose.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Wow!  I suppose it has something to do with life and death along with insurance.  Well, you probably have to consider the complexity of the hair follicle, which derives from both epidermal and mesodermal stem cells.  Take a look at those labs.  Who do you know in the hair restoration industry that has anything like this?  

Like it or not, the loss of a liver or both kidneys will kill you. Too few recognize that hair loss is the equivalent of killing you to a small fraction of people.  Most consider it a normal occurrence that you should not be upset about.  No insurance is going to cover it.  Thus, where is the money for invested research backed by our government?  There in lies much of the problem, perhaps.

We are fortunate to have dedicated researchers such as Dr. Cotseralis dedicated to the problems at hand.  i still recall his excitement when i told him i had noted that follicles around a healed strip excision had the capacity to increase in hair diameter following strip excision in 1999.  i suspect this was his first exposure the potential of perturbation of hair follicles.  All of us are lucky to have him.  

i suspect we all just need more money and more rational to overcome hair loss.  No one is going to die from hair loss based on the rational of most. Still it impacts many people in horrific ways.  i think we need to get this across to politicians and researchers.  

i recall my next door neighbor who needed a single kidney.  Her husband, who was a federal judge, and she were careful with their money.   They never bought a cell phone.  One day they got a call that her matching kidney was available, but they were our of town.  The kidney went to the next person and she died of kidney failure months later even though they finally bought a cell phone.  That memory has never left me.  Hair loss can be devastating to so many people.  We just need more awareness that hair loss, though not life threatening, can severely impact the lives of so many.  Therein lies the problem. No heart...you die.  No liver....you die.  No kidneys...you die.  No hair....what are you worried about?  Well, the loss of hair has a tremendous impact on otherwise healthy individuals.  We simply need more awareness of the impact and a tremendous amount of financial backing.

----------


## rapunzal

> When I extract a full intact hair follicle, I ease it out.  I do not cut around it and remove it.  Easing the follicle out means that bits and pieces of the dermal sheath are left behind in the dermis and adipose.  These bits and pieces leave potential stem cells behind.  These stem cells have the potential to create new hair follicles.


 Doctor thank you for answering my question. One follow on question, do you have plans to refine your extraction in order to consistently regenerate follicles at the donor following extraction or is it simply too unpredicatable at the moment.

----------


## tbtadmin

We ask that all users of BTT forums act in a respectful and civil manner when posting their questions, concerns and opinions. This is a place to learn from each other, share ideas and information and to communicate with experts in the field, not a place to voice unfounded personal attacks.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> *This is a place* to learn from each other, share ideas and information and to communicate with experts in the field, ...


 The answer is - NO.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

That is a tough question, but a good question, Rapunzal.

In the 20 years Ive been restoring hair the one constant is change in my personal technique.  I made some huge changes back in the early years when I began transitioning from the standard of plug grafting to follicular units.  Back in 1991, I termed them pilosebaceous units and I still think that term is more applicable to what we do surgically as opposed to follicular units.  I invite anyone to research the orign of the term follicular unit in 1984 as a histological term.  Back in 1991 all my mentors called me crazy for changing.  I could not help but listen back then.  Today, I dont listen to my ears.  I listen to my eyes and think with my mind.  That is not to say that we should not consider what we hear and read.  We simply cannot be boxed in by what others say.  We need to take a rational approach and follow what our eyes reveal.  Results are simply results.  If you dont try to build on them, you are going to be stagnant.    If you try new things, the results disclose the consequences - good or bad.  

In this thread we are focusing more on theory than on concrete evidence.  Theory is a great thing simply because it implores us to try new things.  Reality is a quite different avenue.  If the results are poor, we abandon the road.  If the results are very good, we stay the course.  If the results are suggestive, we wander in one foot at a time.  In many instances of hair restoration surgery the previous freeway leads us to a new exit.  The previous freeway makes us feel comfortable exiting because the road has been safe thus far.  This is what occurred in the transition from plugs to follicular units.  Other roads are new.  We exited a jungle and followed a new road.  Sometimes that new road is dangerous and full of peril.  Such was the road with body hair.  Today we are discussing new highways.  We have some suggestive evidence, but we do not have complete faith in the new opportunities. There are signs along the road imploring us to continue without concern that we are going to drive off the cliff.  The problem is that we still do not know the veracity of these signs.  Is it marketing or is it the land of opportunity?  
The bottom line is that things that have worked in the past several years are likely to work well in the future with few modifications.  Breaking plugs into follicular units was a small but obvious exit.  Stem cell enhancement is not something that is old, tried, and true.  This is new!  We all must step tepidly as the consequences are yet uncertain.

To more directly answer your question, I must say that I dont think I have a new solution for extracting grafts even with the new biologic enhancement tools at our disposal.  I dont think there is a better way.  As I mentioned my procedure over the coming months or years will certainly change.  I dont sit and wait for modifications.  I constantly look for them.  Sometimes I sit in a comfort zone on fractions of my procedure such as how I extract follicles while looking in the other direction for improvements in other aspects of my procedure.  Your comments, however, cause me to contemplate because perhaps there is a better way.  We must all be on the look out for ideas that jar our creative side.  This is still not to suggest that I can think of a better way at this time.  It is simply a reflection that I hear your wake up call and I will contemplate the possibilities.
Every day I go to work I think about how I am going to treat my patient.  I actually begin this the day before by reviewing the patient chart and the procedure.  I often change the start time to encompass what I want to do.  Then I modify it once more while I evaluate the patient in person.  Then as I progress, I often modify the procedure once more as I begin to focus on the individual follicular units under 6X magnification.  I think about my work from the before I go to sleep until the time I sleep.  Then I often dream about it.  Youd be surprised what you can learn from your dreams.  I feel that if you are ever going to improve, you must be constantly focused on improvement and vigilant of what your colleagues are doing.  There is always something to learn or modify based on your own reflections or the advancements of your colleagues.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> That is a tough question, but a good question, Rapunzal.
> 
> In the 20 years Ive been restoring hair


 ... someone like you has now clue whether or not a plucked hair has the ability to regrow?

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Hair Robin Hood, i have no idea what your point is.  What i can say without reservation is that there is no one who is not walking on thin ice with regard to Acell.  Acell is a new modality with unproven benefits.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

So far no problem with direction--it is a great question though.
FUE transplants require extensive shaving of the donor area causing a long downtime to the patients. Strips offer the ability to transplant "coupled follicular units" allowing for better central density and a quicker more cost effective procedure. Downtime is minimal.
That being said, each patient and Physician needs to choose the procedure that they are most comfortable with after reviewing the options. ACell seems to even the field.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Thank you very much for all your input. I can only speak for myself, but to me the FUE downtime is not that much of a problem because in the end its just a few month. But due to some operations back in my youth days (not hair related) i am really really afraid of a strip procedure.

Thats why i like the idea of only plucked hair to be transplanted and the idea to creat infinite donor hair with FUE. I know every surgeon has his speciality when it comes to terms of transplantation. But i am still afraid of a strip operation. So as rapunzal i would be very happy to see further efforts to create an Acell FUE technique with regenerating donor hair.

I would accept the downtime without hesitation. In the long run it wouldn&#180;t even make no difference between FUT and FUE in terms of infinite donor hair.

@Dr Hitzig : Acell is not even the field its more then that its a real game changer :-) so thanks again to you and Dr Cooleys efforts to reach out to the baldie community, your efforts are very much appreciated

----------


## montrose

what effect does acell have on the donor scar?

----------


## ejj

..........

----------


## RichardDawkins

> This is my donor scar where acell has been used , I had a procedure 13 months ago . For me its a little dissapointing , the scar is not like a               ` normal ` scar there is no hard tissue, so I suppose thats a positive !.... however *its now just a `hairless ` piece of scalp that I think defeats the object of having a transplant in the first place* , 
> 
> Hope this helps with your qs montrose 
> 
> Regards 
> 
> Ejj


 That was a good one :-) i think you should ask to Dr Hitzig and or Dr Cooley they can surely help you. Also your scar is "new" which should make things easier then an old one

----------


## rapunzal

Hey ejj, sorry to hear that you didnt get the outcome you wanted. dont give, hopefully someone can help you out.

i have a couple of questions if you have a moment and are willing to share the answers.

when you went in 13months ago did you go in for scar correction only or was it part of a hair transplant ?

what was your scalp laxity like when you had it done ?

do you know what type of closure was used and stitching ? it might be on your procedure report if you have one

do you know how the acell was applied ? powder, sheets and where is was applied

sorry for the questions, but this information helps everyone ask the right questions when they go to see a surgeon for a consult

----------


## Bakez

Who performed the surgery?

----------


## RichardDawkins

ejj why did you delete your post?

----------


## rapunzal

Guys
I appreciate the time you both take to answer questions and provide your thoughts. Please continue to take time from your busy schedules to visit these forums to answer questions and provide your thoughts because with something like Acell that is very new there simply isnt enough information available.

pioneers can often be rediculed, dont be disheartened if you really believe you are making a difference because the satisfaction from eventual achievement will make the journey worth its while
cheers

----------


## RichardDawkins

I agree with this statement. It is important to get deeper in this Acell thing and also to go one step beyond.

For Example, Dr Cole is sceptical about autocloning, but maybe he can conduct some trials with patients and see if plucked hairs will grow and he can also put further effort in FUE and infinite donor reserves.

If FUE infinite donor is possible, my plan would be really simple, go for a FUE procedure and use Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooleys Plucked hair autocloning for do a little bit more fine tuning in my frontal area.

I am currently saving my money till someone will come up with "Yes i managed to get infinite donor with FUE"

But thanks again due to those results and the encouraging effort put into this, it is the first time i can gladly say " Well hairloss is only temporaire messing around but not in the long run"

Keep up the good work

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

I have been doing non-shaven FUE for many years.  i strongly feel this is the future in FUE for all patients.  It requires more preparation time, but it does allow the patient to return to work the next day without shaving.  There still are many physicians who are unaware that patients do not need to shave their donor area.  i've done well over 3500 grafts on a patient in one day without shaving the donor area of my patient.  i think a good mark is about 2000 to 2500 grafts in one procedure non-shaven, however.  

if you have a strip scar, you often do not want to shave your donor area.  Who could blame you?  in these instances, i am careful with how much donor area i trim.  The last thing we want to do is expose the strip scar whenever possible.  

Now here are some pearls of wisdom if both patients and physicians are reading.  When i was doing strip procedures, i would often trim the donor area that i planned to take in patients who had existing strip scars.  In my hands you can typically anticipate that a strip scar that is 3 mm wide is going to be 3 mm wide with the subsequent procedure.  in other words, the width was based not on technique, but rather on individual patient healing characteristics.  Knowing that the scar would be the same, i would let the hair down and step back away from the patient.  i would then look at the donor area under bright lights.  if i could see the strip scar even with the upper hair laying over the scar, i would not take as wide of an excision.  often times the strip scar is most apparent over the mastoid process.  if you measure 7 cm lateral to the midline of your scalp in the back donor area, you are over the mastoid process.  that is the boney protrusion that sticks out between your ear and the mid-line of your rear donor area scalp.  This is where strip scars are first evident.  i think the bony prominence makes the scar most prone to be wide there.  Also the donor area density is lower there than in the mid-line scalp.  If i could see the scar i would reduce the width of my strip so that i could insure more hair was there to help conceal the strip scar.

Back in 1992 I noted that my first strip procedure produced a fine scar.  I would often then make a second procedure and produce a second fine scar above or below the first scar.  The problem was that the multiple scars would make the donor area appear thin with all the scarring.  This was how physicians taught me to do the procedure.  Then i got the idea to harvest from the same scar in the second procedure so that my patients still had one scar.  That was a good idea.  The problem with harvesting from the same scar was that the extra tension on the subsequent procedure tended to make the scar wider.  That's when i came up with the idea to close in two layer.  My colleagues thought it was ridiculous to close in multiple layers because there was no firm tissue to hold the deep suture.  Well, the adipose was firm enough to hold either individual sutures or a running suture.  Guess what?  the scars reduced by 50&#37; when i did this.  Today, multiple layer closure is quite common.  I could take a 5 mm wide scar and get it to 2.5 to 3 mm in width.  Then i noted the big problem was an alteration of hair growth angles.  The more tissue you take out, the greater that problem became.  Furthermore, the more tissue you take out, the greater the reduction in follicular density around the scar.  Finally, even the best of techniques cannot always stop a strip scar from going from 2 or 3 mm to 5 mm.  Now you have a wider scar, less density around the scar, and distortion of hair growth angles.  All these complications simply create headaches for physicians and patients.  Today there are options available that allow you to avoid these complications.  

With a non-shaven technique of FUE, we can trim the donor area first and see what the donor area would look like if we take all the follicular units that we trim.  Of course I sometimes over trim to see what the donor area would look like if i took all the follicular units that i trimmed.  if i don't like what I see, i can reduce the number of follicular units that i take.  This is very important with patients who have prior strip scars.  We need to insure that patients can conceal their strip scars following a procedure.  When i was doing strip procedures (I've done over 8000 of them), we could only estimate what the donor area would look like.  With the non-shaven FUE we can actually see what the donor area will look like if we take everything.  if i don't like the coverage that is left following individual follicular unit trimming, I simply reduce the number of grafts that i take.  This is yet one more advantage to the non-shaven technique.  

I began doing this non-shave technique is 2004.  Prior to this i would shave small patches of hair.  It turns out that the shaven patch is the worst way to do FUE.  Avoid it at all cost.  Either go with the non-shaven technique or the shaven technique.  The shaven patch is a bad protocol.  Patients will not prefer this method even though many physicians still do it.  This method thins out patches of hair.  It is far better to stretch your follicle removal out over the entire donor area than to do it in patches.  

Shaving is a faster way to proceed.  Shaving is the preferred way if your transplant surgeon is a novice. If your surgeon has not done much non-shaven, don't let him experiment on you with a large procedure.  He needs to start small and work his way up.  

The non-shaven route takes more time to master.  I remember doing it early on.  i went home with a headache every day.  Now i simply fly through it with no problem.  It just takes time to get really good at it.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> I agree with this statement.


 Does it mean you agree that conversations with yourself?

----------


## RichardDawkins

@ Dr Cole : Ok this has its advantage but my point is, and i think anyone would agree here. That we would switch a full shaven head for infinite donor any time :-)

As i said before i hope you will go this way further with possible infinite Donor

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Richard Dawkins, I am skeptical of autocloning.  Nevertheless, it is one of those eye opening events that you have no choice but follow.  i honestly think that Dr. Hitzig and Dr. Cooley need to inject the donor area with Acell, in addition to the plucked follicles.  i'm really worried about what will grow in the donor area if they do not do this.  I'm sure they will keep us posted on their results.

For me, i have no plans to test autocloning at this time.  I learned something long ago.  Patients come to me to get their hair back.  i can assure this with FUE.  i can't with autocloning.  Still I'm totally in your camp with the concept of an infinite donor supply.  We tried it with body hair.  It worked well in some patients, but awfully in others.  It was nearly impossible to predict the results.  Today we are seeing a potential improvement by adding Acell to body hair transplants.  Even if autocloning does not work and even if treating the donor area FUE extraction sites does not work, perhaps body hair and Acell will work.  No matter which path anyone takes, they should proceed with caution.  Do a little, see what works, and then do more.  I'm so excited about what we are seeing in FUE donor area healing with Acell; however, that I just can't stop thinking about it.  I certainly hope that is exactly where Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig are with autocloning.  My advice to anyone considering autocloning with plucked hairs remains that they should test the area with no more than 500 grafts.  if it does not work for you, stop doing it.  If it does work for you continue it.

Richard Dawkins, you bring up one more point.  I cannot tell you how many patients I have seen in their 30s who started hair transplant surgery in their early 20s.  There are so many of these individuals who wish they had never done a hair transplant.  I worked on a repair case just this week with over 4 strip scars.  His comment to me was that he started in the early 90s when long hair was cool.  Then everyone started shaving their heads to conceal their hair loss. Now he wishes that he had not done anything.  I wish he hadn't either.  He got on the hair transplant freight train after watching an a TV commercial from an established clinic.  He has not only multiple strip scars, but also pitted and pluggy grafts.  His repair work will require at least 2 years of his time and my time.  Waiting for an infinite donor supply for you is a good thing.  My honest hope for you is that you will no longer want hair restoration by the time technology catches up to what you want.  By the time many individuals hit their 30s, they no longer worry about their hair.  They have other things to worry about like children, wives, and business.  I hope you are able to put it behind you.  I also hope your follicle loss does not put you in a place where you need an infinite supply of hair.  Thus, my sincere hope for you is that you do not want hair transplants in the future and that your donor area is capable of restoring your hair loss should modern technology fail to produce the results you are in need of.  

That leads me to one last comment.  I don't read these forums on a regular basis.  i have tunnel vision when i do.  Did anyone see Jerry Brown's inauguration picture this month?  I recall his inauguration in the 1970s.  He was on the stage with Linda Ronstadt.  Jerry had a hair loss problem at that time, but he looked like he had a full head of hair.  Well, fast forward almost 40 years and it was all gone.  The last thing you want is to start hair transplant surgery in your early years and wind up like Joe Biden with a huge bald spot in the rear.  All of you guys take note.  What you do today has an impact on what you will look like in the future.  There is nothing wrong with waiting.  Next year's model will be better than this year's model.  We will have more time to work out the Acell, etc. kinks.  For me, my first car was a Ford Galexy 500 that i had to bleed the breaks on every two days.  I could not consider myself in that clunker today not simply because  i'm too rotund to get under the car.  We are simply not a match.  Waiting will bring you nothing but the future.  Hopefully the future will bring you peace with who you are in your absence of as much hair as you would like.  Besides, perhaps modern technology will help you avoid surgery altogether.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> For me, my first car was a Ford Galexy 500


 No Mercedes Benz with just 3 wheels?

----------


## gmonasco

> Did anyone see Jerry Brown's inauguration picture this month? I recall his inauguration in the 1970s. He was on the stage with Linda Ronstadt. Jerry had a hair loss problem at that time, but he looked like he had a full head of hair. Well, fast forward almost 40 years and it was all gone.


 *How cosmetic doctors would redo Jerry Browns face*

Cosmetic doctors say that Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown, 72, has had little or no plastic surgery, but they have plenty to recommend to him.

http://inyourface.ocregister.com/201...ns-face/22686/

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

This is what i use to measure Acell.  Note how little powder there is to equal 15.6 mg.  This scale has glass all around to eliminate air flow and allow for a more precise measurement of the Acell.  The scale is quite precise and carries a costly price tag.   I like to be as precise as possible when mixing the Acell in my delivery vehicle such as hyaluronic acid or cellulose.  This is the Acell powder, which i fell mixes much more homogenous than the Acell flakes.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

That so entertaining, gmonasco.  I would not know where to look for such links as you point out.  There is so much to take home from this presentation, however.  Jerry Brown was quite the "looker" in the 70s.  He had medium length hair just over his ears.  He looked professional yet "hip".  Fast forward almost 40 years and his has a shaven head with a Norwood Class 6 pattern.  Would he shave his head if he had a strip scar?  It is almost appalling to see plastic surgeons recommend a variety of procedures for him.  One thing i noted was that no one recommended a hair transplant.  I can only imagine what they might say about his strip scar....."he needs to get that reduced....he needs to put some hair in that scar....he's obviously had a hair transplant....he needs balloon expansion of his scalp to reduce the scar".  

Here are the points.  Even in your 30s you might have a full crop of hair or you may be a NW class 2.  By the time you hit 70, you might be a class 6.  Jerry Brown did it.  Why can't you?  Why in God's name would you want a strip scar put on the back of your head for any reason regardless of your hair loss pattern in your 20s, 30s, or 40s?  I don't get it.  you can avoid it altogether today.  What are you going to do in your 60 and 70s when your hair loss has out weighed your donor area?   Are you going to shave your head like Jerry Brown or grin and bear it like Joe Biden?  The points are simple. Hair loss is a life long process.  The consequences of anything you do today are going to catch up with you later on in life.  If you have a strip procedure today, shaving your head is out of the question from then on.  It is better to do nothing in my opinion than get on that ballon.  If you have something like FUE, you will not have a strip scar.  At the worst you can relocate the grafts back to your donor area without worry about hair growth angle distortion.  Still the best solution of all is to do nothing as did Jerry Brown.  Many recommended a brow lift, liposuction, facelift or eyelid surgery, but no one recommended a hair transplant.  Still more important, no one recommended a scar revision for his inadequate hair transplant procedure.  

if you are going to have hair restoration surgery, it is my firm belief that you should do it in a way such that you minimize the consequences of the procedure.  It is better to do FUE than a strip procedure.  It is better yet to add Acell and PRP in the donor area when you do FUE.  It may or may not be better yet to do hair plucking plus Acell in the recipient area than FUE. Time will tell.  What i can say unequivocally is that strip surgery is only for those with minimal hair loss.  If your hair loss is greater than a class 2 in your 40s, you should probably avoid it because ultimately your hair loss will catch up with you just as it did With Jerry Brown. You will hear it time and time again from strip surgeons that you should have FUE only if you have minimal hair loss.  Well my friends, it is the other way around.  The only way you do a good job of hiding that hideous scar is to have minimal hair loss.  What would Jerry Brown do with his strip scar today?  Would he have been re-elected?  I don't know, but one thing for sure is that he would not have his hair cropped short and plastic surgeons would be commenting about more than his eyelids, face, and adipose.

I had a patient in his late 30s ask me about a strip procedure just this week.  I told him I would not do it and referred him to several well known colleagues.   Obviously strip surgery is still something that many want, but long term will they still want it?  i don't know, but i do know that I will not be practicing medicine in 40 years when the complications show up.  I will not be around to clean up my scars any longer.  Personally I want nothing to do any longer with strip hair restoration procedures.

----------


## Westonci

Dr. Cole, I have an idea as a way to compromise between your skepcticsm on plucked hair as well as still being able to put the experimental use of plucked hairs to use.

In a regular FUE you take follicular units from the permanent donor region in the back of the head and place them in the balding area. The downside however is that the donor region is depleted as is the case for all hair transplants to date.

My idea is that you would carry out the normal FUE procedure (Extract Follicular units from the back of scalp and place them in the bald area) but you would add an additional step of plucking hairs from the donor region that are left over from the FUE procedure and soaking them in Acell and them inserting them into the Donor holes left over from the extraction sites.

Worse case scenario would be a normal FUE procedure, however the plucked hairs with acell placed in the donor holes do not regenerate. However this is not really a negative since you would end up with the same loss factor as normal FUE hairtransplant.

Best Case scenario, the implanted plucked with acell  regenerate a new hair follicles in the donor holes. So you get the results of an FUE with the added benefit of regenerated donor hair.

Since there are donor holes left over from the FUE procedure you may as well put them to good use.

What do you think of my idea?

----------


## RichardDawkins

I think it is worth a shot. And i know Dr Cole you are sceptical about plucking but i think sometimes risks have to be taken.

Because with your showings about those non existing spots after a FUE procedure, i think you were on the right track.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> What do you think of my idea?


  I guess he likes you idea, because Dr. Cole likes everything what makes things more complicated than necessary.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

I think your ideas are good.  I first did this by taking hair off the legs and putting it in donor area extraction sites.  Guess what?  The donor area looked better with less hypopigmentation.  The problem was that the hairs from the legs were fine in nature. Their coverage value was minimal.  Chest hair did better, however.  Not only that, when i put PRP in the extraction sites the survival of body hair in the extraction sites was better.  

Now here is my concern with plucking hair.  If i pluck a hair, will the hair re-grow in the donor area or will it die?  Suppose i pluck a hair and put it over in my extraction sites.  Suppose the plucked hair re-grows, but the spot where the plucked hair does not re-grow. The end result is a one for one transfer.  Now suppose a worse case scenario.  The plucked hair re-grows, yet it is finer.  Now we have a one for one transfer, but the end result is less hair volume owing to the finer hair.  Now the worst case scenario is that i pluck the hair and nothing grows.  Now i and a one for one loss.

I'm all for trying new things, but i don't want to do things that are not likely to yield results especially when they affect other people.  I spend almost all of my non-family spare time fishing.  I would never go where the fish are not likely to bite.  The same is true for cosmetic surgery.  You need to go where the results are.  I'm already putting Acell in my extraction sites.  Suppose i put a plucked hair in my extractions sites with Acell.  Suppose something grows.  Was it the plucked hair or the stimulated hair follicles from the FUE graft that i removed?  Best for me to stick to my plan in the short interim.  You have a good mind thought.  Perhaps you should come visit me and stimulate me mentally.  if my plan does not work and plucking does work, then we will all be plucking. If my plan does work and plucking does not, then we will all be doing FUE.  I think we need different minds and differnt points of attack to see what works best.  One thing is for sure.  if i put Acell in a donor extraction and a plucked hair we will never know whether the plucked hair grew or whether it was stem cells from my minimal depth extraction procedure.

Now hypopigmentation is a local phenomenon.  We don't see it on the beard or legs.  We rarely see it on the back.  It is common but not ubiquitous on the chest or abdomen. It is common on the scalp.  What these variables tell us is that hypopigmentation is not a procedure result. It is a local result.  With Acel we are overcoming the local results and at times re-growing hair.

My greatest challenge is not what i do.  My problem is patient follow up.  Most of my patients come from different states and different countries.  I don't market and I don't advertise. What i have is a long standing reputation of good work which results in many patients.  I'm happy to have this, but change is based on seeing your results.  What i really miss is seeing my patients every 3 months.  I feel this is what made me  better over the years.  I wish i had that today, but sadly my reputation has superseded my personal touch.  What i need is more local patients so that I can follow them up more closely and make changes as necessary.  I'm always looking for patients i can follow closely. I live in a rural community close to my horses.  When you don't advertise, you simply don't get may local patients.  I truly miss having my patients visit my home and i miss having dinner with them....with their families.  More importantly, yet not more personally rewarding, i miss close patient follow up.  We need this to ensure we are on the better path.

----------


## gmonasco

> You will hear it time and time again from strip surgeons that you should have FUE only if you have minimal hair loss. Well my friends, it is the other way around.


 Given today's state of FUE technique and its limitations, do you think it's currently advisable for anyone with more than minimal hair loss to undergo an FUE transplant?

----------


## RichardDawkins

Even i am not a doctor but with regards to some late findings i say today its more advisable then 5 to 7 years before.

----------


## gmonasco

There are those who would say that anything more than a minimal FUE procedure presents the same problem as FUT: if your hair loss continues, you won't have more available donor hair for future (FUE) procedures, and you won't be able to shave down due to the FUE scarring.

----------


## Bakez

> So far no problem with direction--it is a great question though.
> FUE transplants require extensive shaving of the donor area causing a long downtime to the patients. Strips offer the ability to transplant "coupled follicular units" allowing for better central density and a quicker more cost effective procedure. Downtime is minimal.
> That being said, each patient and Physician needs to choose the procedure that they are most comfortable with after reviewing the options. ACell seems to even the field.


 If there has been no problem with direction, then would that not add further suggestion that you are actually 'waking up' the 'faulty' stem cells, in line with the recent research as you spoke about on the show recently?

This is amazing news if true, although I still have much doubt over the procedure.

----------


## RichardDawkins

> There are those who would say that anything more than a minimal FUE procedure presents the same problem as FUT: if your hair loss continues, you won't have more available donor hair for future (FUE) procedures, and you won't be able to shave down due to the FUE scarring.


 FUE in combination with Acell wont go to the shotgun white dots. Thats only one of the Acell benefits. With adding Acell, it seems that there was no FUE extraction in the donor area and you have aldo a higher chance of follicles to regrow in your donor area.

----------


## KeepHoping

I think at this point, the news is very exciting but lets see what comes up with the pictures of acell transplants + acell/PRP cases (Where part of the scalp is transplanted and another part is only injected with PRP/Acell)...  Dr. Hitzig mentioned he's going to start using stem cells from bone marrow because they are active stem cells and that might cause even more regrowth.  If those results are really good, I'm going start my hair restoration journey.

----------


## rapunzal

Hi Dr Hitzig

I appreciate your effort of putting some photos of recent PRP+ACell injection cases on your website for all to see.

Just a thought, the photo's alone for this procedure might not do this type of treatment any justice because its not easy to judge an improvement to hair diameter or thickening through photos unlike hair transplants where the change is like night and day.

Perhaps you could consider including some type of measurement in future cases, even a crude measure such as taking an average hair diameter reading with a micrometer of 100 random hairs in the treated area prior to treatment and the same measurement of 100 random hairs at 6 month follow up. it would probably add about 1/2hr extra in time to the procedure, would not be inconvenient for the patient (hair shaving, tattoo, etc). it would make the publics judegement a little less subjective and demonstrate to the public that indeed this is the preventative vaccine for hairloss.

----------


## KeepHoping

To me it clearly looks like in both the examples the hairloss is going in the opposite direction, although the changes are not extreme they are in the right direction...  I think maybe more accurate measurements would help silence some of the critics as Rapunzal says...

Also could the results get better as time progresses Doctor?  Do you think the hair will continue to get better and see more growth after a year?

----------


## ejj

Hi Richard Dawkins and Rapunzel ,

Sorry re deleted post wanted to post all my pics only got one up as not posted before ( tech head ) , think its best if I start a new topic re my transplant of beard fue and acell rather than jump into this one !!  will get them up over the weekend 

ej

----------


## ejj

Acell kind of doesn`t create the usual scar tissue associated with strip  as I said large area non hair bearing scalp , more pics  to follow , Dr was Dr Cooley  great guy but im extremely upset with the results , acell powder , no scar revision 

hpe this helps 

ej

correction to the above post it was not fue ....it was plucked beard hair   thx

----------


## Bakez

That was a strip scar and he JUST used ACell on it? So he didn't implant any plucked hairs or anything like that? What were you expecting? Surely if the ACell turned the scar into normal tissue that is good right?

----------


## gmonasco

> Even in your 30s you might have a full crop of hair or you may be a NW class 2. By the time you hit 70, you might be a class 6. Jerry Brown did it. Why can't you? Why in God's name would you want a strip scar put on the back of your head for any reason regardless of your hair loss pattern in your 20s, 30s, or 40s?


 I would never advocate that a patient bank his future on a currently non-existent medical option, but even if we haven't licked the limited donor hair problem by 30-40 years from now, I'd be quite surprised (assuming I were still alive) if we hadn't made great strides in scar reduction/elimination by then.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Hey ejj thats the problem BH in general seems to not work very well when transplanted.

You should try it with plucked hairs

----------


## ejj

It was plucked hair 
Expectations ... well a standard everday closure would of been nice !

ej

----------


## Bakez

How many hairs were plucked?

----------


## RichardDawkins

What was it exactly? 

First you dont know IF you got plucked hairs

Then it was plcuked beard hair

And now its plucked hair

----------


## ejj

600  zero growth .............

----------


## RichardDawkins

Was it Beard hair or scalp hair

----------


## ejj

richard , where you the school bully ???  ...

There is no " dont know " anywhere in any of my posts !!  apologies for saying plucked hair ..it was plucked beard hair ..to clarify  !

ej

----------


## RichardDawkins

Beard and body hair doesnt work that well

----------


## ejj

really !... and in what context are you talking ` plucked ` or fue , mine was plucked so you would be right,   as im wearing the results , re  fue .. im hopefull ,some Drs are getting good results with beard hair fue`d  , thats my option at the moment  ,... but lets not stray to far from the acell results in the donor for the moment , thanks for the reply 
ej

----------


## RichardDawkins

Don´t get me wrong but something here is not kosher in your case.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ah ok now i get it thanks for the clarification

----------


## HairRobinHood

Wait, wait, wait, @ejj, as far as I understand, you had a OLD STRIP-SCAR revision, but *NO removal of the OLD scar*, instead of, Dr. Cooley plucked 600 beard hairs, applied the ACell stuff to the 600 beard hairs and transplanted the 600 plucked beard hairs into the OLD strip scar? Am I right?

When was the procedure? How many month ago?

----------


## HairRobinHood

> When was the procedure? How many month ago?


 Oh, and is your photo (above) a before or an after photo?

----------


## RichardDawkins

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=4308

There is the whole thread

----------


## ejj

To Clarify :  

I have had 5 prior strip procedures .

December 09  I had the  most recent whereby 2000 grafts were taken from 3 strips and grafted to the frontal third of my head .

The donor area where the strips were taken from was treated with acell,  to aid healing , there was NO SCAR REVISION the donor area was sutured not stapled . 

600 Beard Hairs were plucked from my chin  and placed in and around the PRE -EXISTING scar shown in the 3 before pictures . None grew even though they were treated with acell .

The photos show 3 prior, 3 at one week and 3 at 12 months , with 2 added of the lower scar .

Allthough I am a repair patient , I was told this acell treatment is beneficial to repair patients .

The lower scar is approx 10 cms x 2 cms , this is unlike scar tissue as its smooth and flat however to me it is  non hair - bare-ing scalp , the picture at 12 months shows hair growing above and below this donor strip , there was no prior scarring in that area .

The 2 nd scar above my left ear is similar , however a lot wider in parts 

The 3rd scar above my right ear appears to have healed a lot better than the other 2.

I expected the donor area to be improved , not made worse , Im devastated about the results of the donor area,  in particular where the 2 strips ( pictured ) were taken from which have clearly widened .

In my opinion I had one large scar to address when I embarked on my last surgery whereas I now have another 2 to deal with .


If anyone has been in a similar situation it would be interesting to see how you moved forward , revision , fue ,etc  

I have on many occassions spoken with my Dr and yes , I have been offered a free revision / procedure , however i dont think that is an option for me at this moment in time .

Thanks in advance for any advice 

Ejj

----------


## KeepHoping

Where are all the results from plucked hair transplants?  If there was a high success rate I don't understand why the pictures wouldn't be all over the internet as it would only boost your business.  At this point it seems as though going with a smaller transplant procedure seems the way to go along with Acell/PRP needling.

It would seem as though the problem with Acell/PRP is trying to find a way to wound the scalp.  The dermaroller covers the most area but it does not get deep enough to really cause any disruption to the follicles so maybe a new device just like a dermaroller but that would pierce the skin a little bit deeper and then applying the Acell/PRP (with the bone marrow stem cells, that should supply the necessary progenitor cells for the hair to regrow) would cause even more regrowth than what has been seen thusfar.

----------


## rapunzal

i assume the reason why autocloning pictures arent around is because its just too early for "prime time". the moment you start posting results you are effectively adertising the service. there are still many unknowns that need to be resolved and until then you wont see any results from the doctors. the best we can hope for is from patients and i dont think there will be many so far considering the largest is 1500 grafts (upto last October) and remember very few people overall post photos.

----------


## RichardDawkins

I predict last quarter of 2011 we will see more good photos.

I think this wasnt aboz 1500 Grafts, it was about 1500 plcuked hairs but guys correct me if iam wrong here

----------


## KeepHoping

I am thinning diffusely in a MPB progression so at this point my options are pretty limited.  I was thinking about getting a procedure done to fill in the temples and thicken the hairline up and use Hitzig's needling PRP/Acell procedure to hopefully thicken up the rest enough to pass, I want to get something done to hold me over until Histogen or Aderans release a product.  And I feel like 1000 grafts to the front along with the PRP/Acell would do enough... Anyone else thinking of doing the same?

----------


## RichardDawkins

Iam actually waiting another year until the stemcell results are in. Because if they are better i had paid money for nothing :-)

----------


## mkamph

hey rapunzel,

i met with dr cooley about the plucking/acell procedure on the 13th of january.  during that week he had done a total of 5 procedures - he used the plucking/acell technique for all 5 procedures and his largest case was 4,000 grafts on a dude from london.  i talked with him about price and he said that it's going to double here pretty soon.  it also sounded like it was becoming a stand alone procedure.  everything he said led me to beleive he's very confident with his technique.  given his rep, i would say this sond like great news.....but it sure would be nice to see some more pics on here.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> hey rapunzel,
> 
> i met with dr cooley about the plucking/acell procedure on the 13th of january.  during that week he had done a total of 5 procedures - he used the plucking/acell technique for all 5 procedures and his largest case was 4,000 grafts on a dude from london.  i talked with him about price and he said that it's going to double here pretty soon.  it also sounded like it was becoming a stand alone procedure.  everything he said led me to beleive he's very confident with his technique.  given his rep, i would say this sond like great news.....but it sure would be nice to see some more pics on here.


 Nice to hear that. He will need each and every earned Cent soon.

----------


## KeepHoping

If this is working so well and there is so much confidence in it's success then I don't see why it would be a problem to put pictures up on the internet.  I would like to see plucked hair procedures and the transplants done with Acell/PRP needling along with regular grafts dipped in Acell to see the robust and speedy growth that the doctors are observing.  I mean this with all due respect to Cooley, Hitzig and anyone else working with Acell, I'm just interested in seeing some results.

----------


## rapunzal

> hey rapunzel,
> 
> i met with dr cooley about the plucking/acell procedure on the 13th of january.  during that week he had done a total of 5 procedures - he used the plucking/acell technique for all 5 procedures and his largest case was 4,000 grafts on a dude from london.  i talked with him about price and he said that it's going to double here pretty soon.  it also sounded like it was becoming a stand alone procedure.  everything he said led me to beleive he's very confident with his technique.  given his rep, i would say this sond like great news.....but it sure would be nice to see some more pics on here.


 4000 grafts, thats more than double the October 2010 maxiumum. seems like things are moving quicker than i thought ... including the price. did they say how many days it took to do London4000 ?

----------


## mkamph

one day, but they were there til 7pm....maybe longer.

----------


## rapunzal

that is a lot of hairs to pluck in a day. if you assume conservatively that the average graft is 2.0, that means 8000 hairs. if its a 12 hour day its about 10 hairs a minute which is very impressive.
seems like someone should consider inventing a NeoPlucker

----------


## mkamph

yeah, he's got his own plucking technique that i didn't dig into.  i really hope this turns out well.  i wouldn't think cooley would lie.  he seemed like a straight up guy and his recent post on this forum made total sense.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Thats simple he is a Gho Shill and also is he happy about a ongoing or not "Lawsuit" where Dr Gho is sueing people who use their Acell/Plucking technique on patients because of

"Copyright Infringement"

You know Copyright, because Gho produced Millions of Lucky People with his HST Crap. Isn´t that great, even if it (Acell and plucking) will works perfectly we have to depent on Gho.

Thats the Gho IronMan aka HairRobinHood is promoting everywhere, THE Gho who has no patients talking about their success at message boards, the Gho whose employees are self not really aware of the success rate.

As IronMan postet at HS, Gho has been preparing his Act since 2000. Well and guess what from Ghos side we DONT got a cure.

But on the other hand Hitzig and Cooley came up with something.

And another thing, did Gho actually talked about progenitor cells in the past?

Another funny thing is, that we see IronMan not that ****y anymore. Well you see HairRobinHood aka IronMan, now you realize that you are not better then anyone and we all are in the same boat.

And its so funny that Gho cant provide anything but at Lawsuits he is he first in line.

----------


## Jerry Cooley, MD

> Again, Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley, thanks for all the advances you have developed and are in the process of developing for the HT industry.
> 
> 1)In regards to the autoplucking, would it work behind the hairline?
> 
> 2)What if one has a thinning crown, would you recommend the ACell + PRP or would you suggest a small session of autoplucking there as well?
> 
> 3)What is your view in regards of trying to fill in a donnor area depleted by FUE with autoplucking?
> 
> Thanks Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley


 Silver Surfer

These are good questions.  I hope to have more information to present to the public by October. Like standard FUT or FUE, it takes 9-12 months to form impressions so the timeline is unfortunately frustratingly slow.  Most of our work is behind the hairline, at the top and crown of the scalp.  I want to see how that works before I do alot of hairline work.  

Dr Hitzig and I are completely independent of each other.  He is currently interested in the PRP angle and I have very little experience with this.  Regarding inquiries about PRP+ACell, please contact him.  For a thinning crown, I typically advise my patients to use finasteride and minoxidil.  The plucked grafts may be considered in the situation where FUT or FUE are not recommended or desired.  I would think that the plucking technique would be a consideration for someone whose donor had been depleted by FUE.  It would depend on the situation of course.

We do not recommend the plucked grafting as a replacement for FUT or FUE at this time, if a patient is otherwise a good candidate.  These have the track record and predictability to be the treatments of choice.  So when do we do the plucked grafts?  We do them for what I call the "desparate" or the "adventurous".  

By 'desparate', I mean repair cases in which the patient may have had numerous prior surgeries, minimal donor reserves, and we are up against the wall in search of options.  I am seeing more and more of these patients and this is a main driving force for my work.  By 'adventurous' I mean those patients who never would have had FUT or FUE because they are opposed to the idea of surgical harvesting.  They are intrigued by the science of ACell and plucking and are willing to take the gamble in regards to the uncertainty of this technique (success and long term viability).  This will be a small niche of patients.  I repeat, those who are good candidates for FUT or FUE should proceed in that direction.

We charge for the plucking procedure the way we charge for FUT.  In other words, the fee for 2,000 plucked grafts is the same whether it is FUT or plucked, even though it takes us twice the amount of work to do a plucked case.  The reason for the reduced fee is that we don't have the same track record with plucked grafts and in exchange for the uncertainty, patients recieve a discounted fee.  When the procedure is more firmly established, we will charge in accord with the time, effort, and expense on our part.  We have no plans to price gouge, only to charge fairly.

It has been an interesting time for me, with widespread interest, as well as criticism and even threats of lawsuits.  Nevertheless I am pushing forward because I believe in the ACell technology and plucked technique to genuinely help those with hairloss.  It will certainly be refined over time as more knowledge is gained of stem cells and ECM, and methods to jumpstart the follicle regeneration process are discovered.  It is an exciting time in our field.

Dr Cooley

----------


## RichardDawkins

Wonder who is responsible for the lawsuit threat? I dont wanna know the answer cause we all know who is responsable, one of his shills is lurking here. This is so disgusting even to consider a lawsuit or to find this kind of thing funny (like one user does)

Btw thank you Dr Cooley for pushing into the Acell/Plucking thing. I have some questions here.

1) To me it seems that you guys got more and more serious and als confident in Acell+Plucking equals in fact unlimited Donor. Am i wrong with this impression or not?

2) So lets assume for one second, that hairs in combination with Acell are permanent (i personally think its permanent) will this mean that we finally got a cure not for hairloss but for the results of hairloss?

3) When you got more information and good results, will you consider to put in Plucking as a standard procedure besides FUT and FUE?

4) Is it possible to gain more density with plucking then with FUT or FUE? I am wondering about this because when it comes to FUT and FUE there has to be tissue transplanted as well

5) Are you also aiming to get infinite or regenerating donor hair when you use FUE in combination with Acell? 

6) As mentioned before, there was a two year timeline till it comes to the conclusion IF we have a cure or not. Did you guys mean the idea about "infinite donor"?

My personal opinion here is, that the plucking technique is THE game changer in the field because everyone has been thinking about " Well what if i could just pluck my hair and insert it in the blank spots" and now this at some point in our life "stupid idea" seems to be legit.

7) Are you plucking the transplanted hairs right now, to see if they cycle? If so could you give a sneak peak, what we can expect. In the case if you witnessed something.

And another thing, and dont get me wrong here, but i think you guys know more, in a positive way, because otherwise you wouldnt transplant more agressive hairlines as stated and also wouldnt go for the "adventurous" kind of patient  :Wink:  but maybe iam just a dreamer regarding this.

----------


## Bakez

I think that when they pluck the hairs they are just 'reawakening' the defective stem cells. So essentially I think both Hitzig's PRP/ACell and Cooley's plucking are doing the same thing - the plucked hair is just a carrier for the right cells for it to work (providing they arent lying about their results). Maybe you dont even need to pluck the hair, we just need a way of getting these the same cells from the plucked hair, then 'wounding' the scalp as if we were going to implant a graft, but instead injecting the cells+ACell. Perhaps this also explains why sometimes more hairs grew around the implanted plucked hair (I think Cooley said this happened a few times with beard hair)?

Unfortunately I think that if this is the case - that both these methods are simply reactivating the stem cells - then the hairs will be permanent but sensitive to the same things that caused them to become defective in the first place, be that DHT or whatever.

----------


## Jerry Cooley, MD

> Wonder who is responsible for the lawsuit threat? I dont wanna know the answer cause we all know who is responsable, one of his shills is lurking here. This is so disgusting even to consider a lawsuit or to find this kind of thing funny (like one user does)
> 
> Btw thank you Dr Cooley for pushing into the Acell/Plucking thing. I have some questions here.
> 
> 1) To me it seems that you guys got more and more serious and als confident in Acell+Plucking equals in fact unlimited Donor. Am i wrong with this impression or not?
> 
> 2) So lets assume for one second, that hairs in combination with Acell are permanent (i personally think its permanent) will this mean that we finally got a cure not for hairloss but for the results of hairloss?
> 
> 3) When you got more information and good results, will you consider to put in Plucking as a standard procedure besides FUT and FUE?
> ...


 1.  I have never said "unlimited donor", but rather "expanded donor".  Everyone knows that hair grows back after plucking but we also know from the long term observation of patients with trichotillomania, hair can be plucked to the point of failure, although this takes repeated cycles of plucking.
2. Way too early to be making statements like this.
3. Yes
4. Potentially.  Requires study to make this claim.
5. I am also looking at this but like Dr. Cole, I am seeing hair regrowth after FUE without plucked grafts so its not cleat that we need this added step.
6. These treatments will always be evolving and getting more refined.  I would not conceive of it as "two years to know if its a cure".  We are seeing the practical applications of regenerative medicine in the field of hair restoration.  It will only get better and better.
7.  Yes, but will probably not have information to share about this till later this year.
Dr Cooley

----------


## Jerry Cooley, MD

> I think that when they pluck the hairs they are just 'reawakening' the defective stem cells. So essentially I think both Hitzig's PRP/ACell and Cooley's plucking are doing the same thing - the plucked hair is just a carrier for the right cells for it to work (providing they arent lying about their results). Maybe you dont even need to pluck the hair, we just need a way of getting these the same cells from the plucked hair, then 'wounding' the scalp as if we were going to implant a graft, but instead injecting the cells+ACell. Perhaps this also explains why sometimes more hairs grew around the implanted plucked hair (I think Cooley said this happened a few times with beard hair)?
> 
> Unfortunately I think that if this is the case - that both these methods are simply reactivating the stem cells - then the hairs will be permanent but sensitive to the same things that caused them to become defective in the first place, be that DHT or whatever.


 This may be happening in some cases but clearly not all.  By observing the results of plucked beard in the scalp, and performing biopsies, we saw new follicles clearly separate from the surrounding follicles.  We were not simply 'waking up' miniaturized follicles, but creating entirely new ones.  The occasional success in scar tissue also supports this.
Dr Cooley

----------


## KeepHoping

With the successful plucking cases coming in would it be too much to ask to get some pictures of at least a few of these cases just to get an idea of the progress being made?

----------


## topcat

Hurry, hurry step right up and have a seat in the chair. Who needs pictures when the ht industry has a long history of honesty and integrity? In my own repair journey I was able to take weekly pictures for the first 4 weeks, then monthly pictures for the next 11 months. I have now begun taking weekly pictures again after my second procedure and will move on to monthly pictures for the next 11 months. But I have been blessed with having the opportunity to own an exotic piece of equipment called a camera. So I am in an advantageous position and not everyone is as lucky. And after all, you are getting a discount so why would you need pictures.

Seriously though I hope it all works out. I guess I am just too cautious.

----------


## RichardDawkins

I think we are on a good way here.

Well btw i say Thank You to all people who actually put themselves in the position to be the "guinea pig" for us other hairloss sufferers here.

Thank you very much

----------


## topcat

Richard, I agree with you again. There is nothing wrong with being a pioneer but be intelligent, minimize your risk. If that 4000 figure I have read is true, then that is complete foolishness.

But sometimes you lose a few trailblazers along the way, that's the price of reaching the promised land.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Yes you are right, but if it doesnt fail, all i can say to the 4000 hair guy is " Son of a Bitc* you got really lucky" :-)

And i know one thing for sure, when his turned out good, i will punch my face ten times a day for beeing just a "too" cautious moron  :Wink: 

I know and absolutely respect your arguments because of your back story. But if it works you can also benefit and this it whats so amazing in plucking hairs, everyone can benefit.

My calculations, i know they may seen stupid as anything but just to crunch a few numbers.

You have around 100.000 single hairs. A NW7 person has well around 20.000 visible hairs in his horseshoe area (i set this numbers really low to mark a real worst case).

And its said as a (stupid) rule of thumb that you need around 1000 Grafts per NW scale marker. NW 3 = 3000 Grafts and so on.

1 Graft consists of 2 hairs ( i wont count in 3 hair grafts because lets stick to the worst case).

So a NW7 would at least need 7000 Grafts or 14.000 hairs.

And now we assume that the plucking technique works as she is hoped to be. Then we have to harvest those 20.000 (its just a number here) and plant them. Lets say we loose around 4000 hairs (also just an extremely high number) then we would have 16.000 hairs transplanted (equals around 8000 Grafts).

After some time your horseshoe has getting back, your hair count will be around 20.000 from horseshoe and 16.000 transplanted. This would be 36.000 hairs from your 100.000.

I know its a stupid calculation but it shows at least what the possible benefits could be. And i also know that you need more procedures to get back to full density on your whole head. But with a fully working plucking technique, i would go for it.

Those numbers will get better of course when the autocloned hairs will be permanent. So i say we keep our fingers crossed that this thing will work so perfectly, that the next time someone mentions "mega session" , only tweezers are needed for this.

And another question iam asking myself is : If those plucked hairs in the reciepient area could also be seen as potential donor hair. So that we can see hair transplantation as donor area creating instead of illusion making.

Maybe these are really stupid ideas or thoughts, but i have the gut feeing that there is something to it.

topcat iam very thankful for your input because stuff like that keeps me personally thinking about those advances.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Appreciate your Calculations
Remember results are measured by appearance, not numbers.
If you can get proximity and naturalness of distribution your result will trump the same number of singlely distributed hairs,
Duplicating recipient hairs without "clumping" accomplishes this. 
Can't do this with single hairs alone.
Hope the "Vaccination" against hair loss or further hair loss is on the way
Of course, time will tell-Just trying and hoping guys-I've lived this nightmare!

Best,
GH

----------


## SilverSurfer

Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions. I am very excited with all the new developments and hopefully in the near future I will have some work done by you with the Autoplucking technique. I am still waiting for an estimate of how many growth cycles the new hairs will develop and if their growth cycle will be that of a normal hair. Good luck with everything and please don't let external factors (like the lawsuit) discourage you from the work you are doing.

All the best.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

I don't Have any lawsuits.
14 years ago I caught staff "moonlighting" in my office on video camera thinking the cleaning service was stealing supplies. Those I caught tried to exhtort money from me or else they would claim I was a party to the plot (WHEN I THREATENED TO PROSECUTE). I went to court (growing up in Brooklyn I don't give into false threats) and proved all was false.
The lawyer dropped the case and was cited by the Bar Association.
EVERYTHING WAS DISMISSED or dropped. 
Not sure who is trying again to malign me again but now you understand why I keep far away from some of these jealous people.
Jerry Cooley has always been a supporter and knew the facts.
So does Spencer.

Thank You for the kind words.
It would be easy and tempting after 35 years to simply disappear again.

----------


## Jerry Cooley, MD

> Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions. I am very excited with all the new developments and hopefully in the near future I will have some work done by you with the Autoplucking technique. I am still waiting for an estimate of how many growth cycles the new hairs will develop and if their growth cycle will be that of a normal hair. Good luck with everything and please don't let external factors (like the lawsuit) discourage you from the work you are doing.
> 
> All the best.


 I wish I knew the answer about cycling....this will take time and makes me  frustrated too.  

I don't have any lawsuits either!

----------


## SpencerKobren

> Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions. I am very excited with all the new developments and hopefully in the near future I will have some work done by you with the Autoplucking technique. I am still waiting for an estimate of how many growth cycles the new hairs will develop and if their growth cycle will be that of a normal hair. Good luck with everything and please don't let external factors (like the lawsuit) discourage you from the work you are doing.
> 
> All the best.


 I for one would prefer to focus on the positive aspects of Dr. Hitzig’s career, and truly hope that his groundbreaking work with Acell’s MartiStem pans out for all of us.  We support both his and Dr. Cooley's efforts to perfect this treatment and appreciate their participation in our forum.

----------


## Spanish Dude

@Dr. Cooley, I have found, what appear to be, severe contradictions between your different posts, here at BTT, regarding the autoplucking success rate (yield).

On 2010-Oct-28, amidst enthusiasm after your Acell prestentation, you said that autoplucking yield was:
40-50&#37; in scar tissue and 50%-75% in normal tissue.
You also said that these figures were improving steadily.
I think you confirmed these figures to Dr. Rassman by phone (he posted about it in his blog)

But now, 3 months later, you say that plucked hairs don't grow well in scar tissue, and you are extremely dissapointed with this.
You say that success in scar tissue is "ocassional".
You also say that you have learned this problem in the last 12 months (after your patient, "ejj",'s surgery).
Furthermore, when you talk about autoplucking in general (not in scar tissue) you say that, currently, this is only a method for "desperate and adventurous people".
You also have said that autocloning labour cost is twice the cost of FUT, so this is labourwise, a totally viable procedure, and only yield is the decisive factor. This doesn't seem to be as "extremely tedious" as dr. Hitzig says.


Could you explain all these apparent contradictions?
thanks-SD

***************************************
COPY OF YOUR POSTS (Dr. COOLEY)
***************************************

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthr...7505#post17505
Cooley,  2010.Oct-28, 12:17 AM 
I wish I had an exact % to give you. My success was much lower in the beginning but *has steadily risen*. Currently about *75% in a healthy recipient bed, and 40-50% in scar*; because we keep refining the technique, *I expect these numbers to rise*.


http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthr...7505#post17505
Cooley: 2010.Oct-28, 12:44 AM 
1. Success rate: *50-75% in healthy scalp, 40-50% in scar*; we're actively trying ways to raise the success rate.


http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthr...?t=4308&page=4
Cooley, 2011.Jan.31, 07:46 PM 
1) We performed about 600 plucked beard grafts throughout this area. I have not seen the patient in person but from the photographs it appears that virtually none of them grew. *We have since (1 YEAR AGO) learned that plucked grafts do not grow well in scars* and that the wider and denser the scar tissue, the lower the success. I understand the disappointment and upset by the patient as *I too am extremely disappointed by the failure of the plucked grafts to grow in scar tissue.* 

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthr...t=3998&page=20
Cooley, 2011.Feb.01, 04:48 PM 
We were not simply 'waking up' miniaturized follicles, but creating entirely new ones. The *occasional success in scar tissue* also supports this.


http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthr...t=3998&page=20
Cooley, 2011.Feb-01, 03:09 PM 
We do not recommend the plucked grafting as a replacement for FUT or FUE at this time... So when do we do the plucked grafts? *We do them for what I call the "desparate" or the "adventurous".*

----------


## wolvie1985

Spanishdude, once again your paranoid, accusatory tone and ramblings have embarrassed the rest of this community and undermine the good will between honest, noble doctors and hair loss sufferers. 

This is why your reputation precedes you in every hair loss forum you've trolled. Please, seek help and stay off the boards.

----------


## Spanish Dude

> Spanishdude, once again your paranoid, accusatory tone and ramblings have embarrassed the rest of this community and undermine the good will between honest, noble doctors and hair loss sufferers. 
> 
> This is why your reputation precedes you in every hair loss forum you've trolled. Please, seek help and stay off the boards.


 I have just reported you to the admins.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Spanish Dude there is one little little problem in your post :-) You did let slip the most important fact here

*Those plucked hairs in the scar tissue were Beard Hair and not scalp hair.*

And everybody knows that beard and bodyhair is well how can i say this crap. I really believe in infinite donor pretty soon and Acell and everything else what Hm has to offer but I dont believe in bodyhair.

But i like that Dr Cooley and Dr Hitzig are actually put there heads in the line here and discuss even things that went wrong (like ejj´s case for example)

@Spencer : Nobody is accusing Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley here when it comes to lawsuits, it is more a fear of hairloss sufferes, that if Cooley and Hitzig or others do in fact define the plucking technique (like in my number example or even better then that) some as*hole from the netherlands is pulling a lawsuit or anything else on this, only because he thinks his "patent" (which btw is so generally written that even i could be sued if i tried to put hairs in a ECm solution) is violated.

And even you should know what this would mean. That we have to wait a lot of more years even with a solution practically at hand or at head.

Cause lets be honest here, and i dont wanna sound rude. But the plucking thing in combination with ECM well is no miracle if cell tissue is stick to the hair. Its the logical conclusion here to go this way.

Cause all it takes to get "expanded donor" sorry Dr Hitzig i dont like this term because it speaks plucking with Acell lower then it is in reality. And you guys should really be more "agressive" when it comes to the thing called "infinite donor".

----------


## Spanish Dude

@RichardDawkins:

no Richard, the data I have posted is not for beard hair, but for scalp hair. 

In Oct 2010, dr. Cooley said that yield was (on average) 45&#37; for plucked scalp hair, planted in scar tissue, and that yield was improving. And yield was 62% (on average), for healthy tissue. So the difference between healthy and scar tissue was not so terribly big.

But now he says that he is extremely disappointed with the yield of plucked hair (scalp hair) planted in scar tissue. Also, it seems that now Cooley is also disappointed with the yield in normal tissue, because he says that autoplucking is only for the "desperate and adventurous". Otherwise he would have said that "autoplucking is fine, except for scar tissue".
And also, according to Cooley's words, it seems that plucked hairs not only require to be planted on healthy tissue, but also require healthy follicles around to get stem cells from. According to this, autoplucking would not work in bald scalp. 

Note that dr. Cooley is offering patient "ejj", FUE as solution, and not autoplucking, despite the facts that:
1.  his donor is almost totally depleted, to the point that Cooley will have to FUE ejj's beard!
2. "ejj"'s scars are soft, not hard (and thus, should be more receptible for plucked hairs).

Also note that the 600 plucked beards planted on ejj, were not planted on scar tissue. It was a "shock fall" tissue, according to ejj.

I am still waiting for dr. Cooley to confirm if he has really performed 4000 autoplucked hairs on a london patient. He must have been very confident, when he went for such a big session. Why not reporting this case?

----------


## RichardDawkins

He is disappointed by ejj result with plucked hairs not plcuked hairs in general.

Didnt you get this wrong? Not the plucked hairs need follicles around them, the follicles need auto plucked hairs around them to resolve in new follicles. The other way around it may see very strange.

As you may know, this technique is actually pretty new and needs some touch ups to get reliable.

And also the yield rate should be noted as a basic one because every scalp is different. And in ejj case there were severe scars at his head which have traumatized the head.

And i believe ejj said "The problem he had with this is, that the scar healed good but now its just tissue, blank tissue".

I think Dr Cooley is talking about this specific case here and not in general.

But well lets see what he has to say.

----------


## Bakez

Lets be honest I think responding to a bunch of mentalists on a forum are the last of his worries. I just hope he is on to something and doesnt get put off by people scrutinising every bit of info he makes available, tbh its probably the reason why they dont release photos or results - because mental hairloss sufferers on the internet end up asking 40 question for each statement and if they dont get answered we start claiming it is snake oil.

Just hope that in 5 years his methods will have been developed by him, someone else, or a group of doctors into something special

----------


## RichardDawkins

Dont say 5 years, this shocks people and makes them post more nonsense :-)

----------


## Spanish Dude

@Richard:

Regarding problems in bald scalp, yes, maybe I infered too far. But forum member "Bakez" also pointed in that direction. Maybe Cooley could give us a yield figure for bald&healthy scalp versus hairy&healthy scalp.

Regarding yield in scar tissue.
In this matter, there is no doubt. Cooley has said that he has learned, *since ejj's case*, that plucked hairs don't grow well in scar tissue. So he is not just talking about ejj's case. Also, in a non-related post, he has said that growth in scar tissue is "occasional".

@Bakez:
this is not a matter of mentalism, this is a basic, clear, contradiction re. yield on scar tissue.

----------


## RichardDawkins

naaaahhh no bad blood here. I can understand that people are very tipsy right now, because if this works, well our fears are finally over then, thats for sure.

And i think the problem right now is not the IF (it could work) but more the HOW (to increase efficiency).

But seriously just sit down for ten minutes and play the whole thing called Plucking with Acell through just play it through and ask yourself can it work or not.

I bet you will come to the conclusion that everything depends on the HOW right now.

Believe if the rsults come in and they can life up to their hype, i will be the first to do it. In combination with FUE (but only with adding Acell cause i simply wanna increase the chance of donor regrow) well and for the rest i would just wait for Histogen.

End of story, but one thing for sure, i will never go for FUT cause iam really afraif of those operations

----------


## KeepHoping

Gubter_87 wrote:

Actually I am surprised why Spencer did not ask Dr. Hitzig that exact question.
If hair loss is due to lack of progenitor cells and Dr. Hitzig believes that A-cell combined with PRP injections will by pass this, then why does not hair grow everywhere?

Hopefully Dr. Hitzig will find his way to this forum post and be able to give us an answer!

I think this a good question for Dr. Hitzig and I'm interested to find out the answer myself as well.  Any thoughts?

----------


## RichardDawkins

It is a good question and iam really hyped to see the answers

----------


## SilverSurfer

> Silver Surfer
> 
> It has been an interesting time for me, with widespread interest, as well as criticism and even threats of lawsuits.  Nevertheless I am pushing forward because I believe in the ACell technology and plucked technique to genuinely help those with hairloss.  It will certainly be refined over time as more knowledge is gained of stem cells and ECM, and methods to jumpstart the follicle regeneration process are discovered.  It is an exciting time in our field.
> 
> Dr Cooley


 Dr Cooley and Dr Hitzig,
Sorry for the misunderstanding, I was referring to the factors mentioned in this paragraph(criticism and even threats of lawsuits). In no way was I implying something else. Again thanks for all the advancements you have created, personally I feel this will be the solution (Autoplucking)for my problems and all those who have had their donnor depleted.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Not only for depleated donor guys :-)

----------


## HairRobinHood

> Not only for depleated donor guys :-)


 Does it mean for depleted pockets too?

----------


## SilverSurfer

Correct Richard, also for those who want less scarring in their donnor areas. They now have an option with the Autoplucking.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Just to comment on what Keep Hoping had asked, it is the lack of Progenitor cells in the scalp which opens genetically sensitive (to 5DHT) hairs to miniaturizing. There is no problem with other hairs.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Dr Hitzig,

For how long have the first hairs you plucked and transplanted cycled?

----------


## Gubter_87

> Just to comment on what Keep Hoping had asked, it is the lack of Progenitor cells in the scalp which opens genetically sensitive (to 5DHT) hairs to miniaturizing. There is no problem with other hairs.


 I asked the original question, and perhaps I was a bit unclear.
I meant if a lack of progentior cells is the issue with the hair affected by hair loss, and you theorize that the combination of Acell+PRP injected into the scalp will bypass this issue. Then why do you believe you did not get full regrowth of all the minituarized and lost hairs with the injections?

Thanks for taking the time to reply!

----------


## CVAZBAR

In other words, if PROGENITOR CELLS are the problem, why can't NW7's grow back hair again, if you put the stems cells back to work, reactivating PROGENITOR CELLS?

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

#1) The first plucked hairs that I transplanted were in 1999-no ACell. The ones that "took" are still recycling.

#2) The second answer involves the point of no return. I believe there is a point in miniaturization where you can no longer reverse the process. Compare it to a dying plant or person where you can institute all the correct treatments, but it is simply too late. I do not believe vellus hairs are anything more than dead plants sticking out of the soil.
If I am wrong, we will be both happily surprised. 

I look at the ACell/Enhanced PRP injections as as "vaccination" against further hair loss with a strenghening of weakened hairs. Like the Flu Vaccine, it works in many but not all cases--Time will tell if we are right.

----------


## CVAZBAR

So NW7's will never benefit from any of this and will never grow hair back? I guess we can't call this a cure. I don't understand why the reporters in the news always interview NW7's and make it seem as if they will one day get their hair back with Cotsarelis discovery.

----------


## rapunzal

> 1.  I have never said "unlimited donor", but rather "expanded donor".  Everyone knows that hair grows back after plucking but we also know from the long term observation of patients with trichotillomania, hair can be plucked to the point of failure, although this takes repeated cycles of plucking.
> Dr Cooley


 i have been plucking two radical eyebrow hairs that are clearly distinguishable from the others for the last 15 years. im hoping one day they will reach the point of failure.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

You could have them removed permanently via FUE.

----------


## rapunzal

haha .. knowing my luck they will probably regenerate even without Acell

----------


## RichardDawkins

Oh thats the point, i have a theory about the possible "scars" when plucking hairs.

I think this problems only occur in people who pluck thir hairs because the just do it for the sake of doing it. When we plcuk hairs its because, like rapunzal said to fine tune some areas like nose hairs or eyebrows.

But those people do it for other reasons and not with the intention to fine tune something. So sometimes their hair will stick in the follicle region and begin to develop scar tissue. After some time there will be more scar tissue.

Its because the didnt pluck their hairs in a "clean" way. So i think with combination of Acell we dont have to fear scaring like in those patients.

But thats only because of the ECM and the "clean" plucking.

@rapunzal : I know this from my eye brows and this really sucks. I dont know for how many years i pluck them, but the still come back and sometimes they have this epitelial tissue stick to them.

So if you would have the right equipment you could test autocloning yourself and create yourself a nice monobrow :-)

But jokes aside, it would be nice if Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley could answer the other questions here

----------


## CVAZBAR

DR. Hitzig, were you able to get in contact with Cotsarelis to share ideas or is that not happening afterall?

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

I have not been in contact with Dr. Cotsarelis yet. Probably my fault as I have been dealing with the ridiculous snow and ice storms.
As  I have said, I do believe that miniaturization past a certain point will not respond to any therapy. My goal would be to prove myself wrong--but I will not offer excitement to anyone because it's what they want to hear.
We will see. Jerry has talked about Expanded DONOR at this point, and I believe that to be very smart in his analysis. We will expand our analysis as we have viable results.
As I have always said--Stay Tuned!!!

BTW plucking hairs leaves NO SCARS when performed correctly. There is a learning curve (as we went through) on how to do this. It is not so simple!
GH

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Also we will doing our first case of eyebrow plucking with ACell + PRP and remodeling some of the plucked eyebrow hairs to reshape an eyebrow. Will keep you posted

----------


## CVAZBAR

> Also we will doing our first case of eyebrow plucking with ACell + PRP and remodeling some of the plucked eyebrow hairs to reshape an eyebrow. Will keep you posted


 Please keep us updated on the Stem Cell/Acell/PRP injections that you were talking about on the show. I remember you saying it would take you weeks to learn the procedure of extracting Stem Cells from hip. You did say you already performed the ENHANCED PRP, so hopefully we find out results asap. Ive had hard time halting my hair loss and I believe this can be the magic injection to do the job. Thanks, I appreciate your attention to this forum.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

As you know, I am still waiting to see confirmation that Acell and plucked hairs produce a viable alternative.  Until then, I will stick with FUE plus Acell on the grafts, as well as, treat my donor area with Acell.  

Here is an example of a repair case that wanted fuller coverage and to look more natural.  He had multiple prior pluggy transplants that left him unnatural and with multiple scars in his donor area.  The prior grafting left him with few scalp hairs to graft.  

When I do a repair case, I ask the patient if they want more hair and to be more natural or do they simply want to appear more natural.  If they want more hair, I try to leave as much hair as possible from the original grafts because you can never get 100% of the hair to re-grow with you attempt to redistribute it.  Then after adding hair, I reduce the larger grafts that are still visible.  If they want to look more natural, but dont want more hair, then I reduce the grafts using my method of FUE, which I call CIT.  If they simply want to be bald, I try to remove all but single hair follicular units and then try grafting the removed follicular units into the donor scar.  
Given that the donor scarring in this situation was so severe, it would have been difficult to make the donor area of this individual appear entirely normal.  Therefore, simple removal of the grafts might have required the patient to keep the back and sides long rather than giving him the option to shave his head.

Based on his limited donor supply, I had no choice other than body hair. Body hair does not work in all individuals, but it worked well in this case.  His beard hair grew well, but his chest hair did not.  Adding Acell to the chest hair grafts in the follow up procedure resulted in a better chest hair result 10 months later.  

The photos here show that grafting body hair can produce a nice result.  When body hair works, it is a proven entity.  I feel Acell may improve the results of body hair grafting, but we will need time to see.  Body hair is not for every patient.  You should have a test procedure done prior to a large procedure.  You should do the same with plucked hairs and Acell in my opinion.  

We grafted a small number of head hairs to the top, but most of the coverage is from beard hair and chest hair.  We treated the scars with beard hair and chest hair.  We also treated the extraction sites with Acell in the follow up visit.  We treated only the scar area with Acell in the first visit.  We also treated the area with PRP in both procedures.  In the follow up procedure, we put Acell powder on the grafts and injected it into the recipient site.  

In the follow more recent procedure I de-bulked some of the frontal hairline plugs.  The latest photos were from the most recent procedure.  The goal here was to add more density to the perimeter of the crown where you see the purple marks.  The idea is to attempt to match the density in the center of the crown at the perimeter.  If grafting will not accomplish this, we might consider de-bulking the central crown plugs.  

As you can see, it is possible to treat a class 7 with grafting alone even when the donor area is markedly scared and when it is a repair case.  My concern with plucked hairs as follows:   When someone plucks hair to groom themselves, they are not plucking almost the entire follicular structure.  These hairs will likely grow back.  When you are plucking to get growth from Acell, you are plucking almost the entire intact follicular structure.  Im still looking for evidence that you can get two from one from this method.  Im also looking for a case that makes a measureable difference in appearance and yet leaves an almost intact donor area.  

I would start by measuring a pre-operative hair mass index in one tattooed area of the donor area along with as accurate a hair count as possible.  I would then pluck hair from the tattooed area and place the plucked hairs in two different boxes in a bald scalp.  I would treat one box with Acell and the other box without Acell.  I would then calculate the yield at 6 months and one year in each box.  I would also measure the hair mass index and hair count in the donor area tattooed area 6 months and 1 year later.  If everything looks good, you have a positive sign that Acell benefits plucked hair growth and that the donor area grows back.  

Keep up the research.  it's interesting.

----------


## wolvie1985

"My concern with plucked hairs as follows: When someone plucks hair to groom themselves, they are not plucking almost the entire follicular structure. These hairs will likely grow back. When you are plucking to get growth from Acell, you are plucking almost the entire intact follicular structure."


Please enlighten us doctor on how the act of a 'grooming' pluck differs from an HT pluck. As has been brought up here before in response to your previous anti-plucking manifesto, if the world's female population had figured out a way to pluck an eyebrow in a certain way so that the hair doesn't grow back, we probably would have seen it by now.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Dr Cole,
I find the method you are proposing to be accurate. I just have one question, if the hairs come from the beard, who would want a tatto in that area? Or in any other area of the head. Isn't there a better way to keep track of the area without the tatto? Are you referring to a permanent tatoo or some temporary kind of ink that will fade away easier?(I don't know if it exists but it would be useful in this case)

----------


## SilverSurfer

The repair looks very good by the way. The patient must be very happy. Congratulations.

----------


## SilverSurfer

What would you think on using beard hairs taken from the neck area, either below or in the area of the adam's apple(looking for the lowest point). Plucking in a straight 1 cm line horizontally. Measuring the density of the area before the plucking and 3 months or 6 months after. 

I would go with an area located at the lowest point of where beard hair grows to use as reference and then measuring 1 cm up and across. This way you would have as reference the lowest point of the beard and the measurement would just have to be taken from that point and above.

To measure the growth in the recipient area I think the best way is to get a totally bald spot and try in a few hundred hairs like Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley did and then measure what percentage 'took' in. Measure the caliber and the cycles (which appears to be the most difficult).

----------


## RichardDawkins

Right now iam really happy with the turn the things go. Thats what i think was missing the last decade before. The interaction between hairloss sufferers and surgeons and the will to go new ways, even if they may sound "unbelievable" at first.

----------


## uselessgomez

Wow, NICE repair work, Dr. Cole!

I am very impressed.

----------


## KeepHoping

Dr. Hitzig,

What is happening with the the patients who have gotten hair transplants with PRP/Acell?  What is the growth like?  How many more hairs are you getting than anticipated?  Is it like 3 to 4 times than what's expected?  I want to get an idea of how much coverage can obtained with a lower amount of grafts when implementing Acell/PRP into the mix.  I'm trying to plan the next move at this stage and want to get an idea of the results coming in and when we will be able to see them?

A big thank you to all the doctors working with Acell and experimenting to find a solution.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Dr Cole

does this mean that you are also trying and experimenting with Acell and plucked hairs or are you suggesting your idea of doing it to others?

WOuld be nice to hear that you are also go for the plucking with Acell.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

These are plucked hairs that are derived from grooming.  Both males and females produce this sort of plucked hair when grooming their eyebrow, ears, beard, nose hairs, or any other unwanted hair.  You can put Acell on these plucked hairs all day long and I have very little faith in the potential for hair regrowth.  If one could get these hairs to regrow, you would indeed have an inexhaustible supply of hair or "autoclonning".

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

These are both follicles obtained from the donor area.  The one on top is a fully intact follicle.  The one on the bottom is an example of the hairs that both Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig are calling plucked hairs.  What is the difference?  The difference is a minuscule amount of tissue at the base of the follicle.  In other words, the plucked follicle is almost fully intact.  Naturally, if you transplant this almost fully intact follicle, you would not be surprised to see a high percentage of them grow.  If you add Acell to them, you might see a higher percentage of the follicles grow.  What you are not likely to see is a high percentage of growth from the minuscule amount of tissue that remains in the donor area.  In other words, you are better off to have fully intact follicles transplanted to the top, which have a much higher probability of growth than these almost fully intact plucked follicles in my opinion.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

This is a stained version of the plucked almost fully intact vs the fully intact follicle.  The one on top looks like Bart Simpson.  This is the almost fully intact plucked follicle.  All it lacks is the round part at the base of the follicle.  Now who really thinks that if you leave only this tiny round part in the donor area and remove the rest of the intact follicle that you will get 100% regrowth in the donor area?  

In other words, Bart Simpson is missing the top round part of his head.  So is the plucked nearly fully intact plucked follicle.  So are people who really think that this round part of the head could regrow a fully intact Bart Simpson.

----------


## RichardDawkins

This may seem right BUT as you can see there is a demand in the balding community for this. And i think this plucking in combination with Acell is definitely worth trying.

But i can understand that this may sound unbelievable to most people but, if we dont try it then we wont know for sure.

If i would be a US resident i would glady be your "Guinea Pig" for this procedure or Hitzig/Cooley.

And this means much because iam not a fan of FUT or hasty reactions, but this time well its only a win/ win situation (and i was more then just sceptic at first) but some biology departments at the university did try plucked hairs with an ECM substance and it worked.

The key thing is the tissue left at the plucked hair. Sometimes even when hair falls out by natural cause you can see white dry and solid tissue stick to it, but its dry and dead.

As a self experiment i did to myself i plucked different hairs from different "zones" from my body

1) nose hair (there are three hairs in particular which drives my nuts)
2) eye brows ( there are around six or so which stick out)
3) temple area (there i used a mole as reference point to see if it grows back) actual scalp hair
4) beard hair (again i used a mole as reference point)

Timespan : Around 6 years or more

Observations : Every single plucked hair had at least three times a substances stick to it, the tissue. I could also exactly predict when it in fact had this tissue around.
- everytime when i felt a little sting in the plucked area i could say "White substance" and it was

Result :
1) nose hair : still growing (which sucks) and i witnessed NO difference in size or diameter.

2) eye brows : still growing but in longer time spans. No change in diameter or size

3) temple area : scalp hair is still growing, no decrease in density, size or diameter also no irretations there (scar tissue and or blemishes or redness)
Also no whitening when tanned.

4) Beard hair : dont get me started it grows like i dont know. No signs or redness, scar tissue or anything visible

Conclusion : All areas still grow there natural hairs, i plucked those areas approximately more then 10 times in six years and all of them had some tissue stick to them at some point.

I also did a small experiment with chest hair but after a while i left it because it was really painful to tweeze those hairs all the time, but what i saw was it still grows and even with replacing it with tissue stick to it.

Everyone can btw do this himself at home and observe the things. Maybe those who wanna try it could exactly write down the numbers and charts and stuff.

But believe me nose hair hurts like hell.

So my conclusion is, plucked hairs will regenerate themselves even when you pluck a terminal hair with tissue stick to it.

But i cant test the second part of it "Plucked hairs transplanted with Acell" because i lack the equipment like Acell

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

I hear you man.  i want this concept to work as much as anyone.  The issue is merely that what you are plucking contains a small amount of internal dermal sheath and a dead hair follicle.  I would love to see Acell make this grow.  On the other hand, what Dr. Hitzig and Dr. Cooley are doing is plucking the external root sheath, internal root sheath, and dead hair follicle.  they missing only  a tiny fraction of the follicle at the base around the bulb.  If you pluck a nearly intact hair follicle a few may regrow, but most will not.  

think of a follicle as your foot.  The part that grows the hair is your sock.  Your hair resides in your shoe.  when you pluck a hair, you tend to pull out your foot and leave the sock in your shoe.  You may have a few fibers on the foot from your sock, but mostly you have a bare foot.  The sock that remains behind has the ability to grow a hair.  The part that you pulled out of your shoe cannot grow a hair.  Now, if you can remove almost the entire sock and leave only the outer part of the toe of your sock in your shoe, then what you remove can regrow an intact follicle.  the part tiny amount of sock that remains in your shoe, will not grow a follicle.  

when i say we should study the benefits of plucking on the recipient area and the donor area, i mean that we should tattoo a place on the back of the scalp rather than on the beard.  While you can remove tattoos easily later on, no one really likes them in a visible place unless a tattoo artist is doing the work.  For that matter, we could simply pluck all the beard and see what grows on top and what regrows.  

Enthusiasm on your part will help drive these guys to study plucking and Acell.  i'd need to visit Dr. Cooley to see what he is doing and how he is doing it if i were going to venture into this arena.

----------


## RichardDawkins

I appreciate your willingness to actually work with both doctors (thats something i miss from those other self proclaimed "experts").

I personally hope that you get together with both or one of them as soon as its possible because a lot of repair patients and hairloss sufferes in general would be very pleased.

As i said before it would also be nice if there is someone here who would do the "guinea pig" part and get the study done with your ideas and contributions, i would do it as i said if i were a US resident and without hesitation.

So my only advise or recommendation to you Dr Cole, as a hairloss sufferer, get in touch with them and do another step towards helping hairloss suffering people.

Maybe someone here is willing to do the guinea pig job i really hope so.

And i mean, "If donor regrow is possible even with FUE sometimes why not go the extra mile"

----------


## KeepHoping

I would gladly be a guinea pig for this, it has caused me enough suffering and I would be glad to take one for the team for us to find results, nobody deserves to deal with hair loss at a young age, I would gladly volunteer to take part in an experiment and I am a US citizen.

----------


## KeepHoping

Dr. Cole,

with the recent developments showing some thickening of native hair with PRP/Acell (and the idea of taking stem cells from the hip for the PRP as Dr. Hitzig is starting to experiment with) are you going to implement PRP/Acell needling along with your FUE procedures with grafts dipped in Acell to see if you get the robust outcomes and the hair counts that far exceed the amount of grafts transplanted as reported by these doctors?  Or at least to try it and see what kind of result you could get?  I would fly to Atlanta to see you if it was something you would be willing to try out, I would put up before and after pictures and would be happy to be your Guinea Pig for the experiment.

----------


## RichardDawkins

On behalve of me and a lot of other people i say

Thank you KeepHoping

----------


## HairRobinHood

> Now who really thinks that if you leave only this tiny round part in the donor area and remove the rest of the intact follicle that you will get 100&#37; regrowth in the donor area?


  Lection #1 …

  During the 70s, a well-known and respected researcher tried to develop a surgical procedure which involves “direct scraping” of the sweat glands by using a special “tissue shaver”, in an effort for a radical treatment of hircismus and hyperhidrosis …




> 1978 Sep;62(3):355-60.
> 
>   Abstract
>   We have developed a subcutaneous tissue shaver for the radical treatment of hircismus and hyperhidrosis. With this shaver the sweat glands can be removed from the undersurface of the axillary skin through a small incision. We report *3,000 cases* of hircismus and hyperhidrosis treated by our method. The postoperative scar has been minimal, healing has been quick, and good results were achieved by this method.


   Just a few month later, the well-known and respected researcher reported almost excited about an “unexpected side effect” as a result of his newly developed surgical procedure … 




> 1978 Dec;4(12):921-5.
> 
>   Abstract
>   A subcutaneous tissue "shaver" was used in the treatment of axillary bromhidrosis. *Regeneration of axillary hair was observed postoperatively even if subcutaneous tissue and dermis were removed almost up to the level of sebaceous ducts.* Hair regenerated more often in male patients whose sebaceous glands and follicular isthmus were designedly left intact than in female patients whose sebaceous glands were designedly removed completely. Some function of apocrine and eccrine glands tends to return over a two-year period.


   Just about 5 month later: The well-known and respected researcher was “pissed off“ because his new developed subcutaneous tissue shaver didn’t always work in such a way, so that each and every part of the hair follicle (of course including the sebaceous glands too) is completely removed after his new surgical “tissue shaving” procedure, so that he finally suggested his colleagues via a scientific follow-up paper the following:




> 1979 May;5(5):407-11.
> 
>   Abstract
>   From our experience, the most important requirement for permanent epilation by electrocoagulation is not only to destroy hair bulbs, but also to destroy the isthmal regions of hair follicles and the sebaceous glands.


   The reason, why the researcher suggested this, because he observed on his *3000* treated patients (!), through histological studies etc, that even there is a TINY part of the hair follicle left behind within the tissue (after removal of practically almost the whole follicles including sebaceous glands), that this damn thing called “hair follicle” *always fully regenerated* and finally did again what it normally is doing best: producing hairs! – “unfortunately” including the sebaceous glands too. How bad concerning the researchers initial intention with his “tissue shaver”!

  Conclusions

According to the well-known and respected researchers suggestions, I would recommend you doctors like Woods, Rassman, Bernstein or Cole etc, IF you really wish *NO re-growth* of removed hair follicles like through “FUE”. I can guarantee you an almost 100% success rate for no re-growth of follicles including hairs! So all these guys are definitely the way to gho for such procedures, as suggested and described by the mentioned well-known and respected researcher  - or suggested in FUE studies (= how can I perfectly and once and for all destroy a patients hair follicle) by removal of "intact" hair follicles.

----------


## RichardDawkins

We are talking about PLUCKING as an additional treatment especially for people with depleated donor.

And instead of a long post with extracts from the 70s you could just cut to the chase if have something to report where balding people can benefit from.

But i see its another Gho praising

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

I may have confused some people about my involvement with Acell. I have been using Acell for over a year on humans.  I first began following it in 2007.  
It was used in veterinary applications long before it was indicated for humans.  i own horses so i was interested in Acell.  

I put Acell on my grafts.  I use PRP.  I put Acell in my extraction sites.  I put PRP in my extraction sites.  i also microneedle.  i think the full menu offers more potential than any one alone.  

i am open to doing a hair pluck trial.  I've communicated with Dr. Cooley, but we have not discussed his technique.  I think the first thing they could do is publish a video on how they pluck their hair followed by how they apply acell to the grafts.  My bet is that they are working on a soluble form of Acell to coat the plucked follicles with, but they have limited experience with it yet.  Dr. Hitzig should publish a video on how he is making his PRP from the occipital artery.  I'm not sure i'm ready to go needling the hip for stem cells.  

i have two soluble forms of Acell now that i use on my donor area extraction sites.   

While i have my concerns about all this plucking business, i definitely have the tools to evaluate the results.   I'm also curious how well it works especially in the donor area.  

Look, here is hair regrowth in a donor area extraction site treated with Acell 2 months after the extraction procedure.  Interesting.  



i'm not sure you can publish a good quality video on this forum.  Can you?

----------


## RichardDawkins

@Dr Cole : Nice to hear that you willing to test plucking. I think Keep Hoping will contact you then.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Please let's keep focus on the main subject. If you want to brawl look for a chatroom.

----------


## HairRobinHood

> Please let's keep focus on *the main subject*. If you want to brawl look for a chatroom.


 The *main subject*? You'll find the main subject here:

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpos...88&postcount=1

... and in particular here.

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpos...&postcount=259

----------


## Bakez

> I may have confused some people about my involvement with Acell. I have been using Acell for over a year on humans.  I first began following it in 2007.  
> It was used in veterinary applications long before it was indicated for humans.  i own horses so i was interested in Acell.  
> 
> I put Acell on my grafts.  I use PRP.  I put Acell in my extraction sites.  I put PRP in my extraction sites.  i also microneedle.  i think the full menu offers more potential than any one alone.  
> 
> i am open to doing a hair pluck trial.  I've communicated with Dr. Cooley, but we have not discussed his technique.  I think the first thing they could do is publish a video on how they pluck their hair followed by how they apply acell to the grafts.  My bet is that they are working on a soluble form of Acell to coat the plucked follicles with, but they have limited experience with it yet.  Dr. Hitzig should publish a video on how he is making his PRP from the occipital artery.  I'm not sure i'm ready to go needling the hip for stem cells.  
> 
> i have two soluble forms of Acell now that i use on my donor area extraction sites.   
> 
> ...


 Is that growth just a one off though? Or have you been seeing more and more of these?

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Of the top of my head, I've seen three cases where there was definite growth in the Acell extraction sites. In addition, the donor healing was much better than with typical FUE.  I can usually spot a donor area that had FUE right away based on my experience level.  The Acell treated donor area extraction sites heal better than anything i have ever seen.  In fact, i had one case where i could not find any evidence that a procedure had been done. 

Most of my patients come to me from other cities.  That makes patient follow up much harder to accomplish.  I suspect i will see more in the coming year who come back for a check up or more work.  Until then, all i can say is that i'm very pleased with the results thus far.  I need to see more results before i can consider this a major break through, however.  

The enclosed photo was a patient who had over 1800 grafts to the frontal part of his scalp.  When looking through his donor area, I could find a few white spots.  I could find a few areas where i knew a graft had been taken, but the skin healed without any white spotting.  I did not see as many extraction sites as there should have been, however.  This clearly suggested that many extraction sites had regrowth.  Actually, it more than suggested it.  This case was from when i was using just Acell powder plus PRP.  i could not be sure i was getting powder to all the sites back then.  Then i came up with a mixture of hyaluronic acid and Acell.  That is when i really could insure that i treated all the extraction sites or at least nearly all of them.  Now i'm seeing much better healing in general and apparent regrowth in at least 3 cases.  One of those donor areas was flawless.  It blew me away.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Listen guys there are many people who read these forums whose hair loss has made them bitter.  Sometimes they are bitter because they have lived with hair loss a long time and there is nothing they can do about it.  Sometimes they are bitter because they had a bad result from a physician.  Sometimes they are bitter because they did not feel they got the result they hoped for from their physician.  They were not born this way.  They were often dealt a bad hand by life.  Responding in a bitter way is sometimes the only relief they have from the pain they feel inside.  It may be their way of coping.  I try to understand their pain and let them take it out on me.  If hurting my feelings, makes them feel better then I'm willing to accept the humbling criticism.

----------


## Bakez

> Of the top of my head, I've seen three cases where there was definite growth in the Acell extraction sites. In addition, the donor healing was much better than with typical FUE.  I can usually spot a donor area that had FUE right away based on my experience level.  The Acell treated donor area extraction sites heal better than anything i have ever seen.  In fact, i had one case where i could not find any evidence that a procedure had been done. 
> 
> Most of my patients come to me from other cities.  That makes patient follow up much harder to accomplish.  I suspect i will see more in the coming year who come back for a check up or more work.  Until then, all i can say is that i'm very pleased with the results thus far.  I need to see more results before i can consider this a major break through, however.  
> 
> The enclosed photo was a patient who had over 1800 grafts to the frontal part of his scalp.  When looking through his donor area, I could find a few white spots.  I could find a few areas where i knew a graft had been taken, but the skin healed without any white spotting.  I did not see as many extraction sites as there should have been, however.  This clearly suggested that many extraction sites had regrowth.  Actually, it more than suggested it.  This case was from when i was using just Acell powder plus PRP.  i could not be sure i was getting powder to all the sites back then.  Then i came up with a mixture of hyaluronic acid and Acell.  That is when i really could insure that i treated all the extraction sites or at least nearly all of them.  Now i'm seeing much better healing in general and apparent regrowth in at least 3 cases.  One of those donor areas was flawless.  It blew me away.


 OK

This is quite exciting then. It is a shame that it seems that scientific investigation in hair loss appears to be almost impossible. You have to wait months or a year to find out whether something worked, that is if you see the results again at all.

It must take a lot of organisation to record the methods used on each patient and then evaluate the results

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Yes, studies are difficult and numbers is what you need to look at the data.

What i think we should do is get a group of physicians together and set up a protocol that we all follow.  suppose 10 of us get 5 results that come back in over the next year.  That would make 50 total results.  The pooled data would probably give us some statistically significant data.  We don't do that, however.  What we do is one or two cases.  You can't get any meaningful data from that.  

Dr. Hitzig and Dr. Cooley have seen promising results with plucking hair.  Now it is time to do the study.  i'm all for being a part of that along with Drs. Rassman and Bernstein.  

What i'm doing today is treating as many donor areas as possible with Acell.  Eventually, i will have some data that means something, but it is going to take time.  It is possible the results will show it only works on a small percentage, but i'll know at some point.  It is not really all that expensive to treat a donor area with Acell.  I annotate exactly what we do in each case.  sometimes it is prp plus Acell.  Sometimes it is just Acell.  

i did a study recently that i submitted for publication.  i treated a donor scar with 50 beard hair grafts and Acell.  The growth was 96%.  in the same patient i treated a different area of the donor scar with 6 chest hair.  the result was a zero percent yield.  In one patient, it is meaningless, but suggestive that more trials are necessary.

----------


## wolvie1985

Sorry Dr. Cole but you have avoided my question. I asked you to enlighten us as to how a hair that is 'groomed' is plucked differently than one that is plucked by Dr. Cooley and Hitzig. You responded with talk about the cells that emerge attached to the plucked hair and simply hypothesize that when the cells are attached, the donor won't regrow. You have no evidence to support this. There is no evidence to support your claim whatsoever that a hair that is plucked in a certain way it will not grow back (outside of repeated plucking of the same hair for years and years). When you pluck any hair, sometimes cells come out with it, sometimes it doesn't. This is why Cooley/Hitzig check each hair that is plucked and discards the ones that don't have the cells attached. But either way, cells attached or not, those hairs will regrow in the donor -- as has been repeatedly said, if the grooming business knew of a way to pluck a hair to ensure it wouldn't regrow, we'd have known it by now.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

No, i have not avoided your question.  I showed you what a plucked hair typically looks like when you jerk it out at home.  It is not likely to grow following transplantation no matter what you put on it.  This is what a plucked hair looks like when you pull it out at home.  Of course, you have left all the cells behind that make a hair and these are going to produce a new hair unless you get some sort of chronic scarring that seems to occur with people who pluck their hair every day in a condition called Trichotillomania.  in that these people pluck a larger area, i can only surmise that after years of habitual plucking, they create a massive inflammatory response that seems to affect a large area on their eyebrows, eyelids, or scalp.  Please note that not everyone with Trichotillomania suffers from permanent hair loss. Most of them get hair regrowth just like men and women all over the world get when they pluck unwanted hair.  

I then showed you what Dr. Hitzig and Dr. Cooley are calling a plucked hair.  It is not your typical plucked hair.  it is nearly the full, intact hair follicle.  

if you want to know how Dr. Hitzig and Dr. Cooley are plucking hair, i suggest you ask them.  I've already stated that they need to show a video of how they are plucking hairs such that they are pulling out nearly intact hair follicles.  I've also stated that i would like to know exactly how they are doing it.  

Dr. Cooley has already mentioned that as he got better at plucking hair over time.  This probably had an influence on his Acell pluck survival and his Acell pluck results.  

This is really quite simple, and it is black and white.  I'm sorry if you do not understand this.  If you don't, then i do not know how i can make it any more clear for you.  

it really is not my responsibility to clearly show the methods of any other physician's research.  it is up to them to define their methods.  Without methods, no one can repeat the work or verify the results.  

My responsibility is to point out concerns i have with the claims made by another physician, and that is what i have done.  My concerns are based on the documentation provided by Dr. Cooley where he showed what his plucked hair that he treated with Acell looked like.  I know enough about the structure of a follicle to state very emphatically that what he demonstrated was a nearly intact hair follicle.  I have shown you what a nearly intact hair follicle compared to a fully intact hair follicle looks like today.  I suggest you study those comparisons very carefully to see what the tiny differences are in the two structures.  

If you like, pluck some of your hairs and send them to me.  i'll magnify them for you and show you how they are different from what Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig are calling a plucked hair follicle.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Normal plucked hairs look like this.  What do they consist of?  Dead Keratin and a tiny portion of the internal root sheath.  They will not survive transplantation even with Acell.  

I suspect that you do not have a very good memory.  i will refresh you.  Dr. Cooley presented two examples of what he called plucked hairs.  One was a scalp hair and one was a beard hair.  In reality, these were not plucked hairs. They were closer to an intact graft than a plucked hair.  In fact they were 90 to 95% of intact single hair follicle grafts. This concept may be impossible for you to grasp, but these are the facts.

----------


## plopp

> Also we will doing our first case of eyebrow plucking with ACell + PRP and remodeling some of the plucked eyebrow hairs to reshape an eyebrow. Will keep you posted


 I'm soo anxious to see this work. Have had a scar in my eyebrow that has bothered me to death for half my life. Also, plucking from the eyebrow, I guess it will be quite apparent if the donor regrows or not, so this is definitely an interesting case to follow. Best of luck with it, Dr Hitzig!

----------


## wolvie1985

"i will refresh you. Dr. Cooley presented two examples of what he called plucked hairs. One was a scalp hair and one was a beard hair. In reality, these were not plucked hairs. They were closer to an intact graft than a plucked hair."

No, Dr.. In reality, these WERE plucked hairs. Because they were plucked out of the scalp using tweezers. Period. 

Sometimes when I pluck my hair, it comes out with what you consider to be a 'nearly fully intact follicle'. Sometimes I don't. Either way, that hair has been plucked, and plucked hairs grow back. You are telling us that if you pluck a hair in a certain way, it will not grow back. I am saying this is wrong. When Dr. Cooley says he has gotten better at plucking, I understand that to mean that he has a) gotten better at plucking the hair so that the cells come out with the follicle every time, rather than say 50&#37; of the time b) gotten better at recognizing how much material is required at the end of the hair in order to achieve regrowth in the recipient.

What I'm saying is, it is well established that plucking a hair with a pair of tweezers by grabbing on to the hair and pulling - no matter what angle, strength or speed you pull - that hair will grow back. You are simply hypothesizing that this is not the case - and it's not enough to show images of a Cooley plucked hair and say "based on my knowledge and experience, too much of the follicle has been pulled out - it won't grow back in the donor". That flies in the face of all the other evidence we have that prove that plucked hairs grow back no matter how much material was pulled out with it. 

We would have known by now that if you plucked a hair, maybe 10% of the time it won't come back because 'a nearly fully intact follicle came out with it'. Never heard that. Girls who groom their eyebrows don't hear "hang in there, cause 9 times out of ten, the eyebrow hair will grow back, but you can get lucky 1 times out of 10 and it won't'.

I have had handfuls of hair pulled out of my scalp at one time during wrestling matches. Guess what, out of all those handfuls, you would think that some of them would have had 'nearly intact follicles' pulled out. And yet all the hair grew back. So, I do understand what you're saying, Dr.. I just think your own claim is far more unfounded than the science you are attempting to discredit.

----------


## rapunzal

just to open the discussion further on plucked donor regeneration as it is a good debate.

i listened to Dr Cooleys interview with Spencer Kobren. He stated that the hair follicle is made up of two main structures. The epithelial cells and the mesenchymal cells and that if plucked corrctly you can get the epithelial cells. So assuming a perfect pluck "Dr Cole's Bart Pluck" leaves behind the mesenchyme layer at the donor which contains the dermal papilla which is the small piece at the end of "Dr Cole's Homer follicle". 

Perhaps it has already been demonstrated how only a few of these remaining dermal papilla cells can induce follicle regeneration at the donor site can be found here.

http://www.aderansresearch.com/pdfs/...pBio_08_05.pdf on page 2

and

http://www.keratin.com/aw/aw042.shtml

In other words the small amount of dermal papilla cells alone induced the formation of a new follicle by calling upon epithelial cells from an unknown location possibly from existing nearby hair follicles or the epetherial cells in the skin.

----------


## rapunzal

perhaps this study has already been done

extract from an article in the Dermatology Times 1st Feb 2003

Hair Harvest - 'Auto-cloned' beard hair viable alternative donor source for transplantation

Chicago - The beard region may serve as a useful harvesting site for hair transplantation in men who already have a severely depleted scalp donor supply, Gary S. Hitzig, M.D., said at the annual meeting of the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery. 

He reported the success of this beard hair "auto-cloning" procedure in a series of five men. The beard hairs are extracted using a tweezing protocol to remove the shaft and bulb while leaving the follicle intact. All of the men were followed for at least one year and were noted to have hair regrowth at both the sites of hair harvesting and transplantation as confirmed by hair counts performed with a hair densitometer.

----------


## Spanish Dude

Dr. Hitzig published autocloning results in 2003, using beard hairs and without Acell. 
And he claimed 80-85&#37; yield, no less!!
But now, 8 years later, where are the full restaurations? 


http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/dcboard....id=3857&page=3

Copy: >>>>>>>>>>>>

Sat Jun-07-03 10:23 PM:

*Dr. Hitzig has successfully done a series of 1-for-two hair transplants on 5 paitents using their beard hairs. The beard hairs are extracted using a tweezing protocol to remove the shaft and bulb while leaving the follicle intact. Approximately 80 percent to 85 percent of the transplanted hairs grew in the scalp, and the follicles left in the donor beard region continue to generate beard hairs*.

"Our experience with this technique offers promise for men wishing to improve their appearance after an earlier hair transplantation procedure but who lack the donor supply for additional treatment. Further study may also lead us to the use of beard hairs as a source for in vitro cloning of scalp donor material, and if that technique is successful, we would be able to obtain an unlimited supply of donor hair and perhaps eradicate genetic baldness," said Dr. Hitzig.

According to Mr. Oz, the technology so far can only be used on beard hair since the surgical tweezers can NOT handle the much more smaller scalp hair, but the testining has been 95% sucesful. In addition, they're are already testing in vitro to remove ONE single beard hair from a human and use that one hair to duplicate a series of hairs on a synthetic mantle ( artificial skin).

Check the following article for the whole story:
http://www.dermatologytimes.com/derm...l.jsp?id=47883

Dr. Hitzig's site also has a little information on this procedure:
http://www.nyhairloss.com/gsh-procedures.htm

I want to mention that based on what I gathered from this forum, Dr. Hitzig is controversial--he's a veteran HT surgeon with a few class-action suits brought against him. He also reportedly hired a moonlighting New York City Department of Sanitation worker to be an assistant on his surgical team and allowed the guy to do more than what he's supposed to be doing (on the patients). However, I think those things should not undermine his efforts in looking for a better way of treating hair loss.
<<<<<<

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok Guys lets stop right here before the fronts get harder and HairRobinHood will come up with some Gho talk.

KeepHoping has offered himself as a "guinea pig" at Dr Cole to test regrowing donor and also succesfull transplantation of ONLY plucked HAIRS (Hairs not Grafts)

This is what we should focus now and nothing less, and yes i know the answer the one question " Will plucked hairs regrow in Donor area", the answer is Yes but now it is time to put stupid internet arguments aside and communicate together and get something accomplished.

Believe me there were some ideas like "Lets work together" at hairsite but almost all of those ideas have been destroyed by Iron.Man´s endless insults or by other users there.

So lets do it like this, KeepHoping will get in touch with Dr Cole and the will test it as Dr Cole has given his opinion about how to test things. And also let Hitzig and Cooley do their stuff and give them time to redefine their findings and make plucking a "state of the art" technique.

Also i would like to be Dr Hitzig and Cooley a little bit more transparant at this point.

Also as Dr Cole stated, they should get in touch with Dr Rassman, Dr Bernstein and him.

OR

We could just keep arguing over and over again if hairs grow and where all those pictures are, and in 4 years we are still here with no results.

@ SpanishDude : Sorry you absolutely annoy me, now you bring up some Lawsuits against Dr Hitzig, only because you read about them here. Thats your SOP right, wait until something for your world of conspiracy theories come up and then annoy people at message boards with things not even connected to each other.

You and all you "Transform a NW7 to NW1" crap. Have you seen this repair patient with scar Tissue and Nw7? And now he is well everything but not a NW7 anymore.

You and Iron.Man (HairRobinHood) did as mentioned here before, destroy hairsite

----------


## Spanish Dude

Leeroy, it was you and Iron_Man who destroyed Hairsite, not me. In fact you were banned there (and logged in with a new name Stevie.Dee).
And now you are trying to derrail my post.
My post underscores that Hitzig claimed 80-85&#37; yield in 2003. That was autocloning without even using Acell. Where are the wow results? 8 years after?

p.d. the lawsuit was mentioned in that 2003 post. It wasn't my comment.

----------


## RichardDawkins

And to give a straight answer

Yes      I      do belive and know for sure that plucked hairs (intact) always grow back in thir plucked area. Period

My own experiments show that. Also another really obvious proof, girls who wax their bikini zone, their legs etc. The hair always come back to haunt them ALWAYS.

Also another fact is, that follicles even if they got damaged, can and will regenerate themselves. Why?

1) Damage on a smaller scale will always heal without leaving scars
2) The head is very energetic when it comes to blood vessels etc
3) Surrounding cells provide the help to recover

there is a very simple analogy for hairs, they are refered to as "weeds" or "pest plants"

If you hack a pest plant above the surface, its roots remain in the ground and will produce another fully plant.

If you pluck it out and just a little bit of root work sticks in the bottom, and you throw away the plucked plant, you can say sure fire that in the next year you will have two pest plants to take care of

And if you pluck this one "Patient Zero" pest plant all the time it will come back the next year every time.

--------------------------------------------------------

No we transsect the "Pest plant" (like FUE) without Acell

Now all we have is an empty hole in the ground with no rootwork and no live whatsoever BUT there are some minor remains left, some really small root works.

No our beloved gardener think, that is actually a brilliant idea to pour "fertilizer" in this hole because he wanna plant a coconut tree the next day.

WHat happens next in a time lapse is pretty obvious and simple. The remains in the ground will form, guess what, another pest plant.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Only because hairloss is scary, we should think of it as something impossible to beat.

CONCLUSION (Please read carefully)

If there is the smallest of smallest of smallest molecule or "NEEDED" material left, it will regenerate PERIOD.

Thats btw another reason why with FUE progression, there are more and more cases where some grafts in the donor have regenerate themselves.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And in the pest plan example, fertilizer is just a simple stupid solution for nice plants to grow shiny. But Acell on the other other hand is like "rehabilitation program, surgeon, nurse, aftercare and an extra life" all combined.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My prognosis or prediction is pretty straight forward and i wanna share it :

1) Acell/PRP will halt and stop hairloss and reverse it to a certain point

Results : hairloss stopped but NOT a full head of hair only a few more grafts or so

2) Plucked hairs with Acell for creating a perfect dense hairline and induce some autocloning

3) FUE with Acell or Plucking with Acell as full hair restauration solution

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thats the end of the story and please Dr Cole i really respect you effort, i really do and also your scepticism but at one thing you have to believe the hairloss suffering people, because they all speak because they witnessed it themselves

"Plucked hair fully regenerates itself"

----------


## plopp

Guys, I want the donor to regrow more than anyone. Nevertheless, it is well known that hair plucking may result in scarring alopecia. Whether that is a long term effect from overplucking or more of a game of chance everytime you pluck, I don't think anyone can say for sure at this point. The same goes for the extra damage that might or might not be induced by Cooley's and Hitzig's plucking technique.

I think this is just one of those painful 'wait and see' cases. I do agree with Dr Cole that a scientific study would be of tremendous help and shouldn't be too costly to set up.

----------


## rapunzal

actually all i was suggesting is that a study of the donor might have already been done by Dr Hitzig himself

----------


## RichardDawkins

Hmmm iam always curious when 2 post poster are agressively try to downplay some new things.

And now it doesnt result in scaring, only if the hairs are plucked wrong. And if you would really really want infinite donor to be a real thing, you wouldnt come up with such stuff  :Smile: 

And here you can see there is a girl who plcuked her hairs for 11 years and the hair grows back 

http://web121.sun-15.de/wbb2/thread....0711#post10711

----------


## plopp

> Hmmm iam always curious when 2 post poster are agressively try to downplay some new things.
> 
> And now it doesnt result in scaring, only if the hairs are plucked wrong. And if you would really really want infinite donor to be a real thing, you wouldnt come up with such stuff 
> 
> And here you can see there is a girl who plcuked her hairs for 11 years and the hair grows back 
> 
> http://web121.sun-15.de/wbb2/thread....0711#post10711


 LOL, well, I'm always suspicious when people who have only been on here for less than a month makes outrageous claims of infinite donor without anything to back it up  :Wink: . But seriously, ask the people who suffer from trichotillomania or overplucked eyebrows, and you will know that plucked hair don't always regrow. As I said before, it might just be that scarring of the hair follicle occurs first after repeated plucking (cf. Cooley's statement of expanded donor, not infinite). It might be that different types of hair may be more suscpetible to this sort of trauma. It might be that different plucking techniques result in different outcomes in terms of regrowth. The bottom line is that we just don't know as of yet and that, currently, only anecdotal evidence of regrowth is present.

I do believe this to work, and I certainly wish it to more than anything in the world. That aside, I still think it's too early to make any grandiose claims of solving the riddle of hair loss.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Thats reasonable :Wink: 

On the homepage there is the average time it takes for hair to grow back eyebrow and scalp hair

Another question is, if this scaring will occur when you use Acell on the Donor pluck side ;-) so i highly doubt it

----------


## plopp

Using Acell on the plucked donor is definitely an interesting concept and would probably ensure regrowth. The problem would be how to apply it I guess :/

----------


## RichardDawkins

Well.....Dr Cole posted a pic which machine he uses to mix Acell. There are plenty of forms to use like powder or injection. This is not the problem (lucky for us)  :Smile:

----------


## KeepHoping

Are you going to be doing a similar procedure to Dr. Hitzig with just injections or injections throughout the entire recipient and donor with your transplants.  He has gotten some regrowth in patients and it seems to stop their hair loss at least for a certain period of time (http://nyhairloss.com/portfolio/acell-prp-case-studies/).  I think it would help yield better results as it would thicken the native hair along with the transplant, just wanted to know what you thought of it along with your CIT or FUE?

----------


## KeepHoping

I did volunteer to be a guinea pig but no matter who they use to try and prove their technique I think Hitzig, Cooley and Cole should do one procedure with everyone present at one of their offices to learn from each other and try to get the best results.  Of course that is hard to arrange but at least some type of contact during the procedure would be valuable.  

For example, maybe Dr. Cole could offer his expertise on his form of FUE to the other doctors and how maybe the way he extracts from the donor would allow for regeneration with the use of Acell or Dr. Hitzig could explain what he is doing with Acell/PRP injections to stop hair loss and add growth.  This would be the type of cooperation that would help hair loss sufferers move toward the final goal of finding a treatment to stop this and get hair back on our heads.

That's just my two cents.

-KH

----------


## RichardDawkins

You absolutely speak my language. So what does the rest of the community think?

----------


## Jerry Cooley, MD

> "i will refresh you. Dr. Cooley presented two examples of what he called plucked hairs. One was a scalp hair and one was a beard hair. In reality, these were not plucked hairs. They were closer to an intact graft than a plucked hair."
> 
> No, Dr.. In reality, these WERE plucked hairs. Because they were plucked out of the scalp using tweezers. Period. 
> 
> Sometimes when I pluck my hair, it comes out with what you consider to be a 'nearly fully intact follicle'. Sometimes I don't. Either way, that hair has been plucked, and plucked hairs grow back. You are telling us that if you pluck a hair in a certain way, it will not grow back. I am saying this is wrong. When Dr. Cooley says he has gotten better at plucking, I understand that to mean that he has a) gotten better at plucking the hair so that the cells come out with the follicle every time, rather than say 50% of the time b) gotten better at recognizing how much material is required at the end of the hair in order to achieve regrowth in the recipient.
> 
> What I'm saying is, it is well established that plucking a hair with a pair of tweezers by grabbing on to the hair and pulling - no matter what angle, strength or speed you pull - that hair will grow back. You are simply hypothesizing that this is not the case - and it's not enough to show images of a Cooley plucked hair and say "based on my knowledge and experience, too much of the follicle has been pulled out - it won't grow back in the donor". That flies in the face of all the other evidence we have that prove that plucked hairs grow back no matter how much material was pulled out with it. 
> 
> We would have known by now that if you plucked a hair, maybe 10% of the time it won't come back because 'a nearly fully intact follicle came out with it'. Never heard that. Girls who groom their eyebrows don't hear "hang in there, cause 9 times out of ten, the eyebrow hair will grow back, but you can get lucky 1 times out of 10 and it won't'.
> ...


 I agree with you completely.  Hair grows back after plucking.  I have no special, secret, magical plucking technique.  I got better at plucking hairs with adequate epithelial cells attached to the shaft.  No one has seen any thinning or lack of regrowth in the areas I've plucked.  Nor would I expect them to, because I am not extracting complete follicles.  

I've attached a photo of two single hair grafts from the same patient.  The one on the right is plucked, and the one on the left is dissected from a strip.  Both are single hairs from the same patient, so we're making a valid comparison.  I chose the meatiest pluck I could get for this example.  It even has the dermal papilla attached, which is quite rare for plucks.  The difference is that the intact follicle on the left has the dermal sheath, which is quite apparent when you compare the width of these grafts.  Also attached is a histologic stain of a plucked graft.....there is no dermal sheath on it.  Hair will regrow at the plucking site because mesenchymal stem cells in the dermal sheath will regenerate a papilla, and epithelial stem cells in the isthmus will interact with this papilla to form a new hair fiber.  Fifty years of basic hair research support this statement.  

Someone on this Forum mentioned how frustratingly slow hair growth studies can be, and I echo this.  I am accumulating more clinical experience with this technique, and time will tell what role it will play.  There are many very good questions and it will unfortunately take time to answer them.  Later this year, I will provide an update on my results.  In the meantime, I recommend patients seek out standard medical treatments and if they are a candidate, do FUT or FUE.  

Dr Cooley

----------


## RichardDawkins

SO i think that i speak for a lot of people here.

I think we need really to see more pictures to grasp the potential of both Acell/Plucking and Acell/PRP treatments.

There was also a question about some patient who underwent 4000 plucked hairs or something related to this, for this case also more input would be appreciated.

WHat does the community think.

PS: No iam not a naysayer, iam just really really interested in a promising solution, thats all.

----------


## plopp

Dr Cooley and Dr Hitzig,

I think a lot of repair (or otherwised scarred) patients - like myself - would appreciate it if we could have a little more info on the yield in scar tissue. As the spanish guy pointed out, we've heard everything from up to 50 % to down to only occasional success.

What's likely to be the most contributing factor in the success rate of autocloning in scar tissue? Would it be the thickness of the scar or the width? Any pointers in terms of those two characteristics as of yet?

Thanks!

----------


## Jerry Cooley, MD

> Dr Cooley and Dr Hitzig,
> 
> I think a lot of repair (or otherwised scarred) patients - like myself - would appreciate it if we could have a little more info on the yield in scar tissue. As the spanish guy pointed out, we've heard everything from up to 50 % to down to only occasional success.
> 
> What's likely to be the most contributing factor in the success rate of autocloning in scar tissue? Would it be the thickness of the scar or the width? Any pointers in terms of those two characteristics as of yet?
> 
> Thanks!


 I don't know the actual success in scar tissue but I believe it depends on several factors.  When I said 40-50% in an interview, I was referring back to several cases I had recently seen in followup.  I have attached a couple representative photos.  In these photos, you see the hair shaft sticking out from being implanted 6 months earlier, and new hair sprouting out from around it.  However I later had cases where the success was lower or even zero, as in EJ's case, which is very disturbing to me.  I suspect that the wider and thicker the scar tissue, the lower the success.  We need mesenchymal stem cells to make the follicle regeneration work, and they are likely absent in scar tissue.  At this point, I prefer to tell patients that plucking doesn't work well in scar tissue but that we are actively working on techniques to overcome this.

----------


## Gubter_87

Dr Cooley; In these pictures it seems that the actual transplanted plucked hair does not grow, but new hair starts growing where it has been implanted.

Is this what happens in your experience? Will that plucked hair always be there at the same length or will it fall off or start growing?

Also the new hair looks quite thin. Do you believe it will grow in thicker in time?

----------


## Jerry Cooley, MD

> Dr Cooley; In these pictures it seems that the actual transplanted plucked hair does not grow, but new hair starts growing where it has been implanted.
> 
> Is this what happens in your experience? Will that plucked hair always be there at the same length or will it fall off or start growing?
> 
> Also the new hair looks quite thin. Do you believe it will grow in thicker in time?


 Sometimes the implanted hair seems to grow and sometimes new hair is seen branching out from the implanted hair, in which case the 'stub' is eventually shed or can be plucked out.

These are 6 month photos so the hair may be thin because of that or because plucked hair growing in scar tissue is thinner.  I don't have enough data to anwer that yet.  I predict they will be thinner because they are probably made up of fewer mesenchymal cells.  Plucked hair that grows in non-scarred scalp looks normal, and is usually indistinguishable from surrounding hair.

----------


## wolvie1985

Dr. Cooley, how is your success rate with respect to implanting two or three plucked hairs in one incision to create a multi-haired follicular unit? Is it the same success rate as implanting a single hair - which I believe to be 75-80%?

----------


## Gubter_87

Dr Cooley; Thank you for your reply. In at least one of the pictures it also looks like you have gotten two hairs from one transplanted.
Is this correct and if so is it common?

----------


## plopp

Many thanks for the update Dr. Cooley!

If your theory of the presence of mesenchymal cells is correct, what does this imply when autocloning to completely bald or otherwise hairless (but non-scarred) tissue? That is, will surrounding follicles have any impact on the concentration of mesenchymal stem cells in the area?

Also, to follow up on the pictures. When you have follicles forming around the plucked hair like that, do you still feel like you can control the direction that they grow in, or do they come off somewhat 'unruly' so to speak, since (I guess) they aren't growing from the basic follicular structure that was provided by the plucked hair?

----------


## KeepHoping

Is there anyway I could get in touch with you via phone when you have the time? Or maybe email you? I filled out the contact form through your website and sent it through but haven't gotten a response yet, I understand you're busy but I'd love to have the chance to chat for a bit.  Thanks.

----------


## RichardDawkins

I can also say many thanks and i have some questions also, may seem a little bit to early but it would be interesting to hear.

Dr Cooley/Hitzig lets assume for one second that the plucking technique would work exactly like a normal hairtransplant.

What would be the price tag we should calculate then, i ask this question because some people throw around numbers like 10 dollar per single hair, which i think is a little bit over the top.

Second question, because we hear this argument a lot (almost in every discussion) is there a plan that you use lets say one patient as a patient zero and do a plucking transformation from NW5 to NW1? Of course with fotos documented.

I know that you guys must be really exhausted by now and those hard questions the people have, but in the long run i think its all worth it.

And i would really like to see a patent zero case where a NW5 has been transformed to a NW1 just by plucking, it would also make discussions at message boards way easier and it should nod people to rethink the idea about hairtransplants

----------


## Jerry Cooley, MD

> Many thanks for the update Dr. Cooley!
> 
> If your theory of the presence of mesenchymal cells is correct, what does this imply when autocloning to completely bald or otherwise hairless (but non-scarred) tissue? That is, will surrounding follicles have any impact on the concentration of mesenchymal stem cells in the area?
> 
> Also, to follow up on the pictures. When you have follicles forming around the plucked hair like that, do you still feel like you can control the direction that they grow in, or do they come off somewhat 'unruly' so to speak, since (I guess) they aren't growing from the basic follicular structure that was provided by the plucked hair?


 Excellent questions.  We know that mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) can come from blood (marrow source), adipocytes (fat), or from surrounding follicles (dermal sheath).  The  new dermal sheath regenerated after plucked grafting  arose from MSCs but from which source?  We don't know.  But I'm starting to think that local MSCs are important, which would be contributed by surrounding follicles.  One of the many things to be sorted out.

I don't think hair direction is a problem.  You have to keep in mind these are ultra-closeup photos created with a lens attachment that has a glass surface that you have to mash down on the skin to take the photo, so you don't get an accurate look at the way the hair lays down.

In answer to previous questions, we can create multihair grafts but I don't whether this as successful (I think so).  Sometimes we'll see more than one hair sprouting from a single implanted hair.  In this photo, you see two reddish brown beard whiskers implanted and two normal looking scalp hairs emerging from the implantation site.  This suggests that local MSCs controlled the new hair characteristics.  This would look very different if it was beard FUE.

Regarding our fees, see my previous post.  NW7 to NW1?  That's way down the road.  One step at a time.

----------


## wolvie1985

Hmm, if your hypothesis is correct, Dr. Cooley, and MSCs are grown from the local area as opposed to from the plucked hair itself, I suppose that means the plucked hair is more likely to be androgen sensitive.. Time will tell...

----------


## bhoys

Dr Cooley what is the max amount of plucked hairs do you think it is possible to use in one procedure?

----------


## KeepHoping

How many doctors are utilizing this on the entire scalp when performing transplants?  Are those who are seeing thickening of native hair and faster growth when using Acell.  I know Cooley and Hitzig have talked about robust growth and fast growth in the recipient but is this consistent with everyone?

Also, Dr. Cole, on your forum you had mentioned that looking through one of your recent CIT or FUE patients when you look through his donor you cannot even tell a transplant was done.  Does this mean in that patient you saw regrowth in his donor or because it had prevented the hypopigmentation that sometimes comes along with a CIT/FUE procedure?

----------


## KeepHoping

Any news on when new pictures will be coming up on your website?

----------


## SilverSurfer

Assuming one would go to add density to a zone with the autoplucking, would there be any negative side effect to the already transplanted hairs growing there?
Also, what is the density you have been working with? What is the maximum beard or head hairs you have been able to pack as closely as possible per cm2?

Thanks

----------


## Spanish Dude

Regarding the plucking technique, Dr. Cooley says that its just normal plucking.("I have no special, secret, magical plucking technique").

But:
-I have myself plucked a few scalp hairs, and they got absolutely no cells attached.
-In Dr. Cooley's presentation, Part 4, Minute 6:00, Cooley says there is a bit of "pinpoint bleeding, and redness" in the donor area where hairs were plucked from.
I wonder how there can be pinpoint bleeding by just plucking hairs.
http://www.iahrs.org/news/dr-jerry-c...tion-part-3-4/
-Dr. Cole states that normal plucking cannot produce a hair graft like the ones presented by Cooley (the Bart Simpson-like hair grafts).
-Dr. Hitzig says plucking is very "tedious" and he prefers to do strip+Acell.

----------


## RichardDawkins

And your questions are what?

----------


## Spanish Dude

> And your questions are what?


 Is this a normal, simple plucking? Why does it bleed?

----------


## RichardDawkins

pinpoint bleeding is what girls have after epilate their legs its tiny red dots. its not bleeding like in niagara falls of blood its only a little reddish spot where sometimes a little bit of blood (little means insignificant) can pour out

Here this womens book to epilation covers this issue http://books.google.de/books?id=mbzT...page&q&f=false

And to answer your following question, even after epilation the hair at girls legs grow back as normal and so does the scalp hair in the donor area.

Next time just look up what words actually mean please, only because the word bleeding is included it doenst necessarily mean bleeding like blood flow.

Its the same with heart burn :-) youre heart is not burning

As i said before in my observations, i also havent had always tissue at my plucked hairs, thats btw one of the downsides right now, you have to pluck more hair then you get hair with tissue material.

What he means by getting better is the yield when you pluck hair that has tissue is around it.

Plucking hair is of course tedious, you have to pluck hair, then you have to get a good rate of hairs with tissue around it and then you have to transplant them lets sa in groups to simulate a normal graft.

But maybe iam telling bullshit because iam absolutely wrong, lets see what the doc has to say. But i hope he gets better and better because then i will absolutely go for a plucking transplant.

----------


## KeepHoping

I'd like to undergo a CIT/Acell/PRP procedure with you within the next couple months and would be willing to get tattoos in the donor to check for regrowth for the sake of moving this research forward.  I have already submitted my virtual consultation a while ago and I am still waiting on a response but I think it would be to everyones benefit here, I am from San Francisco and would fly to Atlanta for the surgery and fly back for you to recheck for regrowth in the donor, hopefully that would help streamline the research a bit for other people struggling with hairloss.  Thanks doc.

----------


## Spanish Dude

RichardDawkins, please, pluck some hairs from your scalp and tell me if there is any pinpoint bleeding or redness.
Also, tell me why dr. Cole is not able to pluck hairs like the ones obtained by dr. Cooley.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok i plucked some hairs from different areas. Results :

1) One single hair at a time less reddish points and less pain / average to high percentage of tissue arround

2) a whole bunch of hair (hurts effin more and more reddish) a little less tissue yield but increased with grabbing the hair and then curl them a little like spaghetti and then pluck em

I dont know WHY Dr Cole cant pluck em like Dr Cooley but the essence is the TISSUE and only the tissue is needed.

Unfortunately i dont have acell around at my place, but if i had i would just test it

----------


## tbtadmin

Patient had transplant approximately 1 year ago. The right half of the donor was sutured normally, the left half was sutured normally and injected with ACell suspension (Spun down Arterial Blood)

NOTE THE EXTREMELY FINE LINE ON THE LEFT WITH HAIR GROWING THROUGH IT.

----------


## Bakez

That is amazing if real...

----------


## LarryDavid

This is simply awesome.
If u can get this results constantly with Acell, this would be a revival of strip HT.
This looks almost to good to be true.

----------


## Bakez

Is that strip surgery? On the right hand side the hair underneath the thin 'strip' where there is no hair also looks really thin?

----------


## RichardDawkins

Now i really have high hopes when it comes to Acell and Plucking Holy crap. It really seems that hairloss is slowly getting his ass handled  :EEK!: 

But please please please develop the plucking technique cause i cant get myself to get a strip procedure :-)

----------


## clee984

That is pretty effing cool.

----------


## KeepHoping

That donor looks great with the acell treatment!  What about the recipient, I want to see the robust growth they are reporting.  Also would having a strip taken cause problems with scalp tightness or laxity, people have warned me of that, I'm not sure on how Acell would affect that or solve that issue of strip surgery.

----------


## Gubter_87

Absolutely amazing result on the previous page.
A question to Dr hitzig though: Is that a typical result of using A-cell on the scar or is this an exeptionally good responder?

I'm sure that if the whole scar would have been treated it would allow the patient to wear his hair very short without it being noticable.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Thats right but iam more interested in expanding the donor with plucking :-) those results here are a nice a really really nice cherry on the cake thats for sure

----------


## montrose

Now that acell seems to regrow hair, how beneficial do you guys thinks the acell+prp injections would be for people that don't want a transplant. Would the new hair be dht resistant or would a person still need an anti androgen?

----------


## Gubter_87

Richarddawkins: I'm sure we all are, but that picture really got me pumping with excitement.
If the scar can get that thin and even have hair growing through it from a strip procedure then I am really considering it as a viable option. Naturally though plucking would be even better!

God! Exciting times for us hair loss sufferers now!!  :Cool:

----------


## Bakez

I don't understand what the difference would be between FUE and Strip? If this ACell *actually* works consistently (still no proof yet so don't get excited), then surely both ways would create undetectable transplants?

If that were the case why wouldn't you want to do an FUE? I'd much prefer not to have a mass of skin ripped out of my scalp.

----------


## whynot

You get a better yield with FUT.

----------


## LarryDavid

If Acell is able to regrow the donor after a FUE then u would have unlimited or at least extended donor supply.

----------


## Bakez

So why would anyone do strip ever again

----------


## LarryDavid

Because nobody knows if Acell is acutally able to do this.
But having seen this pictures i think it might be.

----------


## KeepHoping

Is there any reason to opt against a strip surgery if it regrows the entire donor?  Can anyone explain what exactly Hitzig is doing there.  Is he taking out a strip then pulling the skin together and closing the wound with stitches with Acell and then when the stitches are removed the hair is growing back?  If that's the case then does it actually mean it's growing back donor because there was still a chunk of skin taken out and your scalp would feel tighter right?  I'm wondering if anyone can explain how that works, sorry I'm not too informed on how the strip transplant procedure works.

----------


## rephairing

That donor comparison looks good . Was standard suturing used or was this sutured loose like in the video presentation ? Also was this a trichophytic
 closure ?

----------


## Spanish Dude

Dr. Hitzig, could you please post the photos "just after surgery", so that we can see the strip just after closure?
How long after the surgery are these photos?
why have you shaved the hair below the strip and not above? I think the proper thing to do, if you wanted to show the scar, would be to shave around the scar, (below and above) not just below the scar.
The Acell-treated side of the "scar" (left side) cannot be evaluated properly because the hair has been shaved below the "scar" only. Why did you do that?

----------


## wolvie1985

There you go again Spanish Dude. Only you could find reason to criticize these incredible photos. He has already said these were posted 12 months after surgery. I would assume the reason he shaved below the scar is to prep the area for another strip and match the old scar up with the new incision. Few patients would consent to shaving a strip of their head if they weren't about to undergo an HT procedure. In any event, we can all properly evaluate the scar based on these photos. The results are clear as day. Your tone as always suggests something underhanded going on. It is entirely unfair and toxic to continue to impugn the work and intentions of these doctors who are honestly trying to help us.

----------


## CVAZBAR

WOW!! Now we just need to see if this would be consistent with every person.

----------


## KeepHoping

Does this mean he is regrowing the same amount of hair bearing skin he extracted or does it mean that he sutured the opening together and regrew just that thin strip?  

And does that mean if he is regrowing the skin with follicles then the scalp wouldn't get tight and FUT becomes the primary method of transplantation again?

----------


## RichardDawkins

@ SpanishDude : I dont know what to say because those pictures are clear when you look from far away to them and as a bonus we got a really close picture here and the left side looks pretty good (almost undetectable but iam not a strip friend) and the right side.......well looks like your normal FUT scar. Those results are like day and night.

@all: it is nice that we are all relatively happy right now but i would be more happy if Plucking would get better and better because to me a FUT is not an option because iam afraid.

I hope both doctors also develop this plucking technique. Cause i dont care if i had to pay a little bit more as long as my donos seems untouched.

Also i would like to see FUE-multiplication gets better and better for the same reasons as above.

But nevertheless those pictures will give a lot of people hopes for the future

----------


## blueheel

Im currently close to one month out from a strip procedure using ACELL with Dr. Cooley. I can report so far that I have high hopes for the outcome based on my progess so far. It seems to be healing COMPLETLY different from my prior surgeries. It is red as hell along the incision(as expected)However, its already flatter and smoother than it was before the surgery. He didnt use prp/acell injected into the suture line. He did place acell sheet into wound bed.

----------


## blueheel

Donor @ 3 weeks
Recipient 17 days

----------


## Gubter_87

Blueheel:

How many previous strip surgeries have you had done?
Hope everything will heal up well for you and please keep us posted on your progress.

----------


## blueheel

Healing well thanks. I had two small procedures in the 90s and and one in 04-ish.  I considered this a scar repair and transplant. So far so good.

----------


## KeepHoping

I asked this earlier but wanted to bump it to see if anyone has any idea:


Is there any reason to opt against a strip surgery if it regrows the entire donor? Can anyone explain what exactly Hitzig is doing there. Is he taking out a strip then pulling the skin together and closing the wound with stitches with Acell and then when the stitches are removed the hair is growing back? If that's the case then does it actually mean it's growing back donor because there was still a chunk of skin taken out and your scalp would feel tighter right? I'm wondering if anyone can explain how that works, sorry I'm not too informed on how the strip transplant procedure works.

----------


## UK_

> Patient had transplant approximately 1 year ago. The right half of the donor was sutured normally, the left half was sutured normally and injected with ACell suspension (Spun down Arterial Blood)
> 
> NOTE THE EXTREMELY FINE LINE ON THE LEFT WITH HAIR GROWING THROUGH IT.
> 
> Attachment 8604
> Attachment 8605
> Attachment 8606


 Sorry am I missing something with this picture - is the area that looks shaved the donor area?  that large strip that is about an inch thick?  THATS the donor area??  If that large area in the 2nd and 3rd pic is the donor area used with ACELL I will eat my hat.  I am guessing that is a scar repair/cover-up from a previous transplant.

----------


## Spanish Dude

No, UK, thats is not the donor area. 
It was a strip procedure. The donor area was removed, cut into FUs and planted on recipient. At 1 year after surgery, Dr. Hitzig shaved the area below the scar and then he took the photos.What you see is just the shaved area below the scar. 
According to Dr. Hitzig, at surgery time, he injected prp+acell on the left side of the stitched wound, and voil&#224;, the left side healed with a minimal or no scar at all, while the right side healed with the typical scar. 

Interestingly, the "vanished scar" on the left can't be evaluated properly because, strangely,  dr. Hitzig decided to shave only below the scar and not above, in such a way that the "vanished scar" gets confused with the fronteer between the shaved and not shaved hair. 

If dr. Hitzig's intention (for this shaving) was to cut off a new strip, over the former one, he should anyways have shaved both below and above, at least a bit, to facilitate the cutting of the new strip so that it contains the old scar. Thus, it looks strange to me that dr. Hitzig decided to shave only the hair below, in such a confusing fashion. Even more strange considering that he was going to use this case as illustration of Acell's healing powers. With this decision, the scar on the left simply cannot be evaluated. 

To clarify things, I have politely requested in this thread that Dr. Hitzig posts the photos "just after surgery" so that we can see the evolution of the scar in the Acell side  of the wound (left side).

----------


## Spanish Dude

> Patient had transplant approximately 1 year ago. The right half of the donor was sutured normally, the left half was sutured normally and injected with ACell suspension (Spun down Arterial Blood)
> 
> NOTE THE EXTREMELY FINE LINE ON THE LEFT WITH HAIR GROWING THROUGH IT.
> 
> 
> Attachment 8604
> Attachment 8605
> Attachment 8606


 admin, where do you see a fine line on the left? have you considered that this could just be the optical illussion as result of parting the hair upwards? I have the impression that there is nothing at all at the left side.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> admin, where do you see a fine line on the left? have you considered that this could just be the optical illussion as result of parting the hair upwards? I have the impression that there is nothing at all at the left side.


 I see what you mean sp but even if he shaved higher, doesn't it seem that hair is still present at the top? If the scar was like the right side, than we would see no hair right? Also, from the direction of the line, it seems that it would be higher than the right side. You don't think the left scar would be too high compared to the right? You have a point, just asking what you think about that.

----------


## Bakez

Yep, wish when pics are posted that they dont allow scope for misrepresentation, been burned too many times

----------


## tbtadmin

> admin, where do you see a fine line on the left? have you considered that this could just be the optical illussion as result of parting the hair upwards? I have the impression that there is nothing at all at the left side.


 We were just sharing the images and text provided by Dr. Hitzig, we have made no commentary on this ourselves.

----------


## Spanish Dude

> We were just sharing the images and text provided by Dr. Hitzig, we have made no commentary on this ourselves.


 ah, ok, thanks for the clarification.  :Smile:

----------


## Spanish Dude

> I see what you mean sp but even if he shaved higher, doesn't it seem that hair is still present at the top? If the scar was like the right side, than we would see no hair right? Also, from the direction of the line, it seems that it would be higher than the right side. You don't think the left scar would be too high compared to the right? You have a point, just asking what you think about that.


 No, you didn't get my idea.
Okay, I am going to be frank and clear.
I think that there is nothing at all at the left side. I mean, there is no scar at all on the left. There is just normal, virgin scalp.

Why? This is what I think: I think there was never a strip taken on the left side. Hitzig has shaved the hair below the "hypothetical scar line" to create a illussion of a very thin scar line on the left when the hair above is parted upwards. 

But the reality, IMO, is that there is nothing there to show. If he had shaved the area properly, (below and above) we would have seen that there is nothing on the left. No thin scar, nothing. Just virgin scalp.

Also note the abrupt transition between left and right!! Think about it: if the "thin scar" on the left was a result of Acell+PRP injections, the transition would be gradual, not abrupt, because once injected, Acell+PRP would diffuse and invade the right side. But you see suddenly big scar on the right, and nothing on the left, with abrupt transition in between. It doesn't make sense.

----------


## Bakez

I am also sceptical, but then how was the gap on the right hand side created? That certainly does look like it must continued into the left side, do people do half the head for a strip surgery? I dont think so, so something has happened

hopefully it is real

----------


## KeepHoping

Clearly we need Dr. Hitzig to jump in and explain things before we jump to conclusions.

----------


## Spanish Dude

> I am also sceptical, but then how was the gap on the right hand side created? That certainly does look like it must continued into the left side, do people do half the head for a strip surgery? I dont think so, so something has happened
> 
> hopefully it is real


 My guess is that the strip was taken on the right side only.

----------


## wolvie1985

So then what you're saying, Spanish Dude, is that Hitzig is a liar. He is trying to deceive us all. He only took a strip from the right side of his head and is trying to fool us about the left side. Admin, please put an end to this poster. He's poisoning the forum just as he did at *************. There is clearly a fine line on the left, and Drs. Hitzig and Cooley shouldn't have to be subject to this tinfoil hat craziness.

----------


## uselessgomez

I guess it's POSSIBLE that a doctor could manipulate the photos or lie about one side being done in order to make this out to be something better than it is, but the doctor would be putting his entire reputation for a lifetime on the line. What would be to gain?

ACell has my strict attention. I fully expect that the results are going to vary considerably from patient to patient because as they say "patient physiology varies."

BUT to even have a donor area looking like that shaved down AFTER a strip surgery is a phenomenal thing. So far it looks like the ACell is going to enhance the donor healing aspect of HT surgery more significantly than it will improve survival and yield. But who knows. More studies need to be done. It's already shown some remarkable results though.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ahmmmm ok SpanishDude you claim that the doc did only cut the right side for the strip?

Well dont get me wrong but when i would be the patient i would find this odd. And i dont know you can see tha scar at the left side pretty clear.

You take your mouth a little bit too full for someone who didnt know what pinpoint bleeding is.

SpanishDude you are exactly your compadre Iron.Man trolling for the shear fun of. I can see the sac also on the left side but its smaller.

But no you are right. Acell is useless and Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley are both liars, thanks for open my eyes here, because i was under the impression it could work. Damn my stupidness  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

Oh but nobody cuts out strips only at one side but if SpanishDude says so then he will be right AS always (pinpoint bleeding is like niagara falls of blood)

Your only reason to post is to claim that all the people are liars, thats classy

----------


## LarryDavid

Would be nice if Dr. Hitzig would aswer here.

----------


## uselessgomez

> Would be nice if Dr. Hitzig would aswer here.


 Maybe he's busy and he doesn't have time to check internet message forums every day?

----------


## RichardDawkins

I think its funny, if nothing can be seen then its always " There wasnt a scar to begin"  :Big Grin: 

I see the future after Histogen and stuff is on the market.

They show a picture

SpanishDude : He wasnt bald to begin with

----------


## Spanish Dude

Richard, at least you must admit that this is not the way to shave the area if you want to display the scar...
and... do you really see the scar on the left?

----------


## KeepHoping

Isn't that the point?  To not see the scar with the use of Acell or at least diminish it to the point where it's almost unnoticable?  It looks great on the left to me, it's set along the same line.  It's healthy to be skeptical but come on man... I mean the actual chance that the doctor would only cut half a strip out on one side of the head and the chance a patient would let him do that seems pretty ridiculous right?  Do you really think this whole thing is a conspiracy or something?

----------


## RichardDawkins

I admit only one thing, on the left side is the same exact zig zag stitch areal like on the right side.

But on the left side hair has grown over it. Even when you compare the portions above the scar, you can celarly see more hair at the left side, while the right side is realtively sparse. Just look at picture three the hairs on the right stand straight up and its sparse but on the left side its way more dense.

And is see the place where acel was used and where he stops to use acell because in this area the hair is not symetrical anymore and you can see that he put more hairs in there because there are much more hairs on one area.

No i dont know how they shave the area because acell is reatively new. But i can tell you one thing, nobody would cut out HALF a strip because it wouls make future treatments much more difficult.

Has it ever occured to you that this " I dont see anything" is the whole concept behind this?

Hell the right side looks thin in the hair area but the left side not.

Its nice that you ask me for my opinion but i can only say what i can see, at first i also was like " Come Hitzig dont make fun of us" but then i was like Wow i dont know why people are experimenting with Acell only now and not ten years ago.

I think there is a difference between you and me, i see the things and see the progress BUT would never do a FUT transplant. I "demand" FUE multiplication or a usefull plcuking technique to protect my donor, just in case i might need him in the future.

And you only see fraud and scam everywhere. I can only say one thing nobody is that stupid to get on a hairloss radio show, ask question at message boards, stick his head out of the box and get his name plastered all over Acell only to get his neck broken by faked pictures.

You dont seem to understand if this would be a scam Dr Hitzig would loose EVERYTHING, i mean EVERYTHING.

Maybe you should see it from another point, you dont see anything because thats what its all about.

Also here is another patient who put his pictures online after a surgery and he has talked about that his scar right now is way besser after only a few weeks then his other have been until today.

But its your opinion and we should wait to say who was right on this subject :-)

----------


## KeepHoping

One FUT would not take out your entire donor at all, you could do one with these results and it might be worth it because if all goes well we could have a solution in the next couple years that will tackle hairloss, plus you'll get better coverage with FUT (supposedly) so it might be worth while to do so but to each his own right?  If the strip does heals like this I guess the only thing you'd have to worry about is scalp laxity right?

----------


## RichardDawkins

Yeah but unfortunately iam not a Pro FUT person sorry. Even with all the benefits i couldnt do it, i just couldnt do it. I would rather pay more money but have no scar.

I know to some people this may sound really dumb but its my personal belief.

To me its like the cure is standing for my door and knocks but iam to lazy to get to the door. I only wanna hear one thing actually

"Consistent results with plucking and FUE/multiplication cure is done" :-)

----------


## Spanish Dude

@Richard (Leeroy Jenkins, Stevie Dee):
you have not answered my questions. 
1. Why shaving downwards only, 
2. Do you really see a scar on the left side?
3. Why the abrupt transition between left and right? PRP and Acell difusses away from the injection points and the effect cannot end abruptly!!


Yes, there is a loss of density on the right, could be trauma from the strip.
Yes, it is weird to get half a strip, but it can later be concatenated with the other half. concatenating strips is quite normal (center and sides).
The zigzag on the left is just your imagination. There is zigzag only on the right.


And if you want to talk about differences between you and me, ok:
-You were banned from alopezie.de and *************.
-You defended Gho&Iron_Man like crazy and now you attack them like crazy.
-You post under many different aliases: Leeroy Jenkins, Stevie Dee, Richard.Dawnkins, etc...
-You made fun of handicapped children on Hairsite
-You placed death threats and death wishes on Hairsite
-You lied repeatedly on Hairsite.

etc etc  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## KeepHoping

Spanish Dude,

The idea is that the scar will appear as normal skin with the implementation of acell.  After acell is put in the wound it is supposed to pretty much make the scar unnoticable right?  I thought that was the point.  You shouldn't see much zigzag on the left because Acell was put in at the site, that's why it's hard to see a scar on the left right?

Hay q tener esperanza Spanishdude.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Yeah right if you say so. I dont know what anything has to do with pictures. Well the only person banned right now is Iron.Man but thats nothing to discuss.

But if my imagination doesnt play tricks on me, then you were involved with Iron.Man at destroying Hairsite because of your repeating attacks on people like you do on Dr Hitzig right now.

Anyway

To your questions/or conspiracy theories

1) Yes i see a scar zig zag pattern on the left

2) A half FUT is highly unlikely and i never saw a case where this would be done also how would you explain the patient " Hey we gotta shave your whole area even if we havent done a strip on the left"

3) The abrupt transition is actually not abrupt if you pay close attention you can see this.

4) Yes the Zig Zag is my imagination right ok, if you say so. Well then i have to switch eyes like ahm everyone here there is a zig zag pattern you cannot manipulate this pattern with hairs

5) Your constant conspiracy theories are without any plausible arguments. You didnt even pay attention to pinpoint bleeding due to plucking or so

6) There are more differences between you and me then you stated here which is btw really odd because you talk like someone we know

7) Interesting that you attack people when they are not 100&#37; on your side.
-----------------------------------------------------

So my Questions to you :

1) Why should Dr Hitzig lie?

2) Why should he manipulate his pictures and therefore mad a huge crack in the Acell Reputation

3) Why are you not at Hairsite anymore?

4) I would lie if i said "I never lied in my lifetime"

5) Why are you only attacking people who try to get the problem MPB fixed, i remember some harassments from yours where you attacked the CEO of Histogen and stalked one of her relatives twitter account. But this wont bring us further in the subject (i mean you crashed this thread pretty good almost like at Hairsite)

----------------------------------------

To make it clear i see a scar on the left but it healed good  :Big Grin:  you know, but keep it going, its funny that you claim really harsh things and after the clarification you vanish only to pop up occasionally to come up with another " Hey iam SD and in his answers from June he said "A" but two weeks later he said "S"....Why is he lying" Give us a break already  :Wink: 

Your ideas are sometimes good but bad published ^^

But before i forget about doing it, "Hello Iron.Man how are you doing? Screencap this please" ;-)

Acell is doing what it should do, i bet if there would be a visible red scar at the left side, you would be like this " Acell is a scam and a fraud and all those docs using it are liars"

Sometimes, just relax, take a deep breath and think about some things and how they work,

----------


## Spanish Dude

KeepHoping, do you see anything on the left side? I cannot. 
Hitzig has posted this photo suppossedly to prove that the scar on the left has been reduced to a fine line, but this fine line cannot be seen (if there is any) because Hitzig has decided to part the hair precisely at that fine line and shaved the hair below.

So Hitzig, *once more* has done a great job at posting confusing photos. This is not the first time. He did it with the Keloid Scar revision, and other manipulative photos.

Do you understand my point now KeepHoping?




> Spanish Dude,
> 
> The idea is that the scar will appear as normal skin with the implementation of acell.  After acell is put in the wound it is supposed to pretty much make the scar unnoticable right?  I thought that was the point.  You shouldn't see much zigzag on the left because Acell was put in at the site, that's why it's hard to see a scar on the left right?
> 
> Hay q tener esperanza Spanishdude.

----------


## mlao

> KeepHoping, do you see anything on the left side? I cannot. 
> Hitzig has posted this photo suppossedly to prove that the scar on the left has been reduced to a fine line, but this fine line cannot be seen (if there is any) because Hitzig has decided to part the hair precisely at that fine line and shaved the hair below.
> 
> So Hitzig, *once more* has done a great job at posting confusing photos. This is not the first time. He did it with the Keloid Scar revision, and other manipulative photos.
> 
> Do you understand my point now KeepHoping?


 Spanish Dude you have some amazing insight into this procedure. Are you a doctor or health care professional. Just Curious?

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok SpanishDude you say that Dr Hitzig manipulates pictures he is posting here? Is that what you saying?

Other manipulative Pictures? What are you talking about?

@mlao : Thats a good question.

----------


## Spanish Dude

@Richard:
I have not been banned at Hairsite if thats what you are implying.
I stopped posting there because you and Iron.Man are there 365/24h turning that forum into a chaos. Once I went away, the chaos continued, so it is proven that I was not at fault.
No, I didn't harass Naughton on email nor Zohar on tweeter, those were your lies that you poured upon me on Hairsite.

----------


## Spanish Dude

> Spanish Dude you have some amazing insight into this procedure. Are you a doctor or health care professional. Just Curious?


 Not at all. I am not a health professional, and furthermore, hair transplants are not my main interest, but I like to use logic and find inconsistencies. 
Of course, I can fail and make mistakes, but in hairloss forums cheap believers are usually the ones who end up wrong.

----------


## RichardDawkins

So then tell me

1) Why should Dr Hitzig do this

2) What if Acell is as good as it should be and the scar is really nowhere to be seen of that. Even if you directly compare both sides those are differences like night and day.

When i look at the pictures i see this zig zag line also in the hair . Just look at the first picture in the upper left corner, you see the rest of the scar pretty clear there is some "bulky white" flesh and a spot without that much density. I mean the close up picture.

Please pay close attention or do the following, open the picture in Paint and draw the line on the left side like you think it should be or how you see it. But keep the right covered

----------


## Spanish Dude

1) Why should Dr Hitzig do this
*why in 2003 did Hitzig say that beard autoplucking had a 85% yield?*

2) What if Acell is as good as it should be and the scar is really nowhere to be seen of that. Even if you directly compare both sides those are differences like night and day.
**If* Acell really produces a scarless STRIP, then that would be great. What do you expect me to say?*

When i look at the pictures i see this zig zag line also in the hair . Just look at the first picture in the upper left corner, you see the rest of the scar pretty clear there is some "bulky white" flesh and a spot without that much density. I mean the close up picture.

*In the close up I cannot see any important irregularity that hints at a strip surgery. No zigzag, no change of colour, nothing. The main irregularity is caused by the imperfect shaving, and thus, some areas are cut shorter than others.  Bulky White? Where? Note that the hair is parted. Below the partline the hairs (shaved hairs) point downwards, and above the partline the hairs (long hairs) point upwards. This creates the illusion of a void in the partline. In other words, this creates the illussion of a fine scar. But there is not such  fine scar. If all the area had been shaved properly, all the shaved hairs would point downwards and there would be no void*

Please pay close attention or do the following, open the picture in Paint and draw the line on the left side like you think it should be or how you see it. But keep the right covered.
*sorry I don't get it.*

----------


## RichardDawkins

Do you have a link where Dr Hitzig said 85% yield in 2003?

Ok then lets wait what Dr Hitzig has to say, because i think we are running around in circles here.

You can draw the line in MS Paint if you load up the picture there. I really doubt that you can shave the hair to create this kind of "Manipulation"

----------


## Spanish Dude

I have posted it before in this thread I think.
Here it is again (2003, autocloning beard hairs without Acell):

http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/dcboard....id=3857&page=3

>>>>>>>
Sat Jun-07-2003 10:23 PM
Dr. Hitzig has successfully done a series of 1-for-two hair transplants on 5 paitents using their beard hairs. The beard hairs are extracted using a tweezing protocol to remove the shaft and bulb while leaving the follicle intact. *Approximately 80 percent to 85 percent of the transplanted hairs grew in the scalp, and the follicles left in the donor beard region continue to generate beard hairs*.

"Our experience with this technique offers promise for men wishing to improve their appearance after an earlier hair transplantation procedure but who lack the donor supply for additional treatment. Further study may also lead us to the use of beard hairs as a source for in vitro cloning of scalp donor material, and if that technique is successful, we would be able to obtain an unlimited supply of donor hair and perhaps eradicate genetic baldness," said Dr. Hitzig.

According to Mr. Oz, the technology so far can only be used on beard hair since the surgical tweezers can NOT handle the much more smaller scalp hair, but the testining has been 95&#37; sucesful. In addition, they're are already testing in vitro to remove ONE single beard hair from a human and use that one hair to duplicate a series of hairs on a synthetic mantle ( artificial skin).

Check the following article for the whole story:
http://www.dermatologytimes.com/derm...l.jsp?id=47883

Dr. Hitzig's site also has a little information on this procedure:
http://www.nyhairloss.com/gsh-procedures.htm

<<<<<<<<<

I have not included the mention of the lawsuit, as this is another matter.




> Do you have a link where Dr Hitzig said 85% yield in 2003?
> 
> Ok then lets wait what Dr Hitzig has to say, because i think we are running around in circles here.
> 
> You can draw the line in MS Paint if you load up the picture there. I really doubt that you can shave the hair to create this kind of "Manipulation"

----------


## UK_

> I have posted it before in this thread I think.
> Here it is again (2003, autocloning beard hairs without Acell):


 lol - Why did he only shave 'below' the scar aswel?  You have a point - if this finding was as significant as it is made out i'd expect a grade 1 (full shave of donor area) all over the back to clearly show a white line on the right and barely anything on the left.  Also a few close-ups and possibly a hair count!

----------


## Spanish Dude

> lol - Why did he only shave 'below' the scar aswel?  You have a point - if this finding was as significant as it is made out i'd expect a grade 1 (full shave of donor area) all over the back to clearly show a white line on the right and barely anything on the left.  Also a few close-ups and possibly a hair count!


 Thats it, and also the "just after surgery" photos, to see the "beginning of the process", the initial state of the wound.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok then lets see what he has to say then ;-) right now iam still positive towards the pictures but consider your arguments valid.

And to be fair i hope you guys are wrong ;-)

----------


## Spanish Dude

lets remind again the photos:

Quote Dr. Hitzig:
>>>
Patient had transplant approximately 1 year ago. The right half of the donor was sutured normally, the left half was sutured normally and injected with ACell suspension (Spun down Arterial Blood)

NOTE THE EXTREMELY FINE LINE ON THE LEFT WITH HAIR GROWING THROUGH IT.
<<<

----------


## Spanish Dude

And this is how it should have been presented. Its a simulation (I got a google pic, and modified it)

----------


## PatientlyWaiting

How does this benefit some one with a receding hairline and some thinning on the top? Like do I have to do an FUE or strip transplant, or is there some kind of vaccine being developed for people that don't want hair transplant? In other words, do I need to go through plucking or FUE/strip in order to benefit from this? Or can I just be injected with PRP+ACell and make my native hair stronger and longer?

I read through the whole thread and sort of understand, i'm new to this, but can some one answer my question. Is some kind of a hair transplant needed, whether plucking or something?

----------


## PatientlyWaiting

I saw a video of how PRP injections are done by Dr Greco on this forum. And that's kinda like what i'm asking. Is there going to be a procedure like that with PRP+ACell?

----------


## montrose

Dr. Hitzig offers acell+prp injections as a stand alone treatment. He has two sets of photos on his website. When I contacted his office about it the price seemed a bit high for something that is still in its experimental stage.

----------


## Spanish Dude

@Patiently Waiting:
there is a bit of chaos right now with the Acell stuff. In the beginning, it was meant to be plucking+Acell, but now it seems that the doctors point towards  improved strips, improved fues, or improved PRP. The "improvement" is debatable because little convincing evidence has been presented, and no long-term results are known. But hey, I am a sceptic.

@montrose: IMO, Acell should provide the powder FREE of charge. (instead, they are charging large amounts of money to the doctors). 
Furthermore, Acell should pay the doctors for their job, and the trialists for the bother. Also, results should be professionally evaluated, and presented to the FDA. If the product works, FDA approval would mean immense benefits for Acell. 
But Acell prefered to go the "underground trials" route, charging money to the trialists, and getting poor, unreliable documentation of the results. Strange.

----------


## RichardDawkins

I was under the impression that Acell is FDA approved but maybe iam misinterpreting this

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_d...f2/k021637.pdf

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_d...f9/K092926.pdf

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_d...f6/K060888.pdf

http://acell.com/about_med.php

----------


## mlao

> I saw a video of how PRP injections are done by Dr Greco on this forum. And that's kinda like what i'm asking. Is there going to be a procedure like that with PRP+ACell?


 Because Acell is new to the application of hair restoration there is no one correct way to apply it yet. You need to follow the doctors who are working with it and wait for them to release their findings.

the only doctor who is doing anything like you suggested is Dr. Hitzig
he is doing a combination of PRP/Acell injections into the scalp.
Here are two examples of the results.

http://nyhairloss.com/portfolio/acell-prp-case-studies/

I for one am going to wait until more information is released from the doctors as opposed to the guys on this forum who keep criticizing and pestering the doctors about their studies.
no one will know until at least the end of this year if Acell might become the next "Big Thing" in hair restoration.

----------


## Spanish Dude

Yes, Acell was FDA approved for human use, 2 or 3 years ago, and it was then when the HT doctors rushed to try it.
This would clear the safety concerns. But not the efficacy.

I am talking about FDA trials for efficacy on hair surgery and hair multiplication. Strip healing, autoplucking HM, FUE+Acell HM, PRP+Acell HM, etc.
These would require separate trials, in the same way that Proscar and Propecia required separate trials.





> I was under the impression that Acell is FDA approved but maybe iam misinterpreting this
> 
> http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_d...f2/k021637.pdf
> 
> http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_d...f9/K092926.pdf
> 
> http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_d...f6/K060888.pdf
> 
> http://acell.com/about_med.php

----------


## RichardDawkins

Efficacy, well if it comes to that terms i would pay attention to this one user here who posted a picture of his scar and said something about "its better after a few weeks" then his other scars has been.

@SpanishDude : There is gossip talk that a lot of other surgeons are experimenting with Acell right now, someone mentioned H&W and Dr A answered some things aswell.

I dont know if a lot of docs rushed to experiment with Acell. Ok well i know i will regret it but PLEASE PUNCH MY FACE FOR THIS

Even Dr Gho did say something about this in a paper a few years ago. But as you i only wanna see one thing fully documented

"A guy with lets say a NW5 pattern who get his frontal area fully restored with high density only by using plucked hairs"

Thats in my books the only thing i wanna see, if this is gonna work, i will book my flight. Or are you disagree with such an "Proof"

----------


## mlao

> Not at all. I am not a health professional, and furthermore, hair transplants are not my main interest, but I like to use logic and find inconsistencies. 
> Of course, I can fail and make mistakes, but in hairloss forums cheap believers are usually the ones who end up wrong.


 What or who is a "cheap believer"?

----------


## Spanish Dude

> What or who is a "cheap believer"?


 posters who are total newbies but consider themselves entitled to insult any hint of scepticism that comes from experienced forum members.

----------


## PatientlyWaiting

Okay, thanks to montrose and Spanish Dude for their input on my questions.

----------


## PatientlyWaiting

> Dr. Hitzig offers acell+prp injections as a stand alone treatment. He has two sets of photos on his website. When I contacted his office about it the price seemed a bit high for something that is still in its experimental stage.


 Can you tell me the price of this injection? I live in New York and I see he has an office in NY. I saw the before and after pictures on his page from the link you posted. It's nothing that made me jump around in my seat, but it's pretty good for something that's still just in it's baby stages.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Yes as was pointed out and I had discussed on the Bald Truth Program several times, my initial pluckings in 5 patients did have an incredibly high yield. If you remember, I also stated that it was like walking into a casino and putting a dollar in the slot machine and winning-you generalize too quickly that it will always happen-it did not!
If that was universal I would never had sought out adjunct treatments (especially ACell) to improve my success rate. The results were preliminary yet exciting with the hope of future expansion on the technique to make it more viable. I have always had my limits on where I applied it and never intended to use it to replace traditional donor, but instead to help those with limited or no donor or for those with very small areas of hair loss.
ACell allowed us to start plucking scalp hair and develop a successful transference to other scalp areas-only beard hairs had worked in the past.
We are proceeding carefully so as not to generalize our early results-we hope to sustain them and have others reproduce or improve on the technique which is tedious. Let me say that despite what some have said, the plucked hairs DO grow back.

As far as the donor picture with ACell, this was a medical student who had a large transplant and agreed to have his donor area closed with ACell plus simple loose sutures on the left, and simple sutures alone loosely applied on the right. He was of course rewarded for his volunteering (reduced fee) but also  knew he would never be shaving his head. He also knew, as a Student Doctor the point of the trial. If you magnify the pictures you will see the whitish remnant of the scar on the left although hairs grow through it. The right side speaks for itself. This was a case who came for re-evaluation very recently and it was exciting to see the result. Will this be every result-I hope so but can't and won't predict but if you look at the slide show from my talk, you will see it to be very dependable.
Sorry not to have posted in a bit but I have been quite busy with my paper and with some exciting new stuff.
Best to all of you
GH

----------


## RichardDawkins

I am glad you answered some questions. So to make it clear only for the record and for future discussions to refer to

1) Hairplucking with acell *works as a hairtransplant* but the downside is that it is very tedious. So we can say Expanded donor is possible right now but the technique to get plucking to perfection and make it less tedious needs some time.

Am i correct here or did i get it wrong?

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

The results are what they are to date. It's still early but very promising. I have always felt that it's easier to save the hair than to grow it back and I do believe there is a point of no return when the miniaturazation is irreversible.
As I keep telling multiple patient inquiries, please prove me wrong.
I think time will tell us whether we need multiple injections or if not, how long between them. I look as the ACell/PRP injections like a flu shot--it may not work 100% but it certainly is helpful.
Sorry you haven't been blown away by the results, but the results are the results to date.
Hope to blow you away in time.
GH

----------


## wolvie1985

I for one am blown away. Thanks doc.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Hi Richard,

You have gotten it very right. When you pluck hairs CORRECTLY there is still a significant loss factor due to fracture of the bulb etc. Every "pluck" has to be carefully examined for damage under the microscope. I know they grow back because quite simply, to test, I plucked out most if not all the hairs in a section of the donor until it was shiny bald. Several months later there are no shiny bald spots where they were plucked-simple but effective proof.
At the ISHRS, we plucked out the hair of some disbelieving surgeons and had them look at their own hair under the microscopes (for salle in the exhibitor hall)-they were amazed how they looked like an FUE extraction graft.
This is what we need to work on- to improve the plucking technique and make it less tedious and more universal
We need constructive assistance as well as criticism
GH

----------


## RichardDawkins

Dr Hitzig thank you very much for making this clear to "hopefully" everyone right now.

This will also give hope to repair patients as well and people like me who are afraid of FUT.

Iam also very thankful, that you and Dr Cooley are taking the steps to work on a perfect plucking technique even if FUT would be more comfortable in time etc.

And iam really looking forward to more results, cause right now i say you contribute a huge amount of "awesomeness" to the field of hairloss and hair restoration.

Thank you

----------


## LarryDavid

> I have been quite busy with my paper and with some *exciting new stuff*.
> GH


 tell us about it  :Smile:

----------


## LarryDavid

And one more Question:
Dr. Hitzig, what do you think about FUE Hairmultiplication by regenerating the donor with Acell PRP after a FUE procedure? Are you or Dr. Cooley working on this?

And thanks a lot for answering questions here.

----------


## Spanish Dude

Dr. Hitzig, I hope you understand my scepticism, but now you say you hit 5 consecutive jackpots back in 2003, and then no luck? 
You tested the technique in 5 individuals, and reported a 80-85% average yield. This was beard plucking without Acell.

Now you say that it was just 5 consecutive jackpots, and then the good luck disappeared. Sorry but I can't believe it.
Furthermore, you maintained the 5-patient success story in your website until recently and I think you never reported that it was just a "jackpot" and the technique was really a failure. 

Now, regarding the strip healing with Acell (the 3 photos we have been discussing in the last few days) you have not addressed our doubts.
1. Why did you shave the hair only under the scar? The supposed fine scar on the left can't be seen properly because you parted the hair upwards, and the partline coincides with the position of the supposed scar.
The fine line seen on the left could be just an illusion created by the hair parting. I can't see any significant "whitish remnant" you are talking about.
If you were so excited about the result, why didn't you shave it properly to properly expose the beautiful tiny scar?
2. Could you post the photos "just after surgery" on this patient?

thanks




> Yes as was pointed out and I had discussed on the Bald Truth Program several times, my initial pluckings in 5 patients did have an incredibly high yield. If you remember, I also stated that it was like walking into a casino and putting a dollar in the slot machine and winning-you generalize too quickly that it will always happen-it did not!
> If that was universal I would never had sought out adjunct treatments (especially ACell) to improve my success rate. The results were preliminary yet exciting with the hope of future expansion on the technique to make it more viable. I have always had my limits on where I applied it and never intended to use it to replace traditional donor, but instead to help those with limited or no donor or for those with very small areas of hair loss.
> ACell allowed us to start plucking scalp hair and develop a successful transference to other scalp areas-only beard hairs had worked in the past.
> We are proceeding carefully so as not to generalize our early results-we hope to sustain them and have others reproduce or improve on the technique which is tedious. Let me say that despite what some have said, the plucked hairs DO grow back.
> 
> As far as the donor picture with ACell, this was a medical student who had a large transplant and agreed to have his donor area closed with ACell plus simple loose sutures on the left, and simple sutures alone loosely applied on the right. He was of course rewarded for his volunteering (reduced fee) but also  knew he would never be shaving his head. He also knew, as a Student Doctor the point of the trial. If you magnify the pictures you will see the whitish remnant of the scar on the left although hairs grow through it. The right side speaks for itself. This was a case who came for re-evaluation very recently and it was exciting to see the result. Will this be every result-I hope so but can't and won't predict but if you look at the slide show from my talk, you will see it to be very dependable.
> Sorry not to have posted in a bit but I have been quite busy with my paper and with some exciting new stuff.
> Best to all of you
> GH

----------


## Bakez

If  Dr Hitzig is writing a paper, then we should wait for this, there is no point in hear say now. What journal will it be published in?

----------


## CVAZBAR

Dr. Hitzig, Do you have an update on the results for the enhanced PRP? What about the HIP Stem Cell extraction procedure you were going to learn? Did you finally get in contact with Cotsarelis? Hopefully you have some good news on all of this. Thanks DOC.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Montrose,
How much did they tell you the PRP+ACell injections were at Dr Hitzig's office??($$$$$)
I am curious since I might get the treatment myself.
Please let me know in order to evaluate if I should procede with Dr Hitzig or Dr Greco. 
Thanks

----------


## montrose

When I contacted the office I was told it would cost $3000.

----------


## Spanish Dude

> When I contacted the office I was told it would cost $3000.


 I think trialists should be paid money, not charged.  :Smile:

----------


## Spanish Dude

Ah, Dr. Hitzig, something else. 

It seems that your colleage Dr. Cooley is having difficulties planting plucked hairs on scar tissue. First he said that yield was 40-50&#37; but now it seems that it was just a "jackpot".

You, however, seem to be quite sucessful doing autoplucking on scars, because, in your Acell presentation, you claimed that you planted 55 plucked hairs on a scar, and not only they grew, but amazingly they multiplied to 150 hairs!!  :Smile: 

So, I think dr. Cooley needs your help. Would you help him to achieve good results with autocloning in scar tissue?

http://www.iahrs.org/news/acell-matr...inary-results/
Part I, Minute 7:40.
Hitzig plants 55 plucked temple hairs on a "long standing refractory scar". 
At 4 months, early growth can be seen, according to him.
At 8 months, there are 150 hairs growing on the scar.

----------


## CVAZBAR

$3000??? Why so much for something that does not guarantee you anything excellent??

----------


## KeepHoping

Can we see results of the transplants with robust growth?  Why haven't more pictures come out?  If you are seeing much higher hair counts the recipients should look incredible.  These donor pics are impressive but I'd like to see both sides.

----------


## montrose

> $3000??? Why so much for something that does not guarantee you anything excellent??


 I agree with you. PRP injections by themselves cost $1000, so an extra $2000 seems crazy. If the price came down a bit i would definitely give it a shot.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Thanks Montrose. I agree way to expensive for an alternative with unproven or definite results yet.

----------


## SilverSurfer

With the use of ACell in the donnor area, what would you say the percentage of regenerated donnor sites comes out to be?
In other words say you use 1000 grafts, how many of those sites would you say regenerates  follicles?

----------


## CVAZBAR

> I agree with you. PRP injections by themselves cost $1000, so an extra $2000 seems crazy. If the price came down a bit i would definitely give it a shot.


 Even $1000 is too much. Remember every person is different and until they prove that it will guarantee good results for everyone, its definitely not worth it. This is truly unfair knowing people will desperately try it and probably wont get anything out of it. Not everyone is rich to be throwing away thousands of dollars for some shit that cant guarantee you anything. After you pay $3000 for the treatment, what next? You will have to go back a month later to get another shot? HAHA. What if you need it constantly to maintain what you have? How the hell do you afford that? I thought this was to HELP people from suffering, not to milk the shit out of them.

----------


## PatientlyWaiting

> The results are what they are to date. It's still early but very promising. I have always felt that it's easier to save the hair than to grow it back and I do believe there is a point of no return when the miniaturazation is irreversible.
> As I keep telling multiple patient inquiries, please prove me wrong.
> I think time will tell us whether we need multiple injections or if not, how long between them. I look as the ACell/PRP injections like a flu shot--it may not work 100% but it certainly is helpful.
> Sorry you haven't been blown away by the results, but the results are the results to date.
> Hope to blow you away in time.
> GH


 Than you for your response Dr. Hitzig.

If anything, I would definitely do the ACell/PRP injection over any hair transplant, i'd take my chances with growing/strengthening my native hair and maybe regrowing some of the peechfuzz I have around my forehead, rather than get a transplant. I am only 22 years old, seeing the pictures in your page, made me happy that I have more hair than those guys' "after" pictures. It made me happy because maybe it can work twice as better for me. It didn't have me jumping around in my seat but I believe it shouldn't have, at least not yet? If i'm not mistaken, you said this is just early experimental stuff? As an experimental treatment, yes it is great results. But maybe my wording was wrong and I should have said as some kind of a "cure" it didn't blow me away. But i'm definitely excited about what's ahead with ACell and to tell you the truth, if I can afford it right now i'd have called you right now and taken the ACell+PRP injection tomorrow  :Cool: 

Definitely, down the line, your PRP+ACell injection is my number 1 option. It's very convenient too since I live in New York. For now i'm stuck with Minoxidil+Finasteride. I'll keep my fingers crossed that everything goes well with ACell, because I may very well take the plunge soon.

----------


## HairTalk

> I have been doing non-shaven FUE for many years.  i strongly feel this is the future in FUE for all patients.  It requires more preparation time, but it does allow the patient to return to work the next day without shaving.  There still are many physicians who are unaware that patients do not need to shave their donor area.  i've done well over 3500 grafts on a patient in one day without shaving the donor area of my patient.  i think a good mark is about 2000 to 2500 grafts in one procedure non-shaven, however.


 How do you perform F.U.E. without shaving the patient? How would you gain access to the follicles?




> i honestly think that Dr. Hitzig and Dr. Cooley need to inject the donor area with Acell, in addition to the plucked follicles.  i'm really worried about what will grow in the donor area if they do not do this.  I'm sure they will keep us posted on their results.


 Are you saying you're suspicious there would be loss in the donor area when using the _plucking_ method? If not, I'm unclear to what you mean; if so, I'm as unclear, though in a different way (as far as I know, plucked hair grows back  it's why beauty parlors continue to exist...).

----------


## HairTalk

> We charge for the plucking procedure the way we charge for FUT.  In other words, the fee for 2,000 plucked grafts is the same whether it is FUT or plucked, even though it takes us twice the amount of work to do a plucked case.  The reason for the reduced fee is that we don't have the same track record with plucked grafts and in exchange for the uncertainty, patients recieve a discounted fee.  When the procedure is more firmly established, we will charge in accord with the time, effort, and expense on our part.  We have no plans to price gouge, only to charge fairly.


 Dr. Cooley, in what way does the plucking technique require "twice the amount of work"? I would think, as you don't need the careful labor of a physician extracting follicular units (F.U.E.), or of technicians creating such units under a microscope (F.U.T./strip-harvesting), the procedure would be far less costly.

Also, simply owing to the still-very-experimental nature of the work, I'm surprised to read it's being charged at the same rate as is the strip-procedure.

----------


## HairTalk

> Patient had transplant approximately 1 year ago. The right half of the donor was sutured normally, the left half was sutured normally and injected with ACell suspension (Spun down Arterial Blood)
> 
> NOTE THE EXTREMELY FINE LINE ON THE LEFT WITH HAIR GROWING THROUGH IT.
> 
> Attachment 8604
> Attachment 8605
> Attachment 8606


 Whose work is this?

----------


## HairTalk

> Donor @ 3 weeks
> Recipient 17 days


 Is this with plucking+ACell?

----------


## montrose

> Whose work is this?


 That is Dr.Hitzig

----------


## rapunzal

> Ah, Dr. Hitzig, something else. 
> 
> It seems that your colleage Dr. Cooley is having difficulties planting plucked hairs on scar tissue. First he said that yield was 40-50% but now it seems that it was just a "jackpot".
> 
> You, however, seem to be quite sucessful doing autoplucking on scars, because, in your Acell presentation, you claimed that you planted 55 plucked hairs on a scar, and not only they grew, but amazingly they multiplied to 150 hairs!! 
> 
> So, I think dr. Cooley needs your help. Would you help him to achieve good results with autocloning in scar tissue?
> 
> http://www.iahrs.org/news/acell-matr...inary-results/
> ...


 PVTPoint2000 might argue this point
http://www.************.com/forums/m...VIEWTMP=Single

----------


## rapunzal

/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=5&threadid=93401&messid=7918  75&parentid=791520&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Single

************(dot)com

************  ... god damn

i give up .. sorry pvtpoint2000 for not getting permission to post your comment on another board

here it is
I had a small test area done back in Sept Last year.......I had about 60 or so ACELL treated plucked hairs placed into the center of my strip scar with ok results thus far .....many grew....I also had several small white FUE spots removed via punch and treated the small wound with ACELL but as of now they look the same.........Cooley said to give it a few more months.........I will revisit him mid this rear for a total eval....

----------


## RichardDawkins

Found this forum and read the whole thread. It is rational but in some way its good to read a story from a repair patient who benefits at least in a small way from plucking.

If if RIGHT now there might be problems to create the density of a whole Graft (i think someone will fix this anyway) it seems more then promising.

And also it seems that the hairs did grow like your normal donor hair in the scar area.

I hope this guy keeps people informed but i wont register myself there because this forum is really depressing to me in some strange way (very bad vibrations)

----------


## Spanish Dude

PVTPoint posted in this forum, but now he prefers to remain silent:

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthr...0879#post20879

----------


## rapunzal

> PVTPoint posted in this forum, but now he prefers to remain silent:
> 
> http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthr...0879#post20879


 maybe he doesnt post in every forum

i found this on hair loss help site, so maybe you can ask him on that forum

----------


## RichardDawkins

he was active at hlh a few days ago.

But SPanish Dude has i t occured to you that it could maybe that pvt is quiet for a reason? For a good reason, because lets face it here. If someone gets hair transplanted with a new promising technique and the result would be "non existing". 

We all know that in this case the person would be all over the forums and would say negative things about this.

But why is pvt not doing so even if he had bad hair transplants in the past? Has it ever come to mind that he could be satiesfied and is going for more.

At HLH he also said that many plucked hairs grow in the scar. And also nobody from here would be that calm if it wouldnt work, and this guy is someone who doesnt speak through flowers here.

Just my 2 cents here

----------


## rapunzal

with due respect to pvt his reason to post or not to post could be personal. it might not have anything to do with the outcome of his procedure but conspiracy theorists will quickly assume that the procedure didnt work out because he did not report back. he owes the community nothing and probably has more important things to do in his life.

i regret copying his post on this board, have sent him a private message to appologise for dragging him into this discussion.

----------


## RichardDawkins

I also dont think that his outcome was negative because 7 days ago he said "Many grow" but the rest of his posting was short.

Maybe he is used as one of the test patients for major plucking sessions.

----------


## KeepHoping

I've asked the question before but I'll ask again.  With the reports of "Robust Growth" and seeing cloned hairs appear after transplanting why would they not show the pictures of the recipient areas?  In theory, if the growth is robust and they are actually getting more hairs then transplanted by a huge margin why would they not be all over the place?

----------


## montrose

There a few pics of what they call "robust growth"

http://www.***************/hair-loss...ell-matristem/

substitute regrowhair

----------


## KeepHoping

I've seen those, I mean pictures of all the people with good results that have been reported by these doctors.  I don't mean to sound rude, I just don't understand why we aren't seeing more before and afters, makes no sense to me, would only boost their profits with the amount of patients it would bring in.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok some people here doubt that plucked hairs actually survive and are dht resistant. We all know that the most important thing is the follicle right.

Then just look at this picture and search where exactly the "follicle" is and you got your answer if you compare the fotos of plucked hairs with this picture :-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Skin.jpg

Enjoy ^^

----------


## SilverSurfer

I hope that's right

----------


## SilverSurfer

What is hard to understand is why all of the sudden the docs are not giving anymore feedback on their findings and are trying to build some sort of mystery around the subject. 

Yes I get it, the business perspective; but if it is working, why aren't succesfully treated patients with the autoplucking coming forward?

----------


## RichardDawkins

the problem is simply and sad : Yes its working and could solve our problems but the how to be efficient side is another story

----------


## plopp

> Ok some people here doubt that plucked hairs actually survive and are dht resistant. We all know that the most important thing is the follicle right.
> 
> Then just look at this picture and search where exactly the "follicle" is and you got your answer if you compare the fotos of plucked hairs with this picture :-)
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Skin.jpg
> 
> Enjoy ^^


 Nice one Rich  :Wink: 

One thing that bothers me though in terms of dht resistance is that the dermal papilla, which is waht actually controls hair growth (as is my understanding), is derived from the recipient. The plucked hair - correct me if I'm wrong - only contain the root sheath (i.e. epithelial cells). I'm no MPB expert, but it seems to me that the dermal papilla if anything should be the DHT sensitive part of the follicle.

Nevertheless, even if dht resistance turns out to be a problem, I think autoplucking can find its way as a repair procedure (let's just hope the scar issue gets resolved..)

----------


## RichardDawkins

When your plucked hair grows, it grows from the FULL material of the dht resitant here itself. The hair itself creates its surrounding as you know the cells are formed then.

Cause even if this hair actually connects to a DP, the DP will take this genetic material especially when its dormant. The DP is actually capable of stimulate other cells to develop hair follicles. Thats why sometimes autocloned hairs come up.

But the key is the material from the hair which connects to the dp. The material around the hair itself has to be sufficiant enough to create another follicle, thats why thie technique right now is tedious.

And those autocloning hairs are nothing other the somethings direct copies of the follicles where the hair was plucked.

You see how strong the genetic material around the hair is it also contains the information " Is my origin a single hair follicle or a multi hair follicle"

----------


## plopp

Have I understood it right if you say that the dp in the recipient is an exact replica of those in the donor? Any sources? Cooley has shown pics before demonstrating a certain degree of recipient dominance, so I'm not sure that's entirely true.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Do you refer to the 2007 fact sheet? Well i can almost clearly say, that those autocloned hairs are an indicator for the new born follicle from donor material. Because if you see  like this

"How possible is it, that one single plucked hair could create or animate other follicles or cells to create other hairs in an area where DHT is "deadly" for hairs"

Another possible aspect could be, when you lance the skin in the recipient are, you cause damage and at this point when tissue gets repaired it "accidentally" uses cell material from the donor area.

Both explainations could show why the hairs Dr Hitzig plucked years ago, are still cycling.

Also its high likely that the moment you pluck the hair, different cell material is still present also DP material and this is transplanted in the recipient area.

And thanks to acell as an enhancement its pretty quick "multiplying"

But all this doesnt change the fact that a lot of efficancy has to be done to make this technique faster and les labor intensive.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Remember guys that Dr. Kim showed well before me that if you cut out a complete hair (FU) then transect it below the bulb, and then transplant both "pieces" to the same person (in his case his arm), he grew 2 hairs.
This is what started me on the road to "Autocloning". Other studies showed that rat whisker hair would do the same whereas body hair (on rodents) would not. When you try laser hair removal of body hair it is not a problem; however beard laser hair removal just doesn't work well at all. I postulated that beard hair is like weeds- they are stonger than body hair. This proved itself to be true in the early trials. Despite this, there was something missing to help stabilize the "take" in autocloning. ACell seems to be that missing puzzle piece. 
Richard has really got it in terms of understanding that we are nearing the answer but need to improve the method. Your suggestions help fuel our ideas.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Thanks for the Feedback Dr Hitzig, its sometimes good to get a backup when people really starting to crawl under my skin in terms of the overly negative thinking"

I have some questions, hope you answer them.

1) Do you have plans for going one step beyond like performing FUE with the twist to "transsect" hairs that they will grow back in the donor area and also in the recipient area (this could solve the time and tedious problem to some point)

2) Have you ever tried different states of hair characteristics during the plucking session like

- wet hair vs dry hair
- medium trimmed hair
- tweeze them clockwise
- tweeze them counter clockwise
- curl them around the tweezer like spaghettis and then pull the tweezer southward
- etc
- reprogrammed NeoGraft machine ( i dont think its beneficial to FUE but could be for plucking) which could perform the plucking part consitently

I am just thinking abou those things because more often its just a little detail nobody has accounted so far which decides the important factors

----------


## HairTalk

> Thanks for the Feedback Dr Hitzig, its sometimes good to get a backup when people really starting to crawl under my skin in terms of the overly negative thinking"
> 
> I have some questions, hope you answer them.
> 
> 1) Do you have plans for going one step beyond like performing FUE with the twist to "transsect" hairs that they will grow back in the donor area and also in the recipient area (this could solve the time and tedious problem to some point)
> 
> 2) Have you ever tried different states of hair characteristics during the plucking session like
> 
> - wet hair vs dry hair
> ...


 What difference do you feel the nature of the plucking might make with regard to the procedure? It's what's at the end of the hair shaft that's of concern, and I fail to see how "twisting clockwise" vs. doing so counter-clockwise  or curling the hair, or trimming it, or wetting it  would have any bearing on the result.

----------


## RichardDawkins

You didnt understand my posting right? The yield rate right now when it comes to usable plucked hairs is maybe 60% and this number has to increase you know to make it more time efficient.

And so its highly obvious that you have to search for different approaches to get to the point where you can say "Thats working better then the rest"

I see you are not a researcher right. If you would consider just a little time to think about hairs you would know that not all hairs grow the same way and therefore you have to find a Semi-working technique.

OF Course the main point is the material at the end of the hair BUT you have to get this material in the first place and for this you have to find      THE       WORKING technique.

Instead of making fun of my ideas you can come up with some of your own, where you think they will suit better.

My ideas are ONLY opinions and ideas. You know when it comes to plucking you can actually think outside the box because no precious donor is destroyed here.

Trimming the hair as a test is very simple law of PHYSICS you know, the longer something the harder it gets to concentrate your force on one single area. And its highly likely that if you have long hair, the plucking force will end before the critical point and therefore you only got a plucked hair without material  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

To be honest your posting did really made me angry because you spill out only empty phrases but dont give some ideas out yourself. Just think for one second what you can do with hairs and that there are different ways to pluck hairs.

I try to give away any food for progresion, nothing more. this is better then just keep sitting here and do nothing

----------


## HairTalk

> You didnt understand my posting right? The yield rate right now when it comes to usable plucked hairs is maybe 60% and this number has to increase you know to make it more time efficient.
> 
> And so its highly obvious that you have to search for different approaches to get to the point where you can say "Thats working better then the rest"
> 
> I see you are not a researcher right. If you would consider just a little time to think about hairs you would know that not all hairs grow the same way and therefore you have to find a Semi-working technique.
> 
> OF Course the main point is the material at the end of the hair BUT you have to get this material in the first place and for this you have to find      THE       WORKING technique.
> 
> Instead of making fun of my ideas you can come up with some of your own, where you think they will suit better.
> ...


 Take a breath, Punky Brewster  you have as little idea to who I am or what I do as I do to your position. No one made fun of you: you were asked to explain why you feel your propositions could improve yield, and you've yet to do so. Science and research aren't based upon people's trying out random things because what they're doing isn't working very well; one experiments based on one's knowledge, reasoning how a particular application may lead to improvement.

You suggested several techniques for how to harvest plucked hairs, but they all seem to me to be blindly shooting into a vacuum. Do you have a theory for why wetting hair could help increase yield? For why clockwise or counter-clockwise pulling might do so? For why trimming might? How about we have people sit out in the sun for fourteen minutes before pulling out the hairs? It might sound absurd, but, hey, we're trying stuff out, right? One does what one feels might make sense; one doesn't engage in an inexhaustible laundry-list of ideas enthusiastically supposing, "You never know."

To trimming, you mention the difficulty of concentration of force, but this holds only if one is plucking out a hair by grasping it at the terminus of the shaft. Regardless of the hair's length, this would be a foolish approach, and one instead would grasp the piece closer to its base; thus, the overall length of the hair should not have an effect on the success of its being pulled with plenty of the follicle still stuck (by the way, I don't think it would be a good idea to remove actually every bit of said follicle  a method for doing so already exists: it's called F.U.E., and it typically doesn't lead to re-growth in the donor area).

No, I haven't any proposals of how to approach this situation. I'm also not eager to say things just for the sakes of hearing them leave my mouth and of feeling important. "Something" is _not_ necessarily better than "nothing"  I lament the ridiculous fallacy that it is; something we feel, based on what we know, might work, and that won't be harmful to try out, is.

Your post has yet to anger me. If mine upset you, I'll refrain from apologizing, as I did nothing wrong, so shouldn't bend to coax your too-fragile ego. You want to make "contributions" to science? Step one: don't be so damned delicate as to take umbrage if a person does something other than fawn over your generosity of suggestions.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Hello Iron.Man2

The lenght can in fact alter the experience. if you pluck long hairs, sometimes they just BREAK or there is not enough force to pluck it correctly.

As i said before everything plausible which alters hair charateristics should be tried, wet hair can easily be plucked in large groups.

I think with your expose to sunlight you actually meant to get this scalp in a warm area that those pores gets wider. This idea occured to me but then i realised that after plucking f your to slow the programmed cell death starts to act and a warm surrounding aways enhanced this. But it was a good idea

You see thats its all about to discuss things in relation to their plausible methods which could actually work.

As i said before not all follicles grew in the same direction so clockwise and counter clockwise could make a difference from case to case.

Science is of course based on accidents, just look at Penicilin, this was an accident, like many other inventions.

If my ideas are like shooting in a vacuum well then thats your opinion, i say some people have to give it a try.

Trimming the hairs is to get a better force point of grabbing them, if you would have take a closer look at the pictures where the technique is shown, you would have seen that the tweezer is very close to the scalp to get a better force.

If thats a laundry list for you, well knock yourself out buddy  :Wink: 

Your answer or idea " I dont think its a good idea to pluck the whole follicle" shows me that you didnt really understand what hair plucking is about. The hair in the donor area just grew back normaly after some time without "waste" of donor material.

You dont pluck out a WHOLE follicle. you pluck a hair with all the genetic material in the surrounding tissue, thats the differende. A FUE just stances out the whole "Follicle" but the plucking not.

Wrong, even FUE under some cicumstances can lead to donor regrow, when the follicle or the information is still intact or semi intact o a certain degree.

If you dont have any proposals, you should begin to think of some. I dont feel important its the other way around, iam only interested in a solution, everything else i couldnt care less.

Something is always better then nothing. A small scar reduction is way better for a repair patient then nothing.

Also, a few years ago nobody would have considered plucked hairs to work like a normal hair transplant (people like you?) but then some people just went one step beyond and thats the most important thing.

Is my ego fragile? Depends on situation but not under normal circumstances, and yes iam pissed off when some people register themselve in a forum this month and their first postings are a mouth full  :Big Grin: 

I dont ask for an apology i ask for some thinking to solve the problem.  :Wink:

----------


## HairTalk

> Hello Iron.Man2
> 
> The lenght can in fact alter the experience. if you pluck long hairs, sometimes they just BREAK or there is not enough force to pluck it correctly.


 As I said, this makes sense only if you are grasping the shaft of the hair near its terminus.




> I think with your expose to sunlight you actually meant to get this scalp in a warm area that those pores gets wider.


 I'm unsure whether you're being sarcastic, but, if you aren't, clearly that statement was rhetorical (to illustrate the frivolity of trying random things) and not a suggested point on which to experiment.



> Science is of course based on accidents, just look at Penicilin, this was an accident, like many other inventions.


 Garbage. _Utter garbage._ The overwhelming majority of science and research are based on people's experimenting with things they know in relation to those they wish to find out. The fortuity of someone's making a mistake and discovering a bacterial colony a weekend later, which happens to be of remarkable clinical relevance, does not stand as testament that medicine more or less is a very long serious of dumb-luck findings.



> If my ideas are like shooting in a vacuum well then thats your opinion, i say some people have to give it a try.


 Of course, it is my opinion.



> Trimming the hairs is to get a better force point of grabbing them, if you would have take a closer look at the pictures where the technique is shown, you would have seen that the tweezer is very close to the scalp to get a better force.


 I feel you're going in a circle and trying to drag me along: One would grasp the hair-shaft at (or close to) its base; thus, the length above that point would be irrelevant. Sure, it might be easier for a person to navigate a shorter hair, but that doesn't imply the result of plucking out a short hair would be better than that achieved by taking out a long one. With F.U.E., one is cutting follicles out of the scalp. Many surgeous prefer to shave the donor area, to make life easier for themselves; others go ahead and make extractions from an unshaved area. The length the hair extends beyond the scalp remains inconsequential to what occurs beneath, as it isn't a portion of the shaft with which the doctor interacts.




> If you dont have any proposals, you should begin to think of some.


 Why? I'm not involved with this research.



> Something is always better then nothing. A small scar reduction is way better for a repair patient then nothing.


 We're talking about two completely different things. I'm unsure whether this is a matter of your misinterpreting what I said, or simply manipulating it into something on which you can make the comment you wish to. I'm not suggesting small positive results are not better than no positive results; I'm saying simply "doing something" is _not_ better than doing nothing at all. When you act, you must do so from deliberation and with direction. Else, you may be wasting time, energy, and money; worse, you may inflict harm (and, no, I don't think plucking trimmed hairs will inflict harm...).

----------


## RichardDawkins

So if you think you are not involved in research, why do you keep posting here  :Wink: 

Utter Garbage is IMHO a little bit over the top when it comes to serious discussions, with such approaches you keep disqualifying yourself from any discussion.

Its funny , you refuse to think about things to improve a technique because in your iwn words "iam not involved in the research" but on the other hand you say everything is utter garbage. Dont you think you contradict yourself here  :Wink: 

I didnt say the whole field of medicine is based on luck or coincidences but there are remarkable things which happen due to accidents. You know Propecia is such an example, i think it wasnt considered as a hairloss helping drug in the first place.

Acell is another example its purpose is not hair regeneration.

Iam not talking about FUE iam talking about plucking and there could be serious differences in between length or hair.

Well but in this case we obviously have the goal right in front of our face "Expanded to infinite Donor" but now we have to go from the Finish line to the start to see what works best and what doesnt work.

Doing something related to hair plucking is always better then just look at this and do nothing. So you say :

"Dont do anything out of the box or even think about it" But what should be done then? The more information one thing has (it doesnt matter if they may seem stupid or not) the better it is for others.

Oh and that some things can make a huge difference, just look at the situation if you would have a tick bite.

There is a huge difference if you pull this thing out clockwise or counterclockwise.

----------


## HairTalk

> So if you think you are not involved in research, why do you keep posting here


 That's a dumb question: I'm posting because I'm interested in this subject. Neither this thread nor this forum is reserved for researchers; thus both my presence and yours (unless you actually are involved with the work being done in this area, beyond spinning a few "suggestions" on the Internet).

I believe this particular conversation has run its course, thus I'll remove myself from it, here. If you say something of interest to me, and I wish to, I of course shall respond; in the interim, good-bye.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Knock yourself out, my criticism towards is more of the nature

"Fresh registered, not interested in thinking about something to improve some other thing but instead attack other peoples ideas"

An maybe "strange" idea is better then no idea, i called it MacGyverisms  :Big Grin: 

Oh but to answer another of your questions, i personally highly doubt that Histogen can regrow hair on scar tissue or if it could, i think its cosmetically NOT significant.

For scar revision you will always need hair transplants to get a cosmetically significant result.

But as always, i hope iam just wrong and it will work on scar tissue as well, but right now with my "strange and stupid garbage" ideas i doubt it  :Smile: 

PS: There is no such thing as a dumb question, but thats a common mistake at message boards

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

I think transecting the hairs in an FUE procedure would help simplify regrowth (using ACell) but it might affect the hair result being transplanted. I need to give it some thought.
As far as plucking goes, I have tried every type of scenario to increase my useable yield. What I found was that you want the beard hairs to be at least 10 days growth so the girth of the hairs will support the plucking and not fracture. Fracturing occurs more easily than you might imagine so twisting has not worked although I have tried it.
The key to successful plucking as I see it is using the correct plucking instrument (sanded down cross-cut needle driver and snapping the hairs in their growth direction with the corrct force to overcome resistance-much easier said than done.
I am always open to new ideas as many come from patients.
Try not to argue--we all have the same goal
As always, thank you for your input!
GH

----------


## RichardDawkins

No i have to thank you.

I really hope you do some experiments with this "FUE Multiplication" also.

Even if this plucking right now is tedious, it is worth to be examined further because the result and the working scale is actually proved. But the way to get a good yield is the key.

Its not satisfying if you pluck 1000 hairs and only 700 are usable because this will slow down the progress.

But Dr Hitzig i hope you wont abandon plucking as a useful hairtransplant technique, this would be sad. Cause it could also be the case that you and your collegues will get better and better due to training.

----------


## wolvie1985

Drs., is it a good idea to do autocloned plucking for the hairline since there's a chance that, with Acell, multiple follicular units can result from a single hair, which would make the hairline look unnatural?

Thanks for your response.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

You're absolutely right. Plucked beard hairs also may grow coarse and unruly and are best hidden behind the hairline.
The temple plucked hair, however, is another story. It is soft and works fine in most cases. 
To answer your question directly, I do not put ACell/PRP in the hairline region for just that reason. We can always get a small sample of natural hairs (a few FUE or FUT to start the soft look of the hairline.
I am posting some beard plucking transplant picture follow-ups in the next few days-you will see I stay behind the hairline but have great multiplication and recycling of hairs (1 Year F/U)
Best
GH

----------


## RichardDawkins

Wow it seems Acell is working "Too Good" at least in the hairline.

Dr Hitzig, do you think that a combination of FUE for a full frontal restauration of the hairline with autocloned hairs behind it would be a good idea.

To me it seems like this because it doesnt matter if on a big area like the vertex some 4 hair follicles are spreading.

And another question : It seems that those beard hairs could esily been used as kickstart. You dont even have to pluck scalp hair. This is also promising.

Anyway good job so far Dr Hitzig

----------


## wolvie1985

Hi Dr. Hitzig, just to clarify, have you seen multi-folicular units sprout from single hair plucking or have you just seen multiple single hairs sprout? 

And re: acell/prp: have you seen multi-units grow? If acell/prp just reawakens the progenitor cells, and those cells along the hairline are for single units, why would there be a risk of a multi-unit growing?

----------


## bellerofonte

@Dr Hitzig:

Dear Dr Hitzig, I just have one question, probabily you already answered about this but I still didn't have time enought to read all the topic.

What's the difference between simple PRP ( obtained from venous blood) and APRP ( obtained from arterial blood) ?
I read that you use arterial blood from the surgical donor area: should you explain the procedure in detail?

Thanks a lot.

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

It seems that we are getting multiple hair growth from single transplanted hairs and need to adjust how far forward we inject the ACell. The good news is that in person one does not see the closeness that magnification shows. The patients look very natural, but the hair is thicker than one would expect from any single session. 
 In areas where there are still viable (alive) original but weakening hairs, we are seeing new multiple hairs sprout, but not yet in completely previously bald areas. I still believe that there is a point of no return for hair regrowth in vellus hairs and that's why the hairline needs single folliclar units with no ACell.
 I don't type well enough to explain all the differences between Venous and Arterial PRP and you are welcome to call me to discuss but suffice it to say Arterial Blood delivers the necessary nutrients etc. to tissues- the venous blood is the waste collector; it removes the tissue waste for disposal---so which blood source would you think is better?

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok seems Acell works to well, thats of course very good to hear but sad that you cant inject it in the frontal area.

Good job so far iam really looking forward to 2013

----------


## Bakez

> Ok seems Acell works to well, thats of course very good to hear but sad that you cant inject it in the frontal area.
> 
> Good job so far iam really looking forward to 2013


 dont get your hopes up

----------


## RichardDawkins

Well but i do because there is obvious progress so thats my opinion, to be more optimistic

----------


## Bakez

> Well but i do because there is obvious progress so thats my opinion, to be more optimistic


 There is no obvious progress, nobody has posted evidence of anything for ages.

----------


## UK_

> There is no obvious progress, nobody has posted evidence of anything for ages.


 I agree, I am highly doubtful of Acell simply because I cannot see any black and white 90% success rate etc results in any patients, an ad hoc one-off transplant that regrew a few fine hairs in donor isnt a result.

----------


## UK_

> Well but i do because there is obvious progress so thats my opinion, to be more optimistic


 What progress? Where?

----------


## RichardDawkins

I dont think that i have to justify my personal impressions here to you guys. Lets stick with it here. You guys are more pessimistic and iam more optimistic but i dont wanna convince you to become optimistic because its your opinion.

@UK: Your statement ".....an ad hoc one-off transplant that regrew a few fine hairs in donor isnt a result....." is pure effin comedy gold.

This technique is in its beginnings and provided some "fine regrown hairs in the donor are" so those results can obviousy be made more efficient.

But dont discuss this its fruitless because you guys have your opinion and i have mine, lets agree that we dont agree

----------


## UK_

> I dont think that i have to justify my personal impressions here to you guys. Lets stick with it here. You guys are more pessimistic and iam more optimistic but i dont wanna convince you to become optimistic because its your opinion.
> 
> @UK: Your statement ".....an ad hoc one-off transplant that regrew a few fine hairs in donor isnt a result....." is pure effin comedy gold.
> 
> This technique is in its beginnings and provided some "fine regrown hairs in the donor are" so those results can obviousy be made more efficient.
> 
> But dont discuss this its fruitless because you guys have your opinion and i have mine, lets agree that we dont agree


 Yes, that's all we are doing, bolstering our "opinons" and until I can see what I asked for (solid regrowth of new terminal hairs in donor in c90&#37;+ of patients) I continue to ask the question:  where is the progress?  Acell has clearly not lived up to its initial hype, it has not produced the results to date.  Regarding your comment about "improving efficiency over time" (by the way we are looking at efficacy not efficiency) what type of method, process or component in this procedure do you believe will bring us from a stage of barely any progress/no results to a stage that can better the results of the likes of Histogen/Aderans or even Propecia?

Any ideas?  I really doubt twisting pulling or yanking hairs out in any which way possible will do it, the compound does not work, it has failed.  Move on.

----------


## UK_

> @UK: Your statement ".....an ad hoc one-off transplant that regrew a few fine hairs in donor isnt a result....." is pure effin comedy gold.


 I'm glad you find it funny, b/c i'd love to see the day you convince me not to assume a certain proceedure is inept based upon its microbic levels of positive results.

----------


## RichardDawkins

To Quote the Dude : "Thats your opinion man, thats your opinion"

You say Acell failed, i say it doesnt. Lets agree we dont agree  :Wink:

----------


## Bakez

> To Quote the Dude : "Thats your opinion man, thats your opinion"
> 
> You say Acell failed, i say it doesnt. Lets agree we dont agree


 How can you be so stupid to base your opinions on no evidence?

Dr Cole's picture is the only piece of evidence that when I look at it I can't immediately find 15 questions that doubt whether its real or not. So that is all we have, 1 photo.

----------


## UK_

> To Quote the Dude : "Thats your opinion man, thats your opinion"
> 
> You say Acell failed, i say it doesnt. Lets agree we dont agree


 We are all on the same side here, literally all of us, a debate on these forums is never anything personal.

I'd too love to sit in the bubble of optimism regarding the developments currently being made with regard to Acell, but the harsh truth is that barely anything is happening...

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok guys then lets just agree that we dont agree.

I think my bubble of optimism is very cosy and comfortable :-) You just have to look at one thing, what makes hairloss dicktits? Right when it affects our psyche.

And i wont let that happen because those kind of things wont go away easy, even when you have your hair back in the near future, just simple as that.

Iam optimistic for several reasons

1) Autocloning works on a small scale so with improvement this can be made even more succesfull

2) Even Dr Coles really hardcore "bashing" has gone to moderate

3) People begin to understand the real problems of hairloss or what causes it its not the same old "Grab Minox and you can enjoy it" story anymore

4) They even created artificial hairfollicles a somehow "new" thing

5) Histogen created cosmetically significant regrow (permanent after one year) and yes i believe their words and only their words, iam stupid right :-)

6) More clinics are experimenting with acell

Well but thats just my opinions and no i dont think that we are all on the same side, i highly doubt it.

Anyway what you call "No progress" is very easy explained, hair doesnt grew ten centimeters a day

But to make things short, should i really discuss with people who call me "stupid" for believe in something "without evidence" (the without evidence part is btw very funny)

So end of story iam more optimistic and enjoy my life while you guys do what suits you best ^^

----------


## UK_

> Ok guys then lets just agree that we dont agree.
> 
> I think my bubble of optimism is very cosy and comfortable :-) You just have to look at one thing, what makes hairloss dicktits? Right when it affects our psyche.
> 
> And i wont let that happen because those kind of things wont go away easy, even when you have your hair back in the near future, just simple as that.
> 
> Iam optimistic for several reasons
> 
> 1) Autocloning works on a small scale so with improvement this can be made even more succesfull
> ...


 Who is talking about Histogen here?  I am referring to the use of Acell, not Histogen's work which is totally separate to this discussion

Autocloning works on a small scale?  - Fair enough, so does Emu Oil n' Saw Palmetto; my point is that there is nothing to get excited about until you can match/better the likes of Propecia/Minoxidil otherwise they wont even market this technique.  Nobody here can show me results, and your assumption that the results will suddenly start flying across these boards in some kind of wild frenzy due to the introduction of a better plucking "technique" is at least - a very very long shot, given what we have seen so far.

The basis of the current results rests on the efficacy of the the actual compound, not the plucking technique, I am here to see if ACELL grows hair, and so far, I have seen nothing convincing, that is literally as simple as it gets.  Histogen is a totally different story, I am one of the most negative people when it comes to hair loss promises, but Histogen is probably the only company I can honestly say I hold genuine promise/excitement for.

----------


## HairTalk

The fact is, the "cure for hair-loss" has been "five or ten years away" for at least as long as I can remember — it was the general feeling in the air certainly as far back as the 1990s. Every now and then, someone has successfully cloned something in vitro, or grown a hair on the back of a mouse, and The Balding have gotten their hopes up that the answer has been unearthed and that it's now only a matter of time before clinical trials are completed and the F.D.A. approves this marvelous new therapy to safely, effectively, and permanently reverse androgenic alopecia. The thing is, clinical trials are what _determine_ the safety and efficacy of a drug, and all the preemptive rejoicing of people around the prospect of something just makes them bitter when, year after year, "promising" old studies are never again heard from, and new ones crop up that sound very much like those forgotten.

Early in 2011, we're all very excited about Histogen and Aderans (some of us, maybe about Trichoscience, as well). Truthfully, Histogen's H.S.C. has completed _stage 1_ trials — _most_ drugs that pass stage 1 testing go on to fail by stage 3. Optimism is nice, but hopes that scrape the heavens are likely to shatter to shit if they fall. Given the track-record this field of study has, let's at least practice very, _very_ cautious optimism. As for Aderans and Trichoscience, they're simply companies that are trying to accomplish what many others already have tried, and failed, to; I don't believe there's any more reason to be excited about them than one would be upon hearing, "People would like to cure baldness."

Finally, regarding ACell, I'm hopeful, yes, that it might give some credence to the notion of "autocloning" (which, of course, is _not_ a "cure" for balding, but could greatly facilitate its current surgical treatment of transplantation), but Dr. Cooley's images have hardly knocked me off my ass. With many of them, if I hadn't read the caption, I'd've never guessed I should feel ACell effected a positive outcome (and, sorry, "images don't do it justice; you have to see it, in person" is not encouraging). Further, his work, to date (March, 2011), has given us _no meaningful numbers_. How many F.U.E. extractions were made (with transection), and how many grew back, without use of ACell? How many did, with ACell? How many plucked hairs grew in the recipient area, without ACell? With ACell? How many plucked hairs regrew in the donor region, without Acell? With? Ultimately, I'm unsure how much sense it makes to be euphoric about this product based on uncertain images and no useful quantitative data. Now, don't get me wrong: I'll be thrilled if it work out — I just don't believe it's very sensible for us all to just yet hold our breaths, once more...

----------


## RichardDawkins

You see three different opinions and thats a good thing, i like it. I give it the benefit of believing because with a little bit more effort this can become somthing very good.

To me, everything involving more hair (except an transplant) is a cure.

Of course in the 90s those rumors like 10 years from now, were preset but i bet that those "cures" were real sci fi stuff and right now a lot of different research companys come up with plausible stuff which to me is believable.

You know what do i loose when iam optimistic and there wont be a cure (highly unlikely)?

- I didnt loose anything at all because in th end i can get a hairtransplant if it comes to this, but i didnt waste any time with depressions

But what did i loose when iam optimistic and there is a cure (very likely)?

- yes i gained double time

--------------------------

If iam pessimistic and no cure?

- Lost precious time to live and no cure

Pessimistic and cure? Depressions will still remain even with a cure around

----------------------

So thats just me and if you dont like it then its your problem ;-) i dont try to convice you guys to be optimistic.

Yes Dr Hitzig should blew out more well documented pictures but on the other hand its good that someone tries something to help hairloss sufferers.

So i stick with the stupid little thing called "Hope" and remain happy

----------


## UK_

> ...Optimism is nice, but hopes that scrape the heavens are likely to shatter to shit if they fall. ..


 LOL exactly, Histogen is the only process ive ever held confidence about, and even that is only in Phase I Asian c/t -

The best news in a long while for me was the existence of the stem cells in bald scalps - and that they were still producing microscopic hairs, I think optimism is nice aswel, and does hold some value, no matter how negative I am about the whole baldness research field I have this inert feeling deep within that we will reach the finish line 'someday', but at a guess I would say we are well over a decade off.

However in defence of Histogen, the issue of the WNT7A and its induction of follicular neogenesis has been in the literature for well over a decade, w/ proven efficacy in animal models.

----------


## RichardDawkins

around 100 new hairs on 2 square centimeters of scalp with only the histogen test injection......if people consider this bad well i advise you to see a shrink immediately.

I dont know if you guys read the story about thie PVt guy who had i belive plucked hairs injected in his scar and he said almost all of them grow and so far it looked good. And this guy is someone who is really one pessimistic and drastic son of a bitch ( in a good way, this is meant respectful by me)

It is highly likely that a cure will come in the near future, yes stem cells are present in your scalp and this is a hope bringer, if you can manipulate or kickstart them, your worrys are finally over for good.

I wasnt around during the 90s but i think most of the cure talk was utter bullcrap even compared to those 90s standards.

Btw Tricho is not gone for good they recruited some people for their studies, some user here posted a link. Strangely it seems that they are playing the under the radar thing.

----------


## UK_

> around 100 new hairs on 2 square centimeters of scalp with only the histogen test injection......if people consider this bad well i advise you to see a shrink immediately..


 But it doesn't matter how effective the treatment is, trials do not always fail on the basis of the compound being ineffective lol.

I am not bothered at all about the effectiveness of HSC, I know it works.

Hairtalk is spot on - you have to ask yourself why companies are not pouring investment into Histogen, why isnt this company on the news?  Shouldn't their phase I have been worldwide coverage?

----------


## HairTalk

> become somthing very good.
> 
> To me, everything involving more hair (except an transplant) is a cure.
> 
> Of course in the 90s those rumors like 10 years from now, were preset but i bet that those "cures" were real sci fi stuff and right now a lot of different research companys come up with plausible stuff which to me is believable.
> 
> You know what do i loose when iam optimistic and there wont be a cure (highly unlikely)?
> 
> - I didnt loose anything at all because in th end i can get a hairtransplant if it comes to this, but i didnt waste any time with depressions
> ...


 Self-proclamations always are of "optimism" or "realism"; I doub't anyone ever will challenge your sentiment by boasting he's a "pround pessimist." The point is not whether you should be hopeful, but that there simply is not, as yet, compelling evidence that "the cure is around the corner." What basis have you for claiming the "high likelihood" one will be found? What supports such a probability: the fact that "people are working on it"? I, too, _hope_ it happens, but it's unfounded to suggest the statistical probability it will.

By the way, you say, "To me, everything involving more hair (except an transplant) is a cure"; you must realize, even if ACell pans out, it will, indeed, be a _transplant_-dependent accomplishment.

One thing about Histogen's H.S.C.: as I said, I feel this prospect _could_ be fruitful, _but_, I'd much like to see before–after shots of H.S.C. treatment of a _bald_ area. Show me a few square inches of bare scalp, then that same area with even a dozen hairs (not "vellus hairs") growing out of it — without transplantation — and I promise you I'll get excited —  :Cool: .

----------


## UK_

@HairTalk - do you not believe there is a 'slightly elevated' chance that being as though BOTH Histogen and Aderans are actually entering Phase II trials now, that we 'may' see a 'better treatment' in the near future?

I am not talking about a _cure_ (NW7 - NW1) I am referring to a better treatment, it has been noted that the vast array of compounds that fall within the c47% failure rate amongst those that have already passed phase I are _not usually_ biotech procedures/compounds but more commonly, traditional chemical based medicines.

----------


## RichardDawkins

> But it doesn't matter how effective the treatment is, trials do not always fail on the basis of the compound being ineffective lol.
> 
> *I am not bothered at all about the effectiveness of HSC, I know it works.*
> 
> Hairtalk is spot on - you have to ask yourself why companies are not pouring investment into Histogen, why isnt this company on the news?  Shouldn't their phase I have been worldwide coverage?


 You see thats my point, some things are just plausible if you think about them, and thats my driving engine here :-)

Companys will pour their money in, when the successfully leave the first phase thats for sure.

But the problem is, hairloss is only interesting to a small scale of people you know and its not considered life threatening and thats our only "problem" here.

But i say in all honesty and with deep respect, "Dr Hitzig please provide more pictures, it doesnt matter if the results are not bombastic, because improvement is everything :-)"

----------


## HairTalk

> @HairTalk - do you not believe there is a 'slightly elevated' chance that being as though BOTH Histogen and Aderans are actually entering Phase II trials now, that we 'may' see a 'better treatment' in the near future?
> 
> I am not talking about a _cure_ (NW7 - NW1) I am referring to a better treatment, it has been noted that the vast array of compounds that fall within the c47% failure rate amongst those that have already passed phase I are _not usually_ biotech procedures/compounds but more commonly, traditional chemical based medicines.


 I feel  if it doesn't turn out to promote neoplasia or something (I don't think it will, and I hope it won't)  H.S.C. could be used alongside hair-transplantation and finasteride (or instead of finasteride, for those reluctant or unable to use it) to ward off further hairloss. To whether the effects of H.S.C. will be permanent, I can't say (and I don't believe anyone yet can); to its efficacy and patient-factors that may influence this, I also cannot say.

----------


## UK_

> I feel  if it doesn't turn out to promote neoplasia or something (I don't think it will, and I hope it won't)  H.S.C. could be used alongside hair-transplantation and finasteride (or instead of finasteride, for those reluctant or unable to use it) to ward off further hairloss. To whether the effects of H.S.C. will be permanent, I can't say (and I don't believe anyone yet can); to its efficacy and patient-factors that may influence this, I also cannot say.


 Therein lies my only concern.

----------


## UK_

And true hair multiplication is still well over a decade away, it's so easy to get caught up in the current hype.  I'd say 15 - 20 years we will have something, not a cure, but something, those banking on a cure in 2015 are dreaming.

----------


## gmonasco

> One thing about Histogen's H.S.C.: as I said, I feel this prospect _could_ be fruitful, _but_, I'd much like to see beforeafter shots of H.S.C. treatment of a _bald_ area. Show me a few square inches of bare scalp, then that same area with even a dozen hairs (not "vellus hairs") growing out of it  without transplantation  and I promise you I'll get excited


 Indeed.  Otherwise, there's no telling how much of the measured increase in hair count might have been existing hairs that were simply coaxed out of the telogen phase rather than new hairs.

----------


## gmonasco

> Truthfully, Histogen's H.S.C. has completed _stage 1_ trials  _most_ drugs that pass stage 1 testing go on to fail by stage 3.


 Have they?  I thought HSC was currently in phase 1 trials.

----------


## HairTalk

> Have they?  I thought HSC was currently in phase 1 trials.


 I could be mistaken, but I think Histogen is beginning phase-2 clinical testing of H.S.C.

----------


## UK_

> Have they?  I thought HSC was currently in phase 1 trials.


 They are in "Phase I/II" which means they are still testing the safety element associated more commonly with Phase I studies, Dr Ziering shall have some results for the hair loss community in the coming weeks, some 'exploratory studies to determine dosage arrangements for Phase II in spring this year'.  I believe these are 50 patients receiving initial doses of the HSC, it usually takes 3 months before the first effects become noticable from a clinical perspective, I highly anticipate these, we also still have Aderans who are deeply entrenched (200+ subjects) in Phase II.  We may hear from them later on in the year (September/October).

----------


## gmonasco

> Hairtalk is spot on - you have to ask yourself why companies are not pouring investment into Histogen, why isnt this company on the news?  Shouldn't their phase I have been worldwide coverage?


 If they stick to the original plan, the investment should come after the phase 1 trials are complete:

[IMG]http://www.*************/hair-loss/img/uploaded/2879_image215.jpg[/IMG]

----------


## Bakez

Best case scenario for ACell:

In 1-2 years you might be able to get a 1000-1500 FUE transplant where all the extraction sites have no scarring whatsoever, and in maybe 50&#37; of them a single hair grows back where the 2-3 graft used to be.

So essentially you might be able to get a 1 small FUE transplant where you can literally still do the sides and back to grade 0.5 and nobody will be able to tell unless they come up and start examining your head after it just got cut to grade 0.5.

That is the realistic scenario for the layman, based on the evidence in this thread and without hope judging my vision.

----------


## Bakez

Actually lack of hype is probably a good thing when thinking about investment. Hype usually ends up over valuing everything, and investors have learnt the hard way (or should have) when dealing with hyped up industries or companies. IE they will be reluctant to put money into it

----------


## gmonasco

We should probably take the Histogen discussion over to the relevant thread:

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?p=23616

----------


## UK_

"*There is no scientific data to prove a single conclusion you allude to. There is no evidence that the plucked hairs grow back at the same diameter as they were in the donor area. There is absolutely no evidence what so ever that anything similar to autoclonning occurs. Dr. Cooley performed no survival studies so there is no evidence that the survival rate is 75&#37;. You seem to have a great deal of difficulty connecting the dots. Read my lips...Dr. Cooley presented no data what so ever to indicate that even a single viable plucked hair grew in both the donor area and the recipient area. I have no idea what your agenda is, but your conclusions are simply a leap of logic or hallucination. We all want to believe hair plucking works including myself, but no one can draw scientific conclusions based on faulty studies. Now, if you want to pull the Dr. Cooley card on me, feel free to have him give me a call or debate me on a forum. We’re not enemies or competitors. We’re colleagues who are both interested in making lives better. I welcome evidence that refutes my position simply because it will improve the possibilities for all individuals with hair loss. If it does not pan out, however, the impact on the finite donor area would be deleterious. Don’t count me to be on the bridge of that ship. In other words, show me the science."

Dr Cole.*

The above comment remains an accurate one.

I am glad Dr Cole was here to douse the uncontrollable wildfire of optimism regarding Acell/Autocloning.

----------


## RichardDawkins

When did Dr Cole said that?

Btw its funny that you keep on trying to destroy everything and you have been registered since february :-) always thos funny coincidences here.

Do you mean Dr Cole who stated that plucked hairs never grew back? While the whole female world struggles with unwante hair :-)

Do you mena that Dr Cole who after this expressions become very quiet and showed a picture with blood vessels after a FUE.

"Uncontrollable wildfire"? Thats ridicolous, can you tell me which clinic you represent here?

You know, i f i were you i would highly get rid of the idea, that one time Histogen will fix you :-) i think thats what you are after, the magic pill or injection.

So my advice is, that you should learn more about your hair, how its working, and how its growing and where the essential key points lay within it characteristics.

Plucked single hairs, seem to be smaller in diamater because THEY ARE SINGLE HAIRS and not a group of hairs coming out of one follicle.

Oh and i take and give this pvtpoint2000 guy definetly more credit because he said that almost all of the plucked hairs grew in his scar.

But hey thats ok stick with your opinions and its good, but dont quote docs here, when you yourself dont have any clue about hairs or how they work, thank you

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Hi Richard,

As we progress we will modify what we do and how we approach it. Sorry people think the cup is half empty but it is really turning out to be half full. Progress is made with slow safe deliberate steps and that is what we are trying.
As much as it is exciting that we are duplicating hair all over with ACell, the hairline is not the appropriate site. We need to adjust for this.  The good news is that the hair is duplicating, not that we need to modify the technique using ACell.
Keep the Faith
GH

----------


## Gary Hitzig MD

Also, plucked hairs do grow back!!!!
I proved this over 10 years ago in my original work.
When you pluck a large circular area in the donor region, it does not remain bald, but instead grows back fully. I have re-used these sites in more than one patient.
Talk with a female who tweezes her eyebrows.

----------


## UK_

> Btw its funny that you keep on trying to destroy everything and you have been registered since february :-) always thos funny coincidences here.
> 
> Do you mean Dr Cole who stated that plucked hairs never grew back? While the whole female world struggles with unwante hair :-)
> 
> "Uncontrollable wildfire"? Thats ridicolous, can you tell me which clinic you represent here?
> 
> You know, i f i were you i would highly get rid of the idea, that one time Histogen will fix you :-) i think thats what you are after, the magic pill or injection.
> 
> So my advice is, that you should learn more about your hair, how its working, and how its growing and where the essential key points lay within it characteristics.
> ...


 Okay - IT WORKS - is that what you wanna hear?

Do you seriously think I DONT want this to work?

What's _"learning about my hair"_ gonna do anyway? If yr genetically predisposed to AA thats it - no amount of protein propecia potion pills books an B vitamins are gonna help you - there is barely anything in the field right now - we're banking on a few horses and I doubt any will reach the finish line - so dont assume im sitting here gleefully awaiting Histogen to wipe away the scorn of my hair loss.

And what's wrong with quoting Dr Cole?  I believe his comment was an accurate one, please silence me by proving me wrong, show me the science.

----------


## plopp

Dr Hitzig,

Could you update us on the 'eyebrow patient'? Have you performed the procedure yet? If hairlines are a problem, wouldn't eyebrows be as well?

Thanks.

----------


## UK_

> Okay - IT WORKS - is that what you wanna hear?
> 
> Do you seriously think I DONT want this to work?
> 
> What's _"learning about my hair"_ gonna do anyway? If yr genetically predisposed to AA thats it - no amount of protein propecia potion pills books an B vitamins are gonna help you - there is barely anything in the field right now - we're banking on a few horses and I doubt any will reach the finish line - so dont assume im sitting here gleefully awaiting Histogen to wipe away the scorn of my hair loss.
> 
> And what's wrong with quoting Dr Cole?  I believe his comment was an accurate one, please silence me by proving me wrong, show me the science.


 By "AA" I meant Androgenic Alopecia not Alopecia Areata

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok then if thats your opinion, then this is ok with me so to speak in your words "There wont be ever something that ill help us right?

I say even genetical predisposition can be altered to a benefit with the right ingridients.

Even Propecia can slow down hairloss and thats a stupid pill. And even Minox can slow it down and thats just "shampoo"

So why do you say that something drastical cant do something better?

Stem cells are still in baldie heads so give them a kickstart or something they can transform to and you got your result.

So explain to me WHY there is nothing and wont be nothing forever according to you? Where are your ideas based off?

I do seriously think that you dont want anything to work. If otherwise you wouldnt quote something, which says that plucked hairs dont grew back or have a smaller diameter.

So tell me one thing, you pluck a hair and insert it in the recipient area, now this exact same hair grows onger and cycles normal. HOW could this hair getting smaller in diameter if its the exact same plucked hair which grows longer like it would have in the donor area?

HOW is that even possible? How

----------


## UK_

> Ok then if thats your opinion, then this is ok with me so to speak in your words "There wont be ever something that ill help us right?
> 
> I say even genetical predisposition can be altered to a benefit with the right ingridients.
> 
> Even Propecia can slow down hairloss and thats a stupid pill. And even Minox can slow it down and thats just "shampoo"
> 
> So why do you say that something drastical cant do something better?
> 
> Stem cells are still in baldie heads so give them a kickstart or something they can transform to and you got your result.
> ...


 What about damage to the hair follicle in both process and donor?  Do you think out of say _c_2,000 plucked follicles that Acell will regenerate and repair damage to 100&#37; of the plucked follicles to the _exact specification_ of the preceding hair?  On what clinical evidence can this assumption be made?  You would need to check under a microscope every plucked hair for what damage has occured, if the hair/follicle has been damaged beyond the extent of it being a viable candidate in the recipient area - how can you rule out the impact that any damage will play in the scope of the natural regeneration of the follicle several months later in the donor region?

Nobody here is making assumptions regarding the patterns of growth/results of plucking hair but you, Dr Cole stated there is _no evidence to suggest anything similar to the concept of autocloning works_ I or Dr Cole are not stating plucked hairs do not grow back, yet you cannot state that 100% of plucked hairs will grow back to the exact specification of the preceding hair.  You also cannot state the diameter of that particular hair will be exactly the same, _nor can I state that it will not be_.  You do not have that evidence, all that exists is _anecdotal evidence in a handful of patients_, that is not real solid scientific _evidence per se_.  Yet all Dr Cole has stated, and all I have supported across the board of his statement is that the evidence does not exist.  If you want to refute Dr Cole, please provide the evidence.... again... _show me the science_.

Until you can provide me with data on 20 - 100 patients in a controlled study I will support Dr Coles contention that _no evidence exists to support the statement that this procedure works_.  There is still no evidence on a survival rate of 75% - if there is and I have missed this, please copy and paste it in your next post.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok ahm you gotta be kidding me right? There are millions of females who almost weekly pluck and epilept their legs, bikini zone and armpits and they still struggle with doing this until the end of their lifes. So its pretty pretty pretty obvious that plucked hairs come back.

Even people who suffer trichotillomania get their hair back after some time if they stop to pluck permanently, and what they do is far more extensive then pluck some hairs, let them grow back and pluck them again and use acell on donor side as well.

I think people who suffer from trichotillomania dont use acell but get their hair back also.

Ahm i belive that Dr Hitzig also stated that they have to carefully look if the follicles (plucked hairs) are usable.... but why am i repeating this to you.

Of course they have the same charateristics, have you ever plucked your eye brows or nose hair? Its coming back exactly the same way as you plucked it. Hair doesnt forget about its characteristics only because you pluck it  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

You should ask this pvtpoint2000 guy cause he also stated that the plucked hairs grow in his scar.

Why should i prove that it works? Why doesnt Dr Cole prove that it didnt work?

No i wont copy and paste anything, thats your job, i refrain from doing so and share my personal believings.

----------


## wolvie1985

UK, please stop wasting our time with this "where is the controlled study science" nonsense. Yes, in a perfect world, Dr Cooley would have the millions of dollars in funding for such experiments like Merck and Pfizer does. But he doesn't. All he has is his observations and his word, which, based on his years of stellar reputation, we should all trust implicitly. 

By your rationale, most hair transplant techniques should not be taken seriously either. You think there is "science" up to your standards for any other hair transplant procedures? You think there's double-blind controlled "science" behind tricho closures, certain FUE/FUT methods or the like? NO. There are only HT doctors across the world who share their knowledge and experiences and try to improve on them. What you and Dr. Cole are trying to do, I believe, with the greatest respect, is slow down the rate of progress and enthusiasm involved with plucking as it's only a matter of time before it becomes the new standard. Dr. Cole spent years and years to perfect his FUE technique, only to have it replaced by this new easier, less invasive system that provides for unlimited donor. In a way, I feel for him. But not so much after his blatant attempts to quash progress in the field to the benefit of his pocketbook and the expense of prospective patients.

----------


## HairTalk

> I do seriously think that you dont want anything to work. If otherwise you wouldnt quote something, which says that plucked hairs dont grew back or have a smaller diameter.
> 
> So tell me one thing, you pluck a hair and insert it in the recipient area, now this exact same hair grows onger and cycles normal. HOW could this hair getting smaller in diameter if its the exact same plucked hair which grows longer like it would have in the donor area?
> 
> HOW is that even possible? How


 I can accept your wide-eyed self-declared "optimism" (even if I feel it isn't based on very much), but it's perverse of you to suggest someone else actively seeks failure in this field simply because he doesn't share in your giddiness.

I believe, in early 2011, we still cannot confidently say plucked hairs will exhibit long-term growth in the recipient area; the only reason we all comfortably agree that transplanted follicular units will do so, is the procedures have been being performed for decades (even if specific techniques of extraction and placement have evolved). The clinical background simply does not yet exist in regard to plucking.

Is this to suggest we shouldn't try it out if we have reason to think things might work? Of course not. It _is_, however, to imply we should be wary and slow in raising our spirits too high about the prospect. If you want to balloon your hopes to the sky, fine; but it isn't fair to accuse people who show more reluctance, of being in favor of failure.




> Ok ahm you gotta be kidding me right? There are millions of females who almost weekly pluck and epilept their legs, bikini zone and armpits and they still struggle with doing this until the end of their lifes. So its pretty pretty pretty obvious that plucked hairs come back.
> 
> Even people who suffer trichotillomania get their hair back after some time if they stop to pluck permanently, and what they do is far more extensive then pluck some hairs, let them grow back and pluck them again and use acell on donor side as well.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Of course they have the same charateristics, have you ever plucked your eye brows or nose hair? Its coming back exactly the same way as you plucked it. Hair doesnt forget about its characteristics only because you pluck it


 Yes, many women (and probably quite a few more men than would admit) tweeze their eyebrows their whole lives, and, of course, this is because the hair comes back. (I think you mention the use of depilatories, but this has absolutely nothing to do with regeneration following plucking: depilatories dissolve the proteins that compose hair-shafts so the latter can be pulled off  the approach is more akin to shaving than to tweezing). However, I believe it's reasonably well-accepted the characteristics of hair _can_ change with continual plucking (it may miniaturize, or altogether cease to come in). All this is anecdotal, as far as I know, but it does give credence to the thought you don't end up with a literally unaffected donor zone by plucking rather than using F.U.E.-extraction.

Now, even if they don't all come back, I am more comfortable than Dr. Cole appeared to be in his earlier posts in this thread, that _most_ tweezed hairs will return properly. Dr. Cole posted a few pictures suggesting more stuff was pulled out with the hair as part of this surgical procedure than is removed with cosmetic tweezing, but Dr. Cooley replied he pulls out the hairs as would anyone else (i.e., for purposes of grooming), so I'm left hopeful the deleterious repercussions on a plucked donor-area could be kept minimal.




> Why should i prove that it works? Why doesnt Dr Cole prove that it didnt work?


 One sets out to prove what works and what is, not the reverse.

Finally, I'm curious to why you appear to be so reluctant to have anyone challenge the prospect of this succeeding. _No one_ in this thread has stricken me as eager to watch this plan turn out to be a disaster or a waste of time. The doctors want to see it work, and the people who suffer from hair-loss  even if they're restricting themselves from celebrating just yet  would love it to. No one's against it; people are simply being cautious rather than unboundedly childish. I don't see why that lands on you as a bad thing.

----------


## RichardDawkins

I have to agree but the worst part imno is, that Dr Cole has manged to perfectionize one important part of the puzzle but its wasted because of "sour grapes" or so.


I do believe that even with CIT in combination with Acell it is possible to ganin infinite donor with a FUE procedure.

And thats the sad part, that instead of aying " ahhhh come on i give it a shot" people get back to "this wont work so why pursue this anyway"

And i often ask myself if those docs think, if they would do someting like this and everyone could do it, that people would rush to other docs.

I say hell NO, i would always prefer to go to the doc who did it first because he has THE experience.

But i dont think this would change, the worst part right now is not "Will this work" its more the "Why not pursue this goal as a community"

Cells are in some way "stupid" if you like it or not, they do what they are told to do, nothing more. And thats why autocloning works, the do what their direct neighbor does.

In a strange way you just override their "characteristics". And lets face it, autocloning is just the transplant form of something like Histogen etc.

Because in every case its a shifting or "modification" of genetic material.

Thats the benefit here, even Propecia as a small and stupid pill can slow down hairloss, even a stupid shampoo can do so, they can slow hairloss down and get some regrow sometimes. And these are topicals and/or "primitive" pills.

But what if you can directly shift genetic material with the code for "DHT resitent" to a place where hairs are not resitant?

Even your average hair transplant goes like this, it plants genetic material on another place. And those transplanted hairs shed, so it seems that they cyce anew in a dht agressive place. and even those planted follicles are not affected from dht, even after some years they stay permanent because they bring along their genetic material.

The human body has the tendency to overwrite negative characteristics with positive ones.

If you got pox, your body creates antigenes etc etc.

And just look at negative genetic impacts like radiation etc. This is another example that genetics are only solid to certain point but with enough "force" you can manipulate them.

And as you said stem cells are stil existing, but what if you use their existence and overwrite them with dht resistance? right they will be resistant.

----------


## HairTalk

> UK, please stop wasting our time with this "where is the controlled study science" nonsense. Yes, in a perfect world, Dr Cooley would have the millions of dollars in funding for such experiments like Merck and Pfizer does. But he doesn't. All he has is his observations and his word, which, based on his years of stellar reputation, we should all trust implicitly. 
> 
> By your rationale, most hair transplant techniques should not be taken seriously either. You think there is "science" up to your standards for any other hair transplant procedures? You think there's double-blind controlled "science" behind tricho closures, certain FUE/FUT methods or the like? NO. There are only HT doctors across the world who share their knowledge and experiences and try to improve on them. What you and Dr. Cole are trying to do, I believe, with the greatest respect, is slow down the rate of progress and enthusiasm involved with plucking as it's only a matter of time before it becomes the new standard. Dr. Cole spent years and years to perfect his FUE technique, only to have it replaced by this new easier, less invasive system that provides for unlimited donor. In a way, I feel for him. But not so much after his blatant attempts to quash progress in the field to the benefit of his pocketbook and the expense of prospective patients.


 Do you really think Dr. Cole's motivation for starting this thread was fear of seeing his "F.U.E. territory" being infringed upon? Doesn't Dr. Cooley, too, perform F.U.E.? And, if plucking worked out, would Dr. Cole be barred from profiting from it?

I agree gigantic studies require lots of time and money and  that hair-transplant surgery historically has not had these resources. I think, however, the "anecdotal" method of discovery often has been _terrible_ for both the industry and for patients. Yes, it's unlikely we'd "be where we are" were it not for doctors' just trying things out, but look at the horribly ugly road that's gotten us to this point. By the mid-1990s, transplants could be performed such they were neither too detectable nor invasive, but, for the years until then, patients were just guinea-pigged in procedures that produced mediocre to awful cosmetic results, and often devastated one's donor area.

Neither regulation, nor the demand to see the science behind an idea about which people are becoming excited, are bad things.

Again, I agree there will be large financial restrictions in terms of what can be tried out in the field of surgical hair-loss intervention, but that doesn't suggest we should stop being alert  let's be open, but not so open we cease to think and to question.

A final point I find quite upsetting about hair-transplant research is how it is (in my view) so unfair to patients. It's one of the few areas of medicine, I believe, in which patients are asked to _pay_ to be tested on; all elsewhere, the subjects are the ones who're given money for offering their time and bodies to medicine. The field of hair-transplantation seems altogether too aware of how eager and desperate its population is, and finds itself with a seemingly limitless number of heads on which to experiment. Actually charging to see if an idea you have will work  regardless of the oral and written disclaimers you give  is, I feel, unacceptable.

I'll step off my soap-box, now.

----------


## HairTalk

> I have to agree but the worst part imno is, that Dr Cole has manged to perfectionize one important part of the puzzle but its wasted because of "sour grapes" or so.
> 
> 
> I do believe that even with CIT in combination with Acell it is possible to ganin infinite donor with a FUE procedure.
> 
> And thats the sad part, that instead of aying " ahhhh come on i give it a shot" people get back to "this wont work so why pursue this anyway"
> 
> And i often ask myself if those docs think, if they would do someting like this and everyone could do it, that people would rush to other docs.
> 
> ...


 It sounds as if you're saying what's done in hair-transplantation, currently, is a form of gene-manipulation. Correct me, if I'm misinterpreting.

----------


## gmonasco

Please, please don't quote the entirety of an 18-paragraph post just to pose a single comment or question.  It really makes the board tough to read.

----------


## UK_

> Ahm i belive that Dr Hitzig also stated that they have to carefully look if the follicles (plucked hairs) are usable.... but why am i repeating this to you.
> 
> Of course they have the same charateristics, have you ever plucked your eye brows or nose hair? Its coming back exactly the same way as you plucked it. Hair doesnt forget about its characteristics only because you pluck it 
> 
> You should ask this pvtpoint2000 guy cause he also stated that the plucked hairs grow in his scar.
> 
> Why should i prove that it works? Why doesnt Dr Cole prove that it didnt work?
> 
> No i wont copy and paste anything, thats your job, i refrain from doing so and share my personal believings.


 But where is the evidence?  And you have failed to address the substance of my post, you cannot apply the concept of plucking eyebrow hairs and nose hairs to scalp hair, really, this isnt that straight forward.  You also failed to address the issue of _damage_ to donor hair follicles, how can you sit there and assume some porcine growth factor can repair _c_2000 torn apart hair follicles and not expect some degree of irreparable damage to occur resulting in a cosmetic dilemma.  Also, you are throwing into the mix here the potential failure rate of transplanted plucked hairs, including also potential failure of extracted plucked hairs due to _again_, damage rendering the plucked hair useless.

"No i wont copy and paste anything".

Thank you, at long last we are getting somewhere; you cannot copy and paste anything because you have nothing to show, the statement that plucking has a 75&#37; success rate has _not been replicated in any further study_ you have nothing backing this.  You can sit here and scream at me all day: _"be more positive" "it could happen" "we have porcine growth factors on our side now"_ yadda yadda yadda the fact remains that Dr Cole's statement remains _entirely true_, you came here to argue my use of that statement, I am asking you to refute the statement with evidence, something you cannot do, so the statement remains an accurate one, and I shall use and stand by it until I see actual bullet-proof evidence that this procedure works.

----------


## UK_

> Do you really think Dr. Cole's motivation for starting this thread was fear of seeing his "F.U.E. territory" being infringed upon? Doesn't Dr. Cooley, too, perform F.U.E.? And, if plucking worked out, would Dr. Cole be barred from profiting from it?.


 Exactly, I didnt even wish to reply to such a ridiculous comment, would Dr Cole not simply adopt the plucking procedure if were to work?  Do you not think this procedure would expand the market a little? lol.

----------


## RichardDawkins

HairTalk, there is a difference between talking everything down and only quote a doctor and what you do. You raise concearns and we can discuss them but the other thin, what UK does is just downtalk everything to the point where it seems to be rubbish science or so.

Also he ignored the fact that someone had plucked hairs transplanted to his scar and many grew. He just ignores this and this is nothing where you should discuss any further.

And i diasagree, hair plucking is hairplucking. Its grabbing hairs with a tweezer and pull them, thats it. Sometimes there is tissue on it and sometimes not.

But this doesnt matter the hair with tissue and the one without will always come back the same way they did before and before and before.

Just tweeze some of your hairs, it doenst matter where and look closely at them, when they have white soft stuff around them, congratulations you plucked a hair which could have been transplanted to your scalp.

After that just watch how long it takes till this hair has grown back.

@UK : i said everything i said to you. Yes i can compare plucking eyebrows with plucking nose hair and scalp hair, cause their charateristics in term of how they work are amost THE SAME.

Otherwise it would even be possible to transplant beard hair.

WHAT damage to donor hair follicles. You dont even know what the follicle is do you?

Here : Just look for the word HAIR FOLLICLE  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Skin.jpg

Iam not saying you should be more positive. I say you should get your head to finally think and not to copy and paste some statements because you dont have any other ideas.

Acell is not grow factor, its an ECM it keeps tissue from healing and therefore animates the body to create exactly what was there before.

So then tell me buddy, why hasnt Dr Cole commented till now?

Btw can you give a date when Dr Cole did say this?

----------


## UK_

> @UK : i said everything i said to you. Yes i can compare plucking eyebrows with plucking nose hair and scalp hair, cause their charateristics in term of how they work are amost THE SAME.
> 
> Otherwise it would even be possible to transplant beard hair.
> 
> WHAT damage to donor hair follicles. You dont even know what the follicle is do you?


 You are missing the real meat of what I am trying to convey here; you say you can compare plucking beard hairs, nose hairs an toe hairs to scalp hairs?  Firstly, if you wish to refute what Dr Cole stated by using this as your _modus operandi_ then you have failed before you have even begun.  Secondly, it is not just _what_ is being extracted but _how_ and _why_ it is being extracted which leads to your next 'question'.  

"WHAT damage to hair follicles"

In order for the plucked follicle to be viable it must retain a certain amount of the follicle on the plucked hair, this links to the damage I have been referring to during my past posts.  For you to extract a _viable_ hair follicle via this procedure you must induce damage in the donor region, that, I am afraid is just how it is.  'Dr Cole's' fundamental argument here is that there is NO EVIDENCE to suggest that a donor area large enough used for this pie-in-the-sky plucking procedure will retain 100% of its original characteristics.  Indeed, many women pluck hairs but how many pluck with the intention of extracting 90% of the hair follicle?  Do not attempt to dissuade my discussion here, I am merely agreeing with Dr Coles statement, and nobody here has proven it to be misguided in any way and there is no reason even in the further future that anyone shall do so.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Pie-in-the-sky technique? Ok i will stop to discuss with you because you dont want this to work, you just wanna bash it, thats it.

And we are running around in circles, so i wait for the next update, which will come

----------


## UK_

> Pie-in-the-sky technique? Ok i will stop to discuss with you because you dont want this to work, you just wanna bash it, thats it.
> 
> And we are running around in circles, so i wait for the next update, which will come


 Indeed we shall see, I have a strange feeling we will be told to wait longer - that's the thing you see, you cant use the _"woman plucking eyebrow hairs model"_ to justify your blind belief in this procedure, why?  Because they are plucking _hairs_ whilst you are plucking _follicles_.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok just listen one time

1) If you pluck your eyebrows and white tissue is around, what do you have?

2) If you pluck scalp hair and white tissue is around, what do you have?

In both cases you pluck      H-A-I-R-S        which     have    the    undoubtful     benefit   of   substitute    that   what    people     generally    consider    a    FOLLICLE ( FUE or FUT Graft)

In other words when you pluck a hair, you pluck a hair with enough sufficient tissue(stem cells included) to actually transplant them.

You could take a FUE or FUT follicle and stripe off all the tissue like it resembles a plucked hair and it still can be transplanted. But in the case of FUE or FUT you have bigger tissue around it because you stance them out, but you soulc easily pluck those hairs out of the stanced out follicle and the hair would still grow.

----------


## UK_

> Ok just listen one time
> 
> 1) If you pluck your eyebrows and white tissue is around, what do you have?
> 
> 2) If you pluck scalp hair and white tissue is around, what do you have?
> 
> In both cases you pluck      H-A-I-R-S        which     have    the    undoubtful     benefit   of   substitute    that   what    people     generally    consider    a    FOLLICLE ( FUE or FUT Graft)
> 
> In other words when you pluck a hair, you pluck a hair with enough sufficient tissue(stem cells included) to actually transplant them.
> ...


 But that is the exact issue I am trying to convey to _YOU_.  You are proposing that you can take a plucked hair as close as possible to a fully extracted follicle, grow the plucked hair in the recipient area and magically have a cloned regenerated hair in the donor area aswel, without the possibility of ANY impact on shape, size and growth of both the regenerated hair and the recipient hair EVEN if you pluck 1 hair or 4,000 hairs - or should I say 4,000 follicles?  Lol.  Let me tell you, that contention is a VERY VERY VERY optimistic one; if this were the case, then why didnt it work 10 years ago?  What has happend since then?  Ill tell you what, the introduction of ACELL, and Acell has FAILED to provide any documented evidence of enhancing the efficacy of this procedure.  This is why I have been asking for the past 10 posts:  _SHOW ME THE SCIENCE_.  

It's all well and nice for you to _sell_ your belief and faith in this procedure to the audience through your overly optimistic and idealistic conjecturally predisposed comments, but the issue is simple; Acell is the only reason we are here, Acell held the promise, and Acell has clearly failed to deliver.  You're like a gambler chasing big losses, all hyped up on a process that has no science or promise, step back and realise that until the professionals in the field can provide you with documented evidence regarding both safety and efficacy you have NOTHING.

----------


## RichardDawkins

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8586752

Quote : "......The results showed that the number of hairs decreased in the axilla with each session using the blend method: permanent hair removal was achieved in an average of 26.8 weeks or 9.9 sessions. *However, the number of hairs did not decrease in the axilla after plucking*........"

2) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12709819
Plucking during telogen induces apoptosis in the lower part of hair follicles. Interesting because you can see what immediately happens when you pluck a hair (reorganisation occurs besides obvious "cell death")

----------


## RichardDawkins

No witty comments UK?

----------


## UK_

> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8586752
> 
> Quote : "......The results showed that the number of hairs decreased in the axilla with each session using the blend method: permanent hair removal was achieved in an average of 26.8 weeks or 9.9 sessions. *However, the number of hairs did not decrease in the axilla after plucking*........"
> 
> 2) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12709819
> Plucking during telogen induces apoptosis in the lower part of hair follicles. Interesting because you can see what immediately happens when you pluck a hair (reorganisation occurs besides obvious "cell death")


 Firstly, the above articles are irrelevant; as in the context of our discussion the plucking process is more akin to a complete follicular extraction than a typical eyebrow pluck.  Also, the above studies do not analyse the _type_ of hair regeneration when you pluck hairs with the sole intention of (1) re-growing them in other areas of the scalp and (2) with approximately 80 - 90&#37; of the follicle attached to the hair.  They cannot be used to support your overly optimistic and buoyant views that anything in this process even works , and by that I mean everything, consistently, the Acell, the plucking, the auto-cloning, the re-growth, everything.

The reason I put emphasis on the issue of the _type of re-growth_ is that my sole contention throughout this exchange has been to convince you that *(1) there is absolutely no evidence that the plucked hairs (in this process) grow back at the same diameter as the preceding hair.  (2) There is NO EVIDENCE that anything close to the concept of auto-cloning even occurs and (3) there is absolutely no evidence to support any claim of a 75% survival rate* (but my heart of hearts tells me you have grown to accept this, just as you will grow to accept the stark truth that this procedure and concept has utterly fallen on its arse).  I also do not believe you can convince me in any way that by plucking c4000 FOLLICLES in THIS MANNER that you will not contribute toward a degree of degradation in terms of diameter, thickness and cosmetic appearance of both the donor and recipient areas.

We clear?

Anyway I gotta hand it to ya - Nice one pulling up some articles on how plucked hairs do return, how many of those hairs do you feel will be viable for auto-cloning?  20%? 50%?  *None?*  All of them? lol I rest my case.

----------


## Bakez

Whats the point arguing, this isn't an option for good quality treatment at the moment. What we need to do is wait for a Dr to post a proper unbiased non-speculative update. We will probably find out how succesful this has been in October this year.

I suppose it would be stupid not to just use ACell at the plucked hair sites like Dr Cole has been doing with his FUE. Now if he is getting *some*, a few, a small amount of hair regrowth from these extractions, I bet plucked hairs (even though they remove so much material) will fair better. If we got 75&#37; regrowth from plucked hair sites, and 75% of those plucked hairs grew in the recipient area, then this is going to be an overwhelming success. But at the moment, we still have nothing.

----------


## UK_

> Whats the point arguing, this isn't an option for good quality treatment at the moment. What we need to do is wait for a Dr to post a proper unbiased non-speculative update. We will probably find out how succesful this has been in October this year.
> 
> I suppose it would be stupid not to just use ACell at the plucked hair sites like Dr Cole has been doing with his FUE. Now if he is getting *some*, a few, a small amount of hair regrowth from these extractions, I bet plucked hairs (even though they remove so much material) will fair better. If we got 75&#37; regrowth from plucked hair sites, and 75% of those plucked hairs grew in the recipient area, then this is going to be an overwhelming success. But at the moment, we still have nothing.


 Agreed, yet there is nothing wrong in having and expressing your doubts in a procedure/drug, I am not stating that this will _never_ work, that would make me a hypocrite, if you read back to my first post regarding this matter, I stated that Dr Coles comment _remains_ true.

I have stated this before, let us wait for the professionals in the field to provide the evidence, until then, we have nothing!

Nothing I say on these boards is ever personal, I have nothing but respect for all the doctors and researchers engaged in this complex field, they are each others colleagues not competitors, and we are here to support and discuss the many angles of the ideas/processes they are using.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Hey UK you spoke exactly like someone who is in a relationshsip with some clinic :-) their reps always use the exact same words like you do.

Also you registered here in February 2011 and the first thing you do is attack a "new" technique :-) I rest my case here and let the reading users here to decide HOW we should deal with you.

You still ignore the fact about this pvtpoint2000 guy which shows clearly that you have a "special" agenda here :-)

Plucking btw is plucking even if you pluck yourself you will get some hairs with a bunch of tissue around it (big deal).

So name the clinic you are involved with, its so funny that those "newbies" always do the same mistakes.

1) Register a nick shortly after some discoveries
2) Dont believe anything and say everything is irrelevant but i dont wanna make it personal here

3) Spoke like a sales rep because "No i really want this to work but i attack everything anyway" "My respects to all researchers (of course not i hope the rot under a stone, how dare they to experiment with something what could possibly help hairloss sufferers)

I really begin to think that you are just "stupid" to understand that plucking is plucking and nothing more. What do you think Dr Hitzig does? Cut out skin and then pluck the hairs or what?

Pluck your own hair and you see it grows back and got white tissue around.

I think you have a problem with people not being negative like yourself, but dont point this on me, you wont get me to get a hairtransplant at your represented clinic buddy, no chance in heaven :-)

Btw why hasnt Dr Cole said anything yet? :-) 

Explain to us what you think is the concept of auto-cloning, i thin kwe all are waiting for your definition of this ;-)

Where is the proof? Have you been to hairsite and just looked at some pictures lately then you should just know better. Also have you even looked at the endless presentations and pictures which have swirl around last year and early this year. Of course you havent because you were involved in selling some transplants to customers :-)

You absolutel mistaken FUE and plucking buddy, no drive to discuss this with you BUT its shows that you are a salesrep, they mostly (exceptions are of course here) dont know anything about hair.

All you are refering to is something from one person Dr Cole, where he didnt even pursue this criticism any further, i think he doesnt have the time for such stupidness and instead he is experimenting.

I wont give anything to you in return because to me it seems that you are a phoney person who only registered to discredit something and i never take those kind of people seriously because if you were actually a hairloss sufferer you would be more interested in HOW others could try it, instead of "Bashing the living Shit out" of something      NEW (or old to some people)

I just cant take you seriously because you contribute nothing but hate. Bakez on the other hand has said Acell failed BUT he also tries to contribute something and shares his opinions as a hairloss sufferer and not a mindless hater.

You also failed to sow us HOW a plucked hair which in the recipient area grew longer could magically lost a good amount of diameter?

----------


## UK_

> Hey UK you spoke exactly like someone who is in a relationshsip with some clinic :-) their reps always use the exact same words like you do.
> 
> Also you registered here in February 2011 and the first thing you do is attack a "new" technique :-) I rest my case here and let the reading users here to decide HOW we should deal with you.
> 
> You still ignore the fact about this pvtpoint2000 guy which shows clearly that you have a "special" agenda here :-)
> 
> Plucking btw is plucking even if you pluck yourself you will get some hairs with a bunch of tissue around it (big deal).
> 
> So name the clinic you are involved with, its so funny that those "newbies" always do the same mistakes.
> ...


 _"So name the clinic you are involved with, its so funny that those "newbies" always do the same mistakes."_

http://www.joelosteen.com/Pages/Index.aspx

I am clearly not getting through to you, and your repeated comments are now merely meager insipid ad hominem aimed at not grasping or accepting the fact that Dr Cole's comment remains an accurate one.  Rather, one that is trying to convince me and those reading this that there is no difference in the method of plucking we may use on an everyday basis to that of the method being adopted by the doctors studying this _technique_.  

This is indeed wrong, and you have NO EVIDENCE to rebuttal my contention that the method of plucking which is designed at extracting so much of a hair follicle (c80 - 90&#37 :Wink:  will have a cosmetic/aesthetic impact when applied to an area of c4000 follicles.  You simply cannot make the assumption that it will work, especially by pulling up some old articles on a few women who plucked some armpit hair, did they measure the density or the hair?  Did they measure the diameter of the hair?  Did they look at biopsies of the follicles to see if the remaining 90% regenerated?  NO!  They didnt because this is an entirely different study!  You need to realise fast - growing hair is as complex as me removing a limb and attempting to regenerate it.  This is not just hair loss research, this is the core of regenerative medicine.  

_"All you are refering to is something from one person Dr Cole"_

Only one person needed to say it - nobody on here can refute his comment, _NOBODY_ and to this end, I will refrain from advancing this pointless discussion and await the results.

----------


## RichardDawkins

You put way too much effort in discredit this technique, which is strange because, why should a person do so.

Yes you got it right there is NO difference between plucking hairs by a doc and by plucking hairs yourself. As i said before you ignore the one user and you ignore the fact that you could easily test it yourself by plucking hairs yourself.

Is that your "clinic" ? Well then its no wonder you discredt new techniques :-) or did you wanna try to get me because of my atheist nickname? ;-)

*Nevertheless, god wont bring you hair, science will.*

You can also use a lot of "classy" and sophisticated vocabulary, it wont change the fact that you dont understand that there is no difference between plucking and plucking.

Well what remains accurate in Dr Coles statement? What exactly? Tell us. And i think with God on your side you can give me an answer why Dr Cole hasnt responded yet and his patients seem very happy with Acell in his forums ;-)

So tell me, why am i of course wrong with my plucking idea? Tell me. Plucking is plucking. Dr Hitzig didnt use a magic wand or a bible spell, he just uses a primitive and stupid "tweezer" and thats effin it. No magic hocus pocus, just plucking and usage.

If you would have read some pages before, you would have witnessed that i clearly described my observations with hair plucking.

I dont think that you understand how cells work bud. There has not to be 80 or 90% of tissue around, it is enough, if there is sufficient tissue around, as long as it has the valuable informations.

But the tissue is used as an indicator for the usage of this hair.

I dont make assumptions, I    KNOW   that this works.

And iam not one of those delusional positive thinking realism hating nutcases. You would have seen this when i clearly stated that this works but it is sad in the way that right now its not efficiant to use.

Which in my books is very pessimistic, because we have the final line in plain sight but the way to cross the line is full of obstacles. Or to put it in another words

"Lets say you have the best car in the world (BMW M6 or so) but you cant drive with it because there is a huge gap full of crocodiles and acid between you and the car"

This is really sad, also i mentioned several times that it sucks like nothing else that this kind of research has been done so "late" but in another way its good because i can guarantee you that if they had pursued something like this in the 80s, they would have abandoned it becaus there was no such thing as "Acell" around etc. I think you catch my drift here.

"old" articles? You know its even better if those articles are old by standards because, if with old techniques and knowledge the plucked hairs came back, then they will surefire do today (unless god decided to switch our genetic material :-) )

Well in this study they clearly showed that the hair number didnt decrease in the plucked area, so why are you bashing this study here ;-)

Growing hair is not as complex as you removing your limb and let it grew back. There is a difference between small and big scale. Because if you were right, this would mean that even when we got minor cuts, our body wouldnt be able to heal the area. But oh joy and wonder, the body does exactly this, in a very small scale almost scarless on a bigger scale with scars. Some not so christian people call this salamander effect ;-)

Or otherwise all normal hairtransplants wouldn work either, but they do to a certain ammount, even with cutting off all important hair vessels etc.

Good vishnu, thats the point, when you say regenerative medicine. What does Acell do? I give you a small hint, the word starts with re and ends with generation.

Acell in hair plucking just straighten out the odds for success.

I really dont know why you put so much effort in downtalking this? I was under the impression that other docs would do so, but its quiet from that perspective ;-) only here and there, a new registered user pops up and the rest is history in the making ^^

----------


## UK_

What is the point in your comments?  I mean really - do you want me to believe that this works? Do you want me to outright proclaim that I believe this will be and IS an effective procedure?

How on earth someone like you maintains a username like that *BOGGLES MY MIND* - _it is you that is taking the leap of faith in this context lol - thus in the words of Richard Dawkins himself; 'the onus is on YOU to prove to me that this theoretical position is accurate and factual'._

Why cant you understand that no matter how many posts you blurt out on this thread you *CANNOT* refute Dr Cole's statement _(I can quote him again if ye wanna give it another shot)_, I am keeping this short, I could go into another critique of your previous comment, but 95&#37; of it is *utterly* irrelevant.

P.S.  You obviously didnt catch the funny side of my link to Joel Olsteen, but yes - I really am a sales representative for Joel Olsteen's church, I am working on the prayer side of research into regenerating hair follicles  :Cool:  we dont have any evidence yet - BUT IT WORKS!!!!  YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE ME!!!! BE OPTIMISTIC!!!! IT WORKS BECAUSE I SAY IT WORKS!!!! WE DONT NEED EVIDENCE!!!! WE DONT ANYTHING!!!!! IT WORKS!!!!!!

 :Big Grin:  Good day!

----------


## RichardDawkins

I was under the impression you would to quote you "Ignore me now" i knew you couldnt resist :-)

Its utterly irrelevant? I think pvtpoint2000 thinks otherwise. You know what they say, Me thinky thou protest too much :-)

To quote one of James Bonds enemies " I dont expect anything from you"

I am not taking any leap of faiths here, i stick with the science and not with bashing new stuff by registering in a forum like you ;-)

I mean you are just a troll, i saw this post of yours with "Dooohhh" in it and then it was all pretty clear, you are hunting down every Acell related toppic to destroy it, so which clinic are you involvd again :-)

Well nope i didnt catch your funny side, because it wasnt funny at all and your lack of intelligence or comprehension overshadows everything useful. You see i actually handle you like what you are, a troll ;-)

Why i can surely say so?

1) Registered in february
2) First postings where bashing Acell related stuff
3) Ignoring all related studies
4) Ignore the fact that patients had this Acell thing done with plucked hairs
5) Write stuff like a typical rep for a clinic
6) Concentrate your postings only on one subject "Acell"
7) Stick to only one argument (which is by now standards old)
8) Ignoring all arguments against your "Acell sucks" agenda

I repeat again

- How can you explain that plucked hairs at pvtpoint2000´s scar did grew normally

- how is the Hitzig hairplucking different from normal plucking? When even by normal plucking, tissue can be seen at hairs?

- Why isnt Dr Cole answering here again to support your arguments?

- Why are other surgeons experimenting with Acell, if it is according to you "Crap and non working"?

- If Dr Coles statement remains "true" why doesnt he back those claims up now, i think he had time to prove or disprove this ;-)

- Why are some of Dr Coles patients in his forum strangely happy with Acell/PRP?

Its funny that you quote one doc, while i use multiple sources for plucking hairs and regrowth in donor area and you say those are irrelevant.

Guess what, at certain points even your beloved Histogen has to use studies, which have been done before them. What do you mean their work is based on, funny man.

What should i prove? There have been plenty of PDF Files with pictures for you to look at and there is one user ( i meantioned several times) you kep ignoring.

Ask this guy what he thinks and iam exited to get the answer :-)

----------


## mlao

I think it's great that this topic is being debated so vigorously on this forum. But nobody really knows exactly how well Acell will work at this time. 
I don't have a medical or scientific background, but I think it has more potential than some of us might think. The reason I say this is because at least half a dozen doctors all members of the IAHRS have begun studying its use in their practice. I'm sure if they didn't see any benefit they would just continue doing FUT and FUE and make their living that way instead. 
I have always felt that the problem with a lot of new hair loss therapies is that they were never tested by doctors who deal with hair restoration in their daily practice but rather by scientists in labs who get a hard on if they grow 10 hairs on a mouse.
I am cautiously optimistic about Acell and the only thing we can do is sit back and wait to see what Dr. Cooley and Dr. Bernstein (among others) come up with.
Now UK and RichardDawkins please play nice.

----------


## UK_

*"- If Dr Coles statement remains "true" why doesnt he back those claims up now, i think he had time to prove or disprove this ;-)"*

Back what up?  The onus is not on the individual stating there exists no evidence to prove that there really is no evidence, the onus is on the researcher(s) conducting the study to prove that the evidence for its efficacy exists.  Thats just how it works - why?  Because it makes more sense to build the foundations of a house before laying its bricks.  Dr Cole has nothing to substantiate :Wink: .

*I was under the impression you would to quote you "Ignore me now" i knew you couldnt resist :-)*

Don't flatter yourself.

*I am not taking any leap of faiths here, i stick with the science and not with bashing new stuff by registering in a forum like you ;-)*

LMFAO... What science?  Read Dr Cole's statement again (the one I quoted), what were the last four words of his statement? :Wink: 

*I mean you are just a troll*

A typical programmed response, not everyone lives in a fairytale world holding hands and leaping around in circles, yr attempt to also alienate me as some type of trolling outlaw newbie is falling on deaf ears - your strategies are weak, placid and platitudinous in every respect.  You fail at coming to terms with the stark reality that your entire argument has _hit the wall_, only science, evidence and reasoning can save you - unfortunately you profoundly lack these, once again, for the fifth f****** time: _SHOW ME THE SCIENCE_.

_Well nope i didnt catch your funny side, because it wasnt funny at all and your lack of intelligence or comprehension overshadows everything useful._

Pot calling the kettle black eh?

*1) Registered in february - Irrelevant
2) First postings where bashing Acell related stuff - Irrelevant
3) Ignoring all related studies - There are no related studies I can assure you
4) Ignore the fact that patients had this Acell thing done with plucked hairs - Still does not refute Dr Cole's statement
5) Write stuff like a typical rep for a clinic - Irrelevant, senile doddering accusation
6) Concentrate your postings only on one subject "Acell" - Irrelevant
7) Stick to only one argument (which is by now standards old) - Old yet still relevant and not yet refuted
8) Ignoring all arguments against your "Acell sucks" agenda* *- What arguments?*

*I repeat again
*

*YAWN*

----------


## RichardDawkins

Hey UK_ this is interesting, fits your profile

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...m-astroturfing

Very strange those similarities here :-)

----------


## LarryDavid

Sooner or later we will see whats really going on with Acell and weather it will be a game changer or not, no need to bash this thread with pointless posts.

----------


## UK_

> Hey UK_ this is interesting, fits your profile
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...m-astroturfing
> 
> Very strange those similarities here :-)


 I am afraid that still fails to refute the statement made by Dr Cole, it remains an accurate one  :Wink:  which is all I have been saying throughout this entire discussion.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Everyone who is interested to see UK_´s agenda in his prime. Just go to Dr DeYarman´s thread about Acell and you get the clear picture what UK_´s only purpose is.

I think that it would be highly recommendable to just block or ban this guy. All i see is a system behind it. He looks at every Acell related toppic and destroys it with his nonsense.

----------


## UK_

> Everyone who is interested to see UK_´s agenda in his prime. Just go to Dr DeYarman´s thread about Acell and you get the clear picture what UK_´s only purpose is.
> 
> I think that it would be highly recommendable to just block or ban this guy. All i see is a system behind it. He looks at every Acell related toppic and destroys it with his nonsense.


 You're still failing in answering to Dr Cole's statement, clearly you'd rather make outlandish accusations about me conspiring (through the use of an internet forum :Smile: ) the total demise of any research into Acell, really, you are ridiculous and boring.

Rather it is not your inability to answer the question that is the problem, it is your inability to accept my suggestion that your uncorroborated utterly baseless exuberance that at times (1) tends to annoy and (2) gets in the way and disturbs _normal_ discussion is entirely fruitless, pointless and boring.

You have some kind of inert tendency to void any questioning of any procedure, to stamp out the individuals who pose any type of questioning toward the concepts you hold so close to your heart.  May I make a suggestion here, that you lower your expectations of _everything_ that is in the _pipeline_ at the moment.  Why?  Because you probably have a 5 - 10% chance of there being a better treatment available in the next 5 years, I am sorry if that upsets the unfounded transparent disease of amaurotic optimism you suffer with.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Where are Dr Coles arguments now? Does he back them up? No but he uses Acell on patients.

One patient got plucked hairs in his scar, so it workes clearly. What science do you need.

Even if i would be picky i would say its 1 : 1 on Cole statement vs one patient who got it done. You see your agenda is beginning to bore me, and you still refer to me instead of you "i will ignore you now".

----------


## UK_

> Where are Dr Coles arguments now? Does he back them up? No but he uses Acell on patients.
> 
> One patient got plucked hairs in his scar, so it workes clearly. What science do you need.
> 
> Even if i would be picky i would say its 1 : 1 on Cole statement vs one patient who got it done. You see your agenda is beginning to bore me, and you still refer to me instead of you "i will ignore you now".


 That still does not answer to Dr Cole's statement, you keep harping on about this scar patient as if it is your only dictum of hope in this crumbling shed of an argument you laboriously maintain.

_*sigh*_...In other words... the scar patient is not adequate/relevant in answering the real substance of Dr Coles comment, I can post it again if you wanna have another read.

----------


## RichardDawkins

EVERY patient with succesful results is relevant. I mean you talk about stuff like you know everything but in reality you make assumptions without even using your brain. You just speak about stuff others gave away in bits for you to chew.

Its always easy to say "it doesnt work, where is the science" but then it should be very very very very easy for Dr Cole to backup his claims.

I read his stuff again and most of the times he is using "theoretical constructs"

I am harping about this patient because THIS patient crumbles Dr Coles statement, where he didnt refer to till today. I think its really odd when other clinic reps admit in public that they belive in the huge potential but some fine adjustement has to be done.

Thats the difference between a troll and provoking person like you and someone who tries to show a serious balanced point of view. From my standpoint, as long as i read into hm stuff, most of the things have actually occured like i predicted or was thinking about them. The only thing which strikes me was the fact that plucked hairs works, i wanst expecting something like this.

Where are Dr Coles statements now? He never came back to them but in his forum people are happy with Acell results, they discuss vividly body hair and Acell etc, and those people seem to be more optimistic then i ever will be.

You can really shut your trap when it comes to stuff YOU think is relevant or not, because you dont have to deceide what is relevant and whats not, you catch my drift?

It answeres Dr Coles statement, he wanna see the science, the science is that ir worked on the scar of a patient. And that plucked hairs regrow is just a so common fact that almost everybody knows this ( strangely Dr Cole didnt agree with that).

No, you are only trolling around and dont try to bring in something valuable here, you can only insult people. As someone said, you called people "Retards" in the TRX2 thread.

Isnt that what the hairsite user Lerroy.Jenkins said to people? Seems to me that actually you are the person Leeroy.Jenkins.

I think if Dr Cole is so vividly against the whole Acell concept he should just try to reproduce the idea and if it doesnt work he can say "it doesnt work" but only saying " Where is the science" is to me like an discusseion where someone brings up "nazi germany" only to end a discussion.

Dr Hitzig and Dr Cooley provid the public with informations on how and what is possible and can be done, now its up to others to put this "myth" to the test.

While other people come up with new ideas, you stick with one sentence the whole time, which clearly shows that you are not only ignorant, but naive.

If Dr Cole would be right, then it would also be impossible to transplant hearts or any other organ. And also hair transplants in general wouldnt be possible.

I won´t refer to his argument, until he has proven to everyone that this whole concept is nor working. Dont hate the player, hat the game

----------


## Kiwi

I think both you guys have hearts in the right place, well UK seems like a pain in the backside, kinda antagonistic, to the point where he either has no life or just wants to push your buttons.

But quite frankly you've both hijacked this thread and since UK started ranting... No more useful information from the doc.

Thanks a bunch.

----------


## thejack

I think both you guys have hearts in the right place, well UK seems like a pain in the backside, kinda antagonistic, to the point where he either has no life or just wants to push your buttons.

But quite frankly you've both hijacked this thread and since UK started ranting... No more useful information from the doc.

Thanks a bunch. 

+1

----------


## RichardDawkins

Yes you guys are right. My apologies but i still hope some people found at least somethings interesting

----------


## thejack

Yes definately the input is good, but the back and forth bickering ruins it unfortunately  :Smile:

----------


## UK_

> I think both you guys have hearts in the right place, well UK seems like a pain in the backside, kinda antagonistic, to the point where he either has no life or just wants to push your buttons.
> +1


 Tell you what, go back and read the comments you blind insipid fool, all I stated was that Dr Coles comment remains accurate, can you read that?  THAT IS ALL I SAID - and I wasnt directly talking to ANY of you other people on this board, it was an open comment, can you prove it wrong?  Can any of you on this board refute Dr Coles comment?

That was my ONLY point, his comment remains accurate, anything else is utterly erroneous, understand that it was not me who responded to RichardDawkins - HE RESPONDED TO ME. 

In other words, if you dont want the hassle, dont start attacking people an cry an moan later on when they retaliate.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PROVE DR COLE WRONG AND I WILL PROCLAIM YOU AND YOUR HOARD OF NEGATIVITY POLICE ENTIRELY RIGHT.

UNTIL THEN... I AM RIGHT  :Wink: .

----------


## Kiwi

Whatever floats your boat man. This thread should be renamed;

ACell, a repetitive conversation between Richard and UK.

----------


## Kiwi

Oh and for the record I don't give a crap about who is right or wrong. I just want to read what the pros have to say about Acell. And I don't want to read your banter, caps lock ridden argumentative crap. From either of you.

----------


## RichardDawkins

So how about Dr Cole remains "accurate"

Here is another link from Dr Bernstein, he seems confident and he pursues plucking WTF but i was under the impression that "Where is the science" was more important then go for it. Anyways guys here is a link i hope you enjoy this

http://www.prweb.com/releases/hair-c...web5150774.htm

 qUK please stop with insulting people you keep the hate flames burning when they were almost gone

@Kiwi : I hope that this Link is something which floats your boat :-) and please dont name me in one sentence with the person UK this seems to insult me ;-)

----------


## plopp

Great find Rich! Always nice to have another top doc on the team  :Smile:

----------


## Gubter_87

Yeah seriously guys just lay off now. You have already ruined pages and pages of this thread, hopefully it'll be able to recover. But we're all sick of your pointless bantering, so please for this threads sake just stop. Continue over PM, if you really can't hold off.

----------


## Kiwi

Cheers Rich. I agree, it is good to see more docs jumping on the band wagon. It means that the science is at worst, worth exploring more, at least from a personal investment point of view. (in the sense that these docs are investing their own time and money on it)

At best sometime in the future hopefully this tech improves our donor area significantly - sadly, in my opinion, I've run out of donor hair to be a test candidate. So I am going to wait until there are hundreds of before / after shots online before I take the risk.

In the meantime I'm saving for another procedure. I'm looking to get another 2-3K FUE implants. Unless Histogen invite me to be one of their guinea pigs :P

----------


## Kiwi

> Yeah seriously guys just lay off now. You have already ruined pages and pages of this thread, hopefully it'll be able to recover. But we're all sick of your pointless bantering, so please for this threads sake just stop. Continue over PM, if you really can't hold off.


 lol - actually the administrators could probably delete pages 15-50 of this thread without any great loss to the community of this website.

+1 - I also vote that any further debating is taken to personal messages

----------


## UK_

> Whatever floats your boat man. This thread should be renamed;
> 
> ACell, a repetitive conversation between Richard and UK.


 But that still fails to address the substance behind my post, nobody on here can prove to me that Dr Cole's statement was an inaccurate one, NOBODY, not you not him not me - NOBODY.

That's how pointless this discussion really is, I just find it hilarious that nobody on this board can even see that. :Big Grin: 

_"“The medical research we are performing is important because it may lead to hair multiplication as a way to increase a person’s supply of donor hair. "_

This still does not refute Dr Cole's statement, but offers the ONLY hope of it ever being answered there is still no evidence for Acell/Hair Cloning but thank the LORD OF ALL HEAVENS we finally have a bloody controlled study into this!

This is all I want to see!!!!

http://www.prweb.com/releases/hair-c...web5150774.htm
*"Controlled studies are the best way to increase the objectivity of the research and insure the validity of the results."* 

...What ive been saying all along, and the fundamental basis that Dr Coles comment rests upon; SHOW ME THE SCIENCE.

Also covered here:

http://insurancenewsnet.com/article....type=newswires

This does look promising, I am so pleased to finally see a controlled study into Acell!

----------


## Kiwi

> But that still fails to address the substance behind my post, nobody on here can prove to me that Dr Cole's statement was an inaccurate one, NOBODY, not you not him not me - NOBODY.
> 
> This is all I want to see!!!!
> 
> This does look promising, I am so pleased to finally see a controlled study into Acell!


 But you still fail to see that we don't care. You fail to see this is a conversation between you and UK now, whereas previously it was a conversation on ACell.

I actually kind of agree with you about one thing, and that is I wish Dr Cole jumped in here 10 days ago and answered all the questions - that would have killed all this in its tracks. 

And of course the controlled study gets a massive thumbs up from me!!

----------


## LarryDavid

Since there will be an objective scientific study concerning Acell, finally both of you can shut up and just wait for the results  :Smile:

----------


## UK_

> But you still fail to see that we don't care. You fail to see this is a conversation between you and UK now, whereas previously it was a conversation on ACell.


 Excellent :Big Grin:   I wish it stayed that way from the beginning because I was right then and im right now, only the study can shut me up, and I hope it does.

But id love to hear an interview from Dr Bernstein after the summer to see if they're seeing any results, in-fact we should open another thread dedicated to this topic.

----------


## UK_

> Since there will be an objective scientific study concerning Acell, finally both of you can shut up and just wait for the results


 Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  I am so happy to see this!!!!!!

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok you gotta be ****ing me right. The science was proven by Cole himself when he said without Acell Beard hairs 0% yield and with Acell 92% yield.

Dr Bernstein is a sceptical and realistic person, so if there would be no plausible science well i doubt he would actually put efford in this.

Also you should really stop to refer to an really old one time argument by one doc while others do experiments.

You know, if this wouldnt work or if there wouldnt be potential i highly doubt that anyone would ever use this.

But i stop here before it gets out of hand again. The discussion is not pointless your same old stories are, especially with your story, february registered and all you do is jumping on Acell etc. Odd at best.

Also you didnt mention the most important part

"These parts can either be from hairs derived from plucking or from follicles which have been purposely cut into sections. Generally, damaged follicular units will stop growing hairs. However, there *is anecdotal evidence that an extracellular matrix applied to partial follicles may stimulate whole follicles* to grow and, when applied to wounds, may stimulate the bodys cells to heal the damaged tissue. "

So your science will be born be "experimenting" and not by saying "Where is the science" and then close the book to let others do stuff :-)

----------


## UK_

> Ok you gotta be ****ing me right. The science was proven by Cole himself when he said without Acell Beard hairs 0&#37; yield and with Acell 92% yield.
> 
> Dr Bernstein is a sceptical and realistic person, so if there would be no plausible science well i doubt he would actually put efford in this.
> 
> Also you should really stop to refer to an really old one time argument by one doc while others do experiments.
> 
> You know, if this wouldnt work or if there wouldnt be potential i highly doubt that anyone would ever use this.
> 
> But i stop here before it gets out of hand again. The discussion is not pointless your same old stories are, especially with your story, february registered and all you do is jumping on Acell etc. Odd at best.
> ...


 We shall see  :Big Grin: .

The key word in that quotation you sprawled across your post is "anecdotal", anecdotal means a short account of an incidence, reason I say that is because many doctors have already adopted the use of Acell/PRP and even months later we're still stuck with the "anecdotal evidence" lol.  

There is anecdotal evidence for a number of things, saw plametto, the hair max laser comb yadda yadda yadda, but what makes a procedure significant in my books is one that provides the KEY scientific data, that means a controlled analysis into safety and efficacy.  How do you know that PRP/Acell is safe for use in the _scalp_?  How do you know if it is effective?  Because it worked on a few patients in 2008 at growing a dozen fine whiskers in the crown?  LOL you cannot under any circumstance judge the 'ultimate' efficacy of a treatment in any way shape or form on mere anecdotal evidence, YOU NEED SCIENCE - so once again, for the 10th time:  SHOW ME THE SCIENCE.  Regarding safety:  I dont recall it being FDA cleared for hair restoration mate  :Wink:   Another aspect of importance is whether the treatment is more _effective_ (by that I mean a number of variables) than current treatments, i.e. Propecia, Minoxidil, FUE etc etc, otherwise it is as good as the laser comb in your garage gathering dust.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Regarding Minox and Fin you should pay attention to this ncbhi site there are fine examples of WHAT those two miracle drugs can actually do.

The question " Where is the science" is irrelevand, just irrelevant. Those anecdotal experiences, well name me the doctors?

Cause 92% vs 0% from your praised Dr Cole, seem to me more then just anecdotal.

You dont get the point with your Internet Chat World of Warcraft Meme talk.

When hairs are cut in pieces they normally dont grow but with Acell they do, so what is anecdotal about this. 

But just name me the doctors who are still trapped with "anecdotal" stuff. Yes say the name, do you mean Dr Cole?

How i know this? Well just look at Dr Coles forum there you see it.

Seriously i hate people who use LOL that often, are you 13 or what? So what science do you want? The science from 8 years ago where people described this? Or do you wanna read Gho papers where he also described that stuff.

If you would understand how an ECM works and what the characteristics of hair are, you wouldnt ask for "Science" you would ask for docs to move on faster.

Great you compare Minox, Fin and FUE and a laser comb. What is it again ahh yes apples and oranges.

Minox is a toppic
Fin a pill
FUE a hairtransplant
Laser comb some stupid stuff from whateveritcamefrom

Acell in its combination is regenerative medicine those are different things.

And i have to agree with one poster, why hasnt Dr Cole chime in about 10 days before? I mean he started the whole thing with his "Where is the science"

----------


## Bakez

Jesus christ



just shut up

----------


## UK_

> Regarding Minox and Fin you should pay attention to this ncbhi site there are fine examples of WHAT those two miracle drugs can actually do.


 Thats great!  But your new treatment must still beat the current FDA approved treatments for it to be economically viable :Cool: .




> The question " Where is the science" is irrelevand, just irrelevant. Those anecdotal experiences, well name me the doctors?


 No it isnt, Dr Cole is asking for the science, he has every right to do so, and so do I as a potential consumer :Embarrassment: .




> Cause 92&#37; vs 0% from your praised Dr Cole, seem to me more then just anecdotal.


 So did Dr Bernstein get it wrong? :Smile:  




> You dont get the point with your Internet Chat World of Warcraft Meme talk.
> 
> When hairs are cut in pieces they normally dont grow but with Acell they do, so what is anecdotal about this. .


 Is there any evidence to suggest a 75% success rate regarding plucked hairs?  If there is, please post it here.




> Seriously i hate people who use LOL that often, are you 13 or what? So what science do you want? The science from 8 years ago where people described this? Or do you wanna read Gho papers where he also described that stuff.


 I thought Dr Gho cured hair loss with unlimited donor 10 years ago? LOL  What happend to that?  Back then there were just as many over-excited individuals like yourself who got their hopes utterly dashed.

Let me ask you something, did Dr Gho provide any evidence/science for his _original_ studies?  Were any of them large/major controlled studies? NO.. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!  It was only when his process was scientifically scrutinised that the house of cards came crashing down, along with the hoards of gleeming hopefuls like yourself :Big Grin: BAH!

History repeats itself sunshine :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): .

Which explains my entire reason for quoting Dr Cole:  SHOW ME THE SCIENCE.

----------


## wolvie1985

Dawkins, stop feeding UK opportunities to reply with 'show me the science'. 

We get it, UK. We get your position. Fine. Please move on from it, because now you're just hijacking this thread and this broken record stuff is no longer constructive.

Dr. Cooley is performing acell plucking on patients once or twice a week. He says he is seeing consistent results over the last two years that has him very excited. He has been in the field for 15 years. He is a doctor, a specialist in his field, and a preeminent and trustworthy one at that. His IHRS presentation, if you've seen it, shows that there is a phenomenon that warrants further investigation. Fine, up until now you can characterize the evidence ass nothing more than anecdotal and insufficient to proclaim mission accomplished. Fine. It's not 'science' yet. But he and others are working towards the 'science' you want and there's reason to be optimistic. Fine, it's not a slam dunk. So just stop. You're starting to look like a shill for Dr. Cole, or nothing more than a troll. So move on from your point please.

Dawkins, do not engage this guy any further, for Christ's sake. Move on. You're not going to convince him. None of us will. Don't give him the satisfaction of debating this guy any longer.

----------


## UK_

> Dawkins, stop feeding UK opportunities to reply with 'show me the science'. 
> 
> We get it, UK. We get your position. Fine. Please move on from it, because now you're just hijacking this thread and this broken record stuff is no longer constructive.
> 
> Dr. Cooley is performing acell plucking on patients once or twice a week. He says he is seeing consistent results over the last two years that has him very excited. He has been in the field for 15 years. He is a doctor, a specialist in his field, and a preeminent and trustworthy one at that. His IHRS presentation, if you've seen it, shows that there is a phenomenon that warrants further investigation. Fine, up until now you can characterize the evidence ass nothing more than anecdotal and insufficient to proclaim mission accomplished. Fine. It's not 'science' yet. But he and others are working towards the 'science' you want and there's reason to be optimistic. Fine, it's not a slam dunk. So just stop. You're starting to look like a shill for Dr. Cole, or nothing more than a troll. So move on from your point please.
> 
> Dawkins, do not engage this guy any further, for Christ's sake. Move on. You're not going to convince him. None of us will. Don't give him the satisfaction of debating this guy any longer.


 I look forward to Bernsteins study and hope Richard, you were right about everything.

Looks like he's covering the whole shabang aswel; PRP, Plucking, Acell+PRP Injected n' their uses in transplants also.

----------


## KeepTheHair

Thanks for making this thread unreadable.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Only one thing

Bakez F*** YOU you are stupid. If i would be 23 years old and suffer hairloss i wouldnt play Mister Big Shot here and discredit Dr Hitzig at Hairsite and here.

So instead of using an overdone Facepalm picture you are not able to argue and tell us WHY Acell failed? When Dr Cole as Mister "Shoe me the bla bla" got a 92% yield with and 0% without Acell.

Answer the people here in a mature way or just leave this place and even hairsite forever because you contribute nothing, no links no nothing, all you do is leech and destroy.

Thats it no more to say to those two trolls anymore

----------


## SilverSurfer

Is this UK the same clown that a few weeeks ago was pushing for the Trx2 product claiming it would do miracles and is now here bashing at this ACell thread? 
C'mmon UK you clearly have some sort of agenda. Why don't you stop with all the drama and let the reasearchers, Doctors and others really interested in this topic fill us in. In the meantime you can still go and do your cheerleading for the Trx2. What do you say champ? :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## UK_

> Is this UK the same clown that a few weeeks ago was pushing for the Trx2 product claiming it would do miracles and is now here bashing at this ACell thread? 
> C'mmon UK you clearly have some sort of agenda. Why don't you stop with all the drama and let the reasearchers, Doctors and others really interested in this topic fill us in. In the meantime you can still go and do your cheerleading for the Trx2. What do you say champ?


 What on earth are you blabbing on about?  Since when was I "pushing for TRX2"?  Go, run along and find me a post in which I directly stated that there is scientific evidence for the efficacy of TRX2.

Hurry up, you made the claim, you find my quote :Big Grin: .

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ahh before it goes down i just wanted to show you guys the question about plucked hairs from the root, some people here still believe that they are gone *cough* *cugh*

http://www.baldingblog.com/2011/03/0...t-by-the-root/

----------


## UK_

> Ahh before it goes down i just wanted to show you guys the question about plucked hairs from the root, some people here still believe that they are gone *cough* *cugh*
> 
> http://www.baldingblog.com/2011/03/0...t-by-the-root/


 Cool, plucked hairs grow back, so baldness is cured right?.. what are we all still doing here? lol.

----------


## HairTalk

I doubt this will nail the coffin of insipid back-and-forth that's been going on, but I thought I should mention:

ACell used in hair-transplantion surgery currently (March, 2011) is being studied by a few doctors (e.g., Cooley, Bernstein)  I've gathered this from calling the clinics. Tests are to involve use of the compound in fully-bald men, and would involve observation of donor and recipient areas (not necessarily in the same subject). Definitive results should be available in early 2013 (patients would be operated on through early 2011; progress would be monitored over twelve months; results would be analyzed, organized, then shared). These results should provide quantitative and qualitative data.

Until that point, then, anyone not immediately involved in this research would have no strong claim to the efficacy  or to the lack thereof  of the compound in relation to hair-transplantation.

----------


## RichardDawkins

At hair site Doctor Hitzig answered some questions really honest, i was impressed.

Especially considering the amount of beard hair (only 35)

----------


## tk72

Who would you guys recommend for hair transplant repair and why?  I had 700 grafts done about 15 years ago when I was 23 and would like to have them removed along with pitting and scar.  I just want to be able to shave my head until they get kinks workout with acell, histogen, follica or whatever.  Also any doctors opinions would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks.

----------


## SilverSurfer

I am a repair patient. Dr Cole did my work and I must say it is great. By the third month I could already see an improvement and by the 8 month mark you couldn't see any signs of the mess that was there before. I would definitely recommend him. I  would recommend him to you because he will be as straight forward as possible, you will get great yield with fewer grafts and most important his work is totally natural and undetectable.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Of course Bro of course. You plucked her hairs out 15 years ago and they didnt grew back.

Strange that some people who pluck their hairs out almost every month (because this mental illness or whatever) will grow it backif they stop it.

Ahhh now i see, First time poster registered April 2011 right. And let me guess it seems to happen that you got the exactly right adress, which beauty salon we should Ask RIGHT

----------


## plopp

lol, rich, you're seriously starting to freak me out. do you even have mpb?

As for nemo's point, the claim that hairs would grow back ever weaker is unsubstantiated. There are also 'internet theories' that they grow back thicker (especially if you don't want them in the first place...)

However, scarring alopecia is a real thing. Given that you actually pulled of a complete patch of hair from your neighbour in one go, you must have applied quite some force. Further, given that 7 year olds 1) are prone to fibrosis given their young age and 2) likely have quite weak follicular structures still, you may very well have induced permanent hair loss.

As Dr Cole (TS) stated, regeneration of the follicle is no sure-fire thing (especially not when it comes to Gho, but let's not get there rich  :Wink: ), and is really the last hurdle before I jump on the plane and get some autoplucking done

----------


## t-bone

i have been getting prp therapy for a year and just had my first acell treatment with prp.It has only been a week so will post before and after in 3 months.I go to dr.de yarmann in Lajolla Ca.

----------


## HairTalk

> i have been getting prp therapy for a year and just had my first acell treatment with prp.It has only been a week so will post before and after in 3 months.I go to dr.de yarmann in Lajolla Ca.


 Were the ACell injections just straight into the scalp, or were they used to aid transplantation?

----------


## Havok

> I agree with you completely.  Hair grows back after plucking.  I have no special, secret, magical plucking technique.  I got better at plucking hairs with adequate epithelial cells attached to the shaft.  No one has seen any thinning or lack of regrowth in the areas I've plucked.  Nor would I expect them to, because I am not extracting complete follicles.  
> 
> I've attached a photo of two single hair grafts from the same patient.  The one on the right is plucked, and the one on the left is dissected from a strip.  Both are single hairs from the same patient, so we're making a valid comparison.  I chose the meatiest pluck I could get for this example.  It even has the dermal papilla attached, which is quite rare for plucks.  The difference is that the intact follicle on the left has the dermal sheath, which is quite apparent when you compare the width of these grafts.  Also attached is a histologic stain of a plucked graft.....there is no dermal sheath on it.  Hair will regrow at the plucking site because mesenchymal stem cells in the dermal sheath will regenerate a papilla, and epithelial stem cells in the isthmus will interact with this papilla to form a new hair fiber.  Fifty years of basic hair research support this statement.  
> 
> Someone on this Forum mentioned how frustratingly slow hair growth studies can be, and I echo this.  I am accumulating more clinical experience with this technique, and time will tell what role it will play.  There are many very good questions and it will unfortunately take time to answer them.  Later this year, I will provide an update on my results.  In the meantime, I recommend patients seek out standard medical treatments and if they are a candidate, do FUT or FUE.  
> 
> Dr Cooley


 so is dr cole confused? how can his plucked hair be different than dr cooley's plucked hair? either way this seems incredibly promising and i would gladly wait few years if it actually works.

----------


## t-bone

yes the acell and prp were directly into scalp.I hear Dr.De Yarmann soaks grafts in acell when doing transplants as well.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

There are different results from plucking hair.  if you pluck an intact follicle or a nearly intact follicle, you are not going to get regrowth in the donor area.  As such, I continue to disagree with the those who feel that nearly intact follicles will result in regrowth of hair.  

A little bit of mesenchymal tissue is not enough to feel confident that a hair will regrow in the donor area.  

i do agree that patients should not depend on this "plucking" technology and focus on more traditional methods of restoring their hair at this time.  


If we suggest that we have a new FDA approved product that may be combined with plucked hairs and produce two hairs from a single hair, we may expect a euphoric response from both patients and physicians.  When we have not demonstrated the capacity to duplicate hair, however, we should be careful to avoid the implication that we have discovered a means to clone hair.  Im not suggesting that Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig will not produce subsequent evidence, however.   In the interim, we should exercise greater caution.  


I suggest we stick to evidence based medicine that depends on the following: hypothesis, methods, and results, followed by conclusions based on the results.  We should create an objective study to evaluate the potential for duplication of plucked hair grafts.  How can we do this?  It will not be easy and it may be nearly impossible to prove.  There are many obstacles in the way to obtaining useful data.  The greatest challenge will be to differentiate which of the more than 20,000 to 30,0000 follicles in a donor area might be the original plucked follicle. Finding a needle in a haystack might be easier simply because the needle looks different than the hay.  

A theory that predicts everything predicts nothing.   There are infinite probabilities from plucking hairs so there are infinite potential outcomes.  Dr. Cooley has stated that sometimes he plucks an intact follicle, but other times he plucks a nearly intact follicle.  When an intact follicle is plucked, we can anticipate very little regrowth in the donor as my hair plucking efforts with FUE have demonstrated.  When we pluck a nearly intact follicle, the total amount of residual tissue remaining in the donor area has infinite uncontrollable outcomes such that regrowth is unpredictable.  In fact, Dr. Cooley has provided insight that nearly intact follicles from the beard and scalp may have a higher yield when treated with Acell.  How much tissue remains in the donor area?  Is there only outer root sheath and follicular sheath, or is there some inner root sheath and dermal papilla that remains?  Does the amount of tissue and embryological origin have any affect on regrowth?  Take for example Figure 1.  The upper follicle is an intact follicle.  The lower follicle is a plucked nearly intact follicle that lacks only a tiny fraction of the outer root sheath and dermal papilla.   The residual fraction in the donor area is estimated by the orange.  Suppose that only this tiny amount of tissue represented by the orange color remains in the donor area.  What is the probability that his tiny fraction can produce a follicle that is an exact duplication of the original follicle especially without Acell treatment?  We do know from transection studies that we often leave far more tissue in the donor area than is depicted by this orange fill, but we do not get 100% regrowth of transected follicles.  When we leave 50% of the intact follicle in the donor area, we can expect no more than 50% of them to grow.  With so little tissue remaining in the donor area following plucking, how can we imply that we are duplicating hair follicles?

----------


## RichardDawkins

Simple answer :

1) A plucked hair is plucked from its sourroundings (stem cells and everything else for regeneration is still there)

2) FUE : Well here you stance out the WHOLE follicle as an Organ and also you cut out the sourroundings of the follicle as well

So there is obviously a difference. In the first case you didnt detroy or take away the ability for regenerating a new follicle or to be more prcise to create new dead material (a visible hair). Its the same as what women do in general when they agressively wax their bikini zone or legs or whatever. The hair always comes back. The whole area where a follicle lives is filled with stem cells and the factors for regeneration. If you take away something from this it will regenerate as simple as that. Think of it as a family who lives in a house, where you take away a family member each time. The house can still be filled with people etc

In the second case : You took away everything. Its like you would take away the whole house here and not its residents. So therefore the house is gone and also the ability to fill this house with people again.

Also your statement doesnt make sense to me. If it would be like you said, how would it even possible for eye brows to grow again? I tweeze them very often and there is a huge amount of white tissue sourrounding it. How do you explain that.

And then on the other hand you demand for a study? So why would you perform a study if you personally believe that plucked hairs dont grow? If you want docs to help you with this, then just ask them directly, i am sure they will gladly help you with the protocol etc.

As some of them already said, they plucked a whole area and tattoed it and all the hair did grow back, i really dont know why you keep on argumenting about "If plcuked hairs do grow or not"? All people here male or female KNEW for good that plucked hairs grow because they almost do pluck hairs on a weekly routine.

No there are not infinite outcomes of plucked hairs there are only a few

1) Donor regeneration Yes or No
2) Successful transplant in Recipient site Yes or No

There is nothing in between which should interest people. Only because we cant explain why certain things work, it doesnt make them automatical "Not working"

I Repeat FUE is not hair plucking. With Fue you extract the whole organ, and then its clear that nothing will ever grow there again. Plucking is just tweeze em out and thats it, but its not about extracting a WHOLE ORGAN.

The tissue left in the donor side has its genetic SOP Modus, its called Survival and regeneration. I would say it otherwise, the Doc out there who is capable of stopping stem cells to regenerate follicles, should be considered for a nobel price because he had suppressed regenerative abilities, which at this point in time is IMPOSSIBLE. No one can stop cells from regenerating only by plucking hair. Nature had this already in mind that sometimes hars will be plucked, so its clearly obvious that they will gow back.

Another example, if you would lose your nail (it has some characteristics like hair) why does the nail grow back after some time? If you get scared, why do the wounds heal amost scarless in minor injuries. How can the liver regenerat itself?

If it would be like you said, i think we all should just shoot ourselfes because then our body wouldnt be capable of regenerating anything and therefore the whole mankind would be dead within the next 4 months.

Also you are only making assumptions because you ask us how far the chances are that small tissue remakrs can form a new follicle.

Ok then here is another one "How far are the chances of a small clump of cells to form " A Human"? Dont answer this, it was a rhetorical question.

I am really diasgreeing with you and also get a little bit angry at this point, not because i desperately want plucking to work (almost anyone knows that it works) but more of this really sheer ignorance here and not listening to hairloss sufferers.

Acell is no magic here, its just increasing or accelerating mother natures healing abilities and thats it no hocus pocus no nothing. And to give you another example.

You yourself put your Grafts into a storage solution. Why do you do this? Correct to increase the odds of survival for the time out of the body. So and Acell when brought to the plucked sites is just working as an in vivo Cell Matrix or Accelerator thats all.

And btw a lot of users here were willing to help you with this, like plucked hairs and Acell tests and also CIT Multiplication test, they send you emails etc but you never answered them, so if you really want to have a study going on then you should listen to what those people have to say and what they send you in emails.

----------


## plopp

> There are different results from plucking hair.  if you pluck an intact follicle or a nearly intact follicle, you are not going to get regrowth in the donor area.  As such, I continue to disagree with the those who feel that nearly intact follicles will result in regrowth of hair.  
> 
> A little bit of mesenchymal tissue is not enough to feel confident that a hair will regrow in the donor area.  
> 
> i do agree that patients should not depend on this "plucking" technology and focus on more traditional methods of restoring their hair at this time.  
> 
> 
> If we suggest that we have a new FDA approved product that may be combined with plucked hairs and produce two hairs from a single hair, we may expect a euphoric response from both patients and physicians.  When we have not demonstrated the capacity to duplicate hair, however, we should be careful to avoid the implication that we have discovered a means to clone hair.  I’m not suggesting that Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig will not produce subsequent evidence, however.   In the interim, we should exercise greater caution.  
> 
> ...


 Hi Dr. Cole,

I have a great respect for your expertise in hair restoration and really do appreciate your input on Acell and its possible applications in this field.

I think it's best to take a cautios approach to any new, not fully tested, discovery in medicine. However, I think your comparison is unfair. You obviously has far more expertise in this field than I do, so maybe it's stupid of me saying this, but surely there is a demal papilla attached to the lower follicle? Does it really come from a plucked hair, or am I seeing things wrong? The picture you provided here, gives a whole other story of a plucked vs a dissected follicle: http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/attachm...1&d=1296839761

I think the key is not how much that is left of the follicle, but rather how much of it that is removed. As long as even a small amount of the dermal sheath is left intact, additional MSCs will migrate to the area of wounding. Since the environment provided by what's left of the follicle is left unchanged, the follicle will be regenerated. However, if too much of the follicle is removed, there is the possibility of triggering a response of fibrosis and subsequently scar the follicle.

----------


## KeepHoping

Any news on seeing regrowth from your CIT procedure with the implementation of acell Dr. Cole?

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Anyone can get as upset about this all they want, but it is not going to change the facts.  

Let me quote Dr. Cooley from 2006.  

"March/April 2006, Volume 16, Number 2, p. 39 Co-Editor's Message Jerry E. Cooley, MD

I was born and raised in Missouri, the "Show Me State." The origins of this nickname are obscure but the most common explanation is that it was coined, or at least popularized, in 1899 by a U.S. Congressman from Missouri named Willard Duncan Vandiver. Vandiver, a scholar, writer, and lecturer was speaking at a meeting in Philadelphia and was questioning the accuracy of an earlier speaker's remarks. Vandiver declared, "I come from a state that raises corn and cotton and ****leburs and frothy eloquence neither convinces nor satisfies me. I am from Missouri. You have got to show me." Missourians were known as nononsense country folk who demanded proof before accepting something as true.

The "show me" attitude is not necessarily rude or confrontational. In our professional lives, we are frequently presented with claims about new techniques and the results certain surgeons are able to achieve. There is absolutely nothing wrong, and in fact it is our duty, to politely request proof for such claims. Some, however, seem confused about the distinction between "tell me" and "show me." Telling others about your new technique is the first step, but this should be followed by presenting credible evidence.

When Dr. Gary Hitzig began claiming several years ago that he was "auto-cloning" beard hairs, I was naturally skeptical. So I flew up to New York and asked him to "show me." With a flick of his wrist, he plucked a bunch of beard whiskers from a patient using his special needle holder. When I looked at his grafts under the microscope, I was surprised to see that many (not all) were in fact intact hair follicles! I had truly been shown, and there was no doubt in my mind that intact beard follicles could be plucked and transplanted to the scalp where they would grow. Textbooks typically describe plucked scalp hair as having only some adherent epithelial cells from the outer root sheath. To my knowledge, there has never been reports of being able to pluck intact follicles. Time to revise the textbooks!

The concept of donor dominance has been a well-accepted principle in our specialty for 50 years. Along comes Dr. Tommy Hwang who claimed that the recipient site had an important influence on grafted hair. His initial results were published in a peer-reviewed medical journal, and in this issue he shares his long-term results. He provides compelling proof that the recipient site determines graft survival and subsequent growth rate while hair caliber remains similar to hair from the donor site. In my mind, he has convinced me that our new understanding should be of "donor dominance/recipient site influence." Now we need research to understand exactly how the recipient site affects graft survival and growth rate. Is it merely a function of blood flow? Some of those doing body hair transplants have claimed that chest hair grafted to the scalp will grow longer like scalp hair, but we need more convincing evidence of this. It would certainly add more support to this emerging concept.
Jerry Cooley, MD"

Now the fact that he is describing this whole situation differently 3 to 4 years later does not change the facts.  A standard plucked hair contains very little tissue as Dr. Cooley noted back in 2006.  it will grow back.  What Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig are doing today is plucking mostly intact follicles or intact follicles (the WHOLE ORGAN as you put it).  

If they apply acell to the plucked area, they might see more regrowth.  i still don't know how you study it because there is no way to determine if the hair you plucked is the same follicle that grows on the top and the donor area because all follicles look the same.  With body hair, you can totally remove an area through FUE and then go back 6 months later and it is full of hair.  it is thinner, but there is plenty of hair.   The reason is that there are many hair in the exogen phase on the body.

I've seen up to 54% regrowth in my FUE extraction sites by putting Acell in them.  Yes, I am essentially plucking intact follicles and i'm getting regrowth.  This is why i suggest that Dr. C and Dr. H apply acell to their donor area where they pluck hair.  I still want to know what the yield is with these plucked hairs and what the hair diameters are.  If the yield of plucked hair is lower than with transplantation, then i would say in general that plucking is not an efficient means of restoring one's hair.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Dr. Cole,
Very interesting posts. Just one question, when you say you have seen up to 54% regrowth it means not all of your patients have had these results. What would you say is the average amount of regrowth on patients treated with ACell in their donnor areas? Also, are you expecting these numbers to go up anytime soon?

----------


## HairTalk

> A standard plucked hair contains very little tissue as Dr. Cooley noted back in 2006.  it will grow back.  *What Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig are doing today is plucking mostly intact follicles or intact follicles (the WHOLE ORGAN as you put it)*.


 But, Dr. Cole, by Dr. Cooley's own account (found on page #30 of this thread):




> I agree with [wolvie1985] completely.  Hair grows back after plucking.  *I have no special, secret, magical plucking technique.  I got better at plucking hairs with adequate epithelial cells attached to the shaft.*  No one has seen any thinning or lack of regrowth in the areas I've plucked.  Nor would I expect them to, because *I am not extracting complete follicles.* 
> [...]
> 
> Dr Cooley

----------


## KeepHoping

Dr. Cole,

I'm a 23 year old, and I've asked you before but I'd love to try again, I'm diffusely thinning in what seems to be a NW5 progression with the persistance of a frontal hairline at around a NW2, hasn't receded too much fortunately.  I know grafting into hair would be risky but would you be willing to try and rebuild my temples and strengthen the hairline which would take the risk of shock loss out, use your CIT method with Acell and I'd be willing to take hair tattoos on my donor and have it rechecked for regrowth by you and your technicians at a later designated date.  Would this be something you would be willing to try out?

Also, 54% regrowth is pretty good, do you have any ideas on how you could get get a higher rate of regrowth at this point?

----------


## Havok

is there any other hair restoration doctor who can confirm whether dr. cooley's plucked hair is in fact mostly intact hair follicle? so if i pull my hair out with my bare hand and examine it under a microscope, i wouldn't see that translucent bulb around the root of the hair? i become depressed every time dr.cole makes his case.

----------


## CVAZBAR

I had no idea what CIT was and I did some research but I'm still confused. What's the difference with CIT from FUE? And if CIT doesn't leave visible scars, why doesn't every doctor do this? Can someone inform me more on this. I'm really considering a HT but the scar has me thinking twice. How are the results and yield from CIT?

----------


## SilverSurfer

Dr Cole,

I agree with KeepHoping's question, any idea on how to make that 54% to increase?

----------


## HairTalk

> I had no idea what CIT was and I did some research but I'm still confused. What's the difference with CIT from FUE? And if CIT doesn't leave visible scars, why doesn't every doctor do this? Can someone inform me more on this. I'm really considering a HT but the scar has me thinking twice. How are the results and yield from CIT?


 As far as I can tell, "C.I.T." is just a marketing-gimmick: a proprietary title for the standard F.U.E. technique used by many surgeons, which can make it sound like something unique in the field and thus worth paying more for.

----------


## Havok

> As far as I can tell, "C.I.T." is just a marketing-gimmick: a proprietary title for the standard F.U.E. technique used by many surgeons, which can make it sound like something unique in the field and thus worth paying more for.


 lol i don't think most people know what FUE means anyway. if they do then they probably know there's very little difference between the two. regardless, i doubt people seek out dr. cole because of the way he named his method.

----------


## HairTalk

> lol i don't think most people know what FUE means anyway. if they do then they probably know there's very little difference between the two. regardless, i doubt people seek out dr. cole because of the way he named his method.


 While "most people" almost certainly do _not_ know what "F.U.E." is, I'd wager the vast majority of persons seriously contemplating undergoing a hair transplant are precisely aware of the technique, as well as of that of strip-harvesting. Sorry, but Dr. Cole's marketing of "C.I.T." really just seems geared at differentiating the procedure from F.U.E., when, in fact (as far as I can tell), "C.I.T." IS what just about every other doctor in the field calls "F.U.E."

----------


## CVAZBAR

That's exactly what I was thinking. It basically seems to be the same as FUE, but why the name change? I would like Dr Cole to explain the difference, if any.

----------


## Havok

> That's exactly what I was thinking. It basically seems to be the same as FUE, but why the name change? I would like Dr Cole to explain the difference, if any.


 somehow the tone of your posts suggest you already know the answer to that question. not sure what the big fuss is about. it's just what he prefers to call his procedure. let him call it however the hell it deems fit.

i'm more curious about what he's going to name the 'auto-cloning' procedure if it actually works haha.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> somehow the tone of your posts suggest you already know the answer to that question. not sure what the big fuss is about. it's just what he prefers to call his procedure. let him call it however the hell it deems fit.
> 
> i'm more curious about what he's going to name the 'auto-cloning' procedure if it actually works haha.


 What fuss? It was a simple question. KeepHoping asked Dr Cole if he was willing to do a HT with his CIT method on him, so I figured I ask what that is. Why are you so defensive? Is he your daddy haha?

----------


## SilverSurfer

cvazbar,

The stupidity and irony in your question shines through. Why don't you read more, learn some more and then participate in these forums. Otherwise, bug off. Don't waste Dr Cole's and the rest of the forum's valuable time when he can be answering good questions.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Wait.........are we all right now serious. Dr Cole did actually back up Dr Ghos claims and no one makes a fuss about it. Ähem 54% regrowth with only injecting Acell. This is let me say it

AWESOME

And its as i said, Dr Cole has a very significant advantage with his low invasive ans small CIT but i doubt he cares when guys here tell him that.

Lets assume someone has 4000 Grafts left. He then gets 54% no make if easier 50% regrowth, this means he has 2000 again.

This will make 4000 extracted plus another 2000 to extract.

Those 2000 will regenerate lets say 1000

This makes 7000 Grafts : 4000 plus 2000 plus 1000.

Then you have additonaly 500 or so......ahem why is nobody happy?

Make your math with incresing this number to lets say 70 or 80% with 4000 Grafts or so.

Come on Dr Cole this is just amazing dont play it down, work with people to increase the number and i think you will get a very workload of patients come by :-)

----------


## CVAZBAR

> cvazbar,
> 
> The stupidity and irony in your question shines through. Why don't you read more, learn some more and then participate in these forums. Otherwise, bug off. Don't waste Dr Cole's and the rest of the forum's valuable time when he can be answering good questions.


 How am I wasting Dr Cole's time, if this is his method? Maybe I would like to go to him you ****ing idiot. Didn't your mom ever teach you to mind your own business and respect others? Why don't you stop being a bitch and just worry about yourself. If you care so much about Dr Cole's time, why don't you stop posting for attention. Speaking of idiots.

----------


## SilverSurfer

You have a problem, a big one and I am not talking about your bad set of hair. If you participate in these forums just to create controversy and piss others off, you shouldn't. Try talking to a psychologist or even a psychiatrist since  you need help and surely medication. Maybe you are on meds but quitted, get back on them, my honest advice.

----------


## SilverSurfer

In the meantime stop wasting the forum"s time and space and get off these boards.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> In the meantime stop wasting the forum"s time and space and get off these boards.


 Like I said, mind your business. Its obvious you crave attention. Don't they give you enough at home? People come to these forums for help you stupid selfish bitch. It's not all about you. It's real easy to act brave and insult people behind a computer huh? You're a clown. If Dr. Cole wants to reply to anyone here, he will. If he can't, it's ok also. Stop acting like you own the forum. If you care so much, do the same and stop wasting the forums time with your whining.

----------


## CVAZBAR

I apologize to the forum for arguing with this girl but I can't stand cowards who love to insult people behind a computer screen. I won't tolerate that. I will respect you as long as you do the same. I apologize to everyone.

----------


## SilverSurfer

The attention slut here is you. You have been around long enough to know what CIT is. Don't play the victim and take responsabilty for you actions, what you have been doing is idiotic and stupid. Besides the one throwing insults behind a computer screen is you because I know if we were face to face you wouldn't dare to tell me those things. What is the point of saying all those bad words and then apologizing?? Says a lot about your character, have a little class and respect for the forum and find a way to argue in a grown up way. You are bald, so I know you are old enough to figure it out, unless you have mental problems which would make you crippled in a way and then I would understand.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> The attention slut here is you. You have been around long enough to know what CIT is. Don't play the victim and take responsabilty for you actions, what you have been doing is idiotic and stupid. Besides the one throwing insults behind a computer screen is you because I know if we were face to face you wouldn't dare to tell me those things. What is the point of saying all those bad words and then apologizing?? Says a lot about your character, have a little class and respect for the forum and find a way to argue in a grown up way. You are bald, so I know you are old enough to figure it out, unless you have mental problems which would make you crippled in a way and then I would understand.


 Still crying? I'm apologizing to the forum you dumb son of a bitch. Now get off my sac already. ****ing attention whore!

----------


## SilverSurfer

Like I said before, you have serious mental issues. This forums are not made for fighting. If you want to fight, send me your address and I will fly over there to break your face in half, are you living in lima by any chance? Because if you are, don't worry, I have a scheduled visit for you.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> Like I said before, you have serious mental issues. This forums are not made for fighting. If you want to fight, send me your address and I will fly over there to break your face in half, are you living in lima by any chance? Because if you are, don't worry, I have a scheduled visit for you.


 Sure, I'm in South Central, Los Angeles. Let me know when you are serious and you want to come down. Are you bringing more bitches or is it only you?

----------


## CVAZBAR

> Like I said before, you have serious mental issues. This forums are not made for fighting. If you want to fight, send me your address and I will fly over there to break your face in half, are you living in lima by any chance? Because if you are, don't worry, I have a scheduled visit for you.


 I have mental issues but you still can't seem to understand why this even started? You initiated this altercation. You insulted me first, so why don't you take your own advice and stop insulting people if you don't want the same treatment. Stop flipping this around trying to blame this on me. Try to be half a man at least and accept it.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Accept what you moron? It has been your fault all this time. I doubt you are in LA. Saw what happened on international news? Bad guys always get what they deserve. Soon you may be getting some too.

----------


## tbtadmin

We ask that all users of BTT forums act in a respectful and civil manner when posting their questions, concerns and opinions. This is a place to learn from each other, share ideas and information and to communicate with experts in the field. Please be respectful of this forum, its users and each other.

Thank you for your cooperation on this matter.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> Accept what you moron? It has been your fault all this time. I doubt you are in LA. Saw what happened on international news? Bad guys always get what they deserve. Soon you may be getting some too.


 You see what you did now? I think that message was for you. That's exactly what I've been saying. That's what this forum is for. So now I'm the bad guy haha? C'mon man, stop being a lame and stop acting hard. Your not fooling anyone man haha. So you still can't admit you insulted me first huh? I thought you would be man enough to admit that at least. You wouldn't come to LA regardless. I know you're all talk. How about we just end this already. I think tbtadmin just validated my argument. Let's show more respect from now on.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Ok just out of curiosity.

You guys are insulting and attacking each other, while Cole caims he got 54% donor regeneration? Well dont get me wrong but i think you guys have serious issues more then hair loss. Instead of hacking each other why not ask Cole if he can refine this procedure.

I mean if his CIT technique is in fact more advanced then your average FUE then its btw not a miracle to get regrowth in the donor area, because also Gho is using small extraction needles. Anyways if Cole can produce consistent results, then we have another one who can work on a solution.

So my question is also, if Dr Cole can increase this "number" and if he can explain how he measured this number

----------


## SilverSurfer

I never insulted you, I questioned your fake question aimed at making the forum lose time. If I did, I really don't care, you deserved it like you deserve many other things. No, the administrator was talking to both of us.

Going back to the 54%, yes Stevie, I am pretty exited. I have already asked Dr Cole how does he intend to raise this number but he hasn't yet answered. Good news all this 54% increase. Dr. Cole if you are reading this, please keep us informed on more news and updates about your procedure.

----------


## RichardDawkins

I know how he could improve the number but unfortunately he has to read Ghos paper. And as i said it before and before and before again "Cola had the advantage to create HM because of his CIT which he claims is smaller then average FUE etc"

And i am honest 54% is OK but it can be improved but its exactly what everyone thinks about Cole. People know he is a good surgeon but sometimes he just have to step a little bit out of the box (like he maybe did with his approach in hair multiplication or donor regrowth)

----------


## UK_

What is the CIT method?

----------


## SilverSurfer

> I know how he could improve the number but unfortunately he has to read Ghos paper. And as i said it before and before and before again "Cola had the advantage to create HM because of his CIT which he claims is smaller then average FUE etc"
> 
> And i am honest 54&#37; is OK but it can be improved but its exactly what everyone thinks about Cole. People know he is a good surgeon but sometimes he just have to step a little bit out of the box (like he maybe did with his approach in hair multiplication or donor regrowth)


 I think he is doing it all through the use of his punches and equipment and minimal depth extractions and the ACell. It would be good if he would fully develop this technique and take another route besides the one Gho is using, that way we have more options from which to choose.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> Ok just out of curiosity.
> 
> You guys are insulting and attacking each other, while Cole caims he got 54% donor regeneration? Well dont get me wrong but i think you guys have serious issues more then hair loss. Instead of hacking each other why not ask Cole if he can refine this procedure.
> 
> I mean if his CIT technique is in fact more advanced then your average FUE then its btw not a miracle to get regrowth in the donor area, because also Gho is using small extraction needles. Anyways if Cole can produce consistent results, then we have another one who can work on a solution.
> T
> So my question is also, if Dr Cole can increase this "number" and if he can explain how he measured this number


 Rich, this is what I was doing in the first place. I was trying to find out more about the procedure. The proof is here. Read my posts. You tell me who started this? Now you see that UK is also asking what CIT is. So what wrong with that? Some people just crave attention.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> I never insulted you, I questioned your fake question aimed at making the forum lose time. If I did, I really don't care, you deserved it like you deserve many other things. No, the administrator was talking to both of us.
> 
> Going back to the 54%, yes Stevie, I am pretty exited. I have already asked Dr Cole how does he intend to raise this number but he hasn't yet answered. Good news all this 54% increase. Dr. Cole if you are reading this, please keep us informed on more news and updates about your procedure.


 You questioned my fake question ha? Dude just give up already. The administrator validated my argument. Hopefully you learn what these forums are for from now on. Let's keep the peace and maybe I'll go surfing with you one day ha.

----------


## CVAZBAR

This is very good news and it seems that we are making progress. Hopefully Dr Cole can give us more info on this.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Look you a$$wipe, I have better things to do than to fight with a moron. The administrator was talking to both of us and from now on I will ignore you in this conversation, in real life it will be another story. Now, move along and if you want to keep asking stupid questions just for the attention, go ahead, the forum already knows what kind of clown you are and that you need attention because you are miserable and lonely in your real life and my guess is they will avoid you just like others were doing before I posted you my reply which 'offended' you. Get a life and stop trying to fill your emptiness in forums that are intended for help and information.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Huh, so know all of the sudden you know what CIT means and the progress that is being made? I thought you were clueless on what CIT was and that you 'needed' Dr Cole to explain it to you. WHy? Would that make you feel important? Don't worry little cvazbar, the world is not ignoring you even if you are a retard.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> Look you a$$wipe, I have better things to do than to fight with a moron. The administrator was talking to both of us and from now on I will ignore you in this conversation, in real life it will be another story. Now, move along and if you want to keep asking stupid questions just for the attention, go ahead, the forum already knows what kind of clown you are and that you need attention because you are miserable and lonely in your real life and my guess is they will avoid you just like others were doing before I posted you my reply which 'offended' you. Get a life and stop trying to fill your emptiness in forums that are intended for help and information.


 Blah blah blah.... You are just repeating what I been saying about you this whole time. You are describing yourself. I tried making peace with you but I guess the truth still hurts.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> Huh, so know all of the sudden you know what CIT means and the progress that is being made? I thought you were clueless on what CIT was and that you 'needed' Dr Cole to explain it to you. WHy? Would that make you feel important? Don't worry little cvazbar, the world is not ignoring you even if you are a retard.


 I still don't know how CIT is different. I was talking about Dr Cole's results son. That's the good news.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Go over the posts you little retard and see how others were pissed off with you way before I got into the conversation.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> Go over the posts you little retard and see how others were pissed off with you way before I got into the conversation.


 Nobody was really pissed off. Hey man, you are continuing to look like a child using words like "retard". It's obvious you don't have respect for anything. I understand that you are bitter due to your hair loss but you need to start thinking before you speak. I'm starting to believe that you need the medication. Someone needs to keep an eye on you because you suffer from uncontrollable rage. The loudest one is always the weakest. You know you're soft bro. Stop insulting people behind the screen. That doesn't make you a man. Weren't you going to ignore me?

----------


## SilverSurfer

You poor pathetic excuse of a man...Stop trying to turn things things around. It has been established it is you the one with mental problems, I felt bad for you at first but it was until further events developed I realized you use your handicap to gain others sympathy and attention. You are not getting away with it anymore. You know what I am talking about. About ignoring you, know that I know the piece of crap that you are and who you are, you are not getting away with it, someone had to stop you long time ago.

----------


## CVAZBAR

> Go over the posts you little retard and see how others were pissed off with you way before I got into the conversation.


 As a matter of fact, I will do everyone here the favor and I will be the one to ignore you before you grab a gun and end up going on a shooting spree.

----------


## UK_

Nothing wrong in asking a question take it easy guys...

well... Dr Cole's summary on the one hand looks demoralising and on the other very positive... 54%!  Nice one... lets just hope recipient remains above that percentage then the proof of concept is here!

Come on Aderans show us ye cards aswel  :Wink: 

 :Big Grin:

----------


## SilverSurfer

> As a matter of fact, I will do everyone here the favor and I will be the one to ignore you before you grab a gun and end up going on a shooting spree.


 At last you will shut up. Now the grown ups can keep discussing these important advances.

----------


## splitting hairs

Ok so first off I agree with dr cole that we need a study to show that plucked hair, as done by dr Cooley, grows back in the donor as you can't just assume that it does.

Secondly, Dr cole cannot say extracting grafts by FUE is essentially the same as plucking hairs with tweezers because it simply is not and anyone with any knowledge about hair restoration will tell you this.

I think he is right to be sceptical until we have data but without trialing this we will never have data. 

Personally I think the work he's done with donor regrowth and FUE is impressive and the more docs working on this the better it is. But I would still opt for plucking.

----------


## SilverSurfer

I agree with what you said. Hopefully the reports Cooley and Hitzig will issue some time this year include more facts and data in order to prove their work is legit and others pursue their path just like it happened with FUE and Dr Woods. I mean if the whole plucking story really works, I guess I have found the solution to my problem. We all have...it will only be a matter of time before more data becomes available and it becomes clear it is not the typical swithch and bait.

----------


## Havok

dr. cooley and others have been working on this for 2 and half years and we still don't know whether hair follicles will cycle normally? i mean yeah at first dr. cooley had low success rate but what about the few that survived? did they cycle normally? the wait is killing me.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

From what I've read I don't think we're anywhere near a time where we'll have infinite donor to work with but it does seem that with the use of Acell some donor regeneration is a real phenomenon.

If Dr. Cole is really getting up to 54% regeneration in the donor with acell then we've made a big step forward. If it's possible to reharvest these regenerated follicules then donor expansion is real and things are genuinely looking up.

Consider someone with an extensive balding pattern. Let's say up to 250cm2 to cover. They may have up to 20,000 FU that are DHT resistant. You could probably strip out at between 8,000-9,000 given multiple surgeries and add up to 1,000-1,500ish with FUE. I think 9,500 strip and fue for most would be on the limit. Even the 9,500 on an extensively bald head can look quite thin if the hair characteristics are unfavourable. Plus who really wants a smiley on the back of their head if they could avoid it.

However if this 54% regeneration figure is legitimate and these FU can be reharvested then FUE would be a far better method of hair restoration if we only consider the aesthetics of the end goal and not the cost along the way.

Now taking the 20,000 DHT resistant FU figure, if 8,000 were extracted (over multiple megasessions, maybe over 3 sessions and 6 months) and 4,320 were regenerated there would be 16,320 left in the donor area. Not bad. If later a further 5,000 were again extracted over a number of megassessions (Is 2500 possible in a day?), 2700 would supposedly regenerate. Crazy numbers, crazy time, crazy money but maybe it's possible.

That would result in 13,000 FU moved. Assuming a 90% yield that would be 11,700 growing. 14,020 would remain in the donor which originally had 20,000. This equates to a net extraction of 30% which I feel is a reasonable figure which will not give the appearance of donor thinning or that moth eaten look.

In a nutshell 13,000 FU is the limit to what I imagine could be achieved by FUE if this 54% regeneration figure plays out in practice and reharvesting can occur. I'd like to think that in 5-7 years time this could be potentially be possible but it's perhaps overly optimistic. I don't see Aderans or anyone cracking it until the end of the decade at the earliest. More like 2025 than 2015 for hair cloning if I had to guess.

However perhaps upon reharvesting the regenerated donor the regeneration figure drops. Who knows really. I've never heard of anyone who got more than London Lad, 11282FU (2 strips). Even he said he'd think about filling in a few spots when HM comes along and I'd guess he was only a norwood 5a pushing 6. I'd imagine the results he has achieved are unobtainable for 99% of us unless donor regeneration becomes a reality.

13,000 FU by FUE would be unreal. Wonder would that be around $130,000 dollars. We could see a load of bank heists in 2017. The suspect is bald... :Big Grin:  

Actually this all kind of sounds like Ray Kurzweil and the "law of accelerating returns". It won't happpen that fast. We got minox in what '88 and finasteride in '98 and dick all since. 2030 for the cloning/unlimited donor. :Frown:

----------


## Havok

there are a lot of men with mild to moderate hair loss. if this works then this is a  tremendous advancement and a way to buy more time until a real viable treatment comes along. also, that's only dr. cole's number.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

Yeah I know. If even 54% donor regeneration could be guaranteed then we're all laughing. I'm norwood 2 or 2.5ish but I know I'm headed towards extensive loss down the line. If 54% is legit we can all have 12,000 or more over a lifetime. I absolutely understand the whole buying time idea but I wouldn't take the plunge myself on that basis alone. 

If what Dr. Cole has done through his experience with Acell can be repeated on a consistent basis we will not have to worry about going extensively bald in the future. It could extend the FUE scalp donor from 5,000-6,000 to 11,000-13,000 and make strip redundant. Time will tell I guess. Fingers crossed in the mean time.

I wonder what figures Dr. Cole thinks are possible. My main concern is reharvesting regenerated donor; is the yield of transplanted regenerated donor less and does the regeneration rate of this regenerated donor fall below 54% to maybe 25-30%. It will be interesting to see what comes of all this.

----------


## UK_



----------


## HairTalk

Thanks for posting this video, UK_.

It seems we've not heard from Dr. Cooley, in some while, on this topic. I'd be interested to read how is experiments with ACell are coming along.

----------


## mkamph

here's some more work by hitzig.  the back looks thicker to me.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Interesting, lets see if the effect is permanent

----------


## splitting hairs

"vaccination for hairloss" that's a bold and unproven claim. It would years of using acell on thousands of patients and monitoring how their hairloss progresses. You can't make a claim like that after using acell for 2 years! Personally I don't trust dr Hitzig and I wouldnt be believing in Acell if it wasn't for Dr Cooley.

----------


## UK_

> "vaccination for hairloss" that's a bold and unproven claim. It would years of using acell on thousands of patients and monitoring how their hairloss progresses. You can't make a claim like that after using acell for 2 years! Personally I don't trust dr Hitzig and I wouldnt be believing in Acell if it wasn't for Dr Cooley.


 I believe he used to term 'flu vaccination', to imply that it may _help_ in _some cases_ to avoid or prevent further hair loss, kind of like an alternative to Propecia, I think he makes this on the basis of what he has seen with the use of Acell and PRP as an injectable, that it has stopped hair loss in some people for 12 - 16 months, I put emphasis on the word "some", but after 20 years of nothing, its good news.

Theres no way Acell or PRP in whatever format you wish to inject it however will grow hair in a completely NW7 scalp, taking NW7 to NW2/3 will be a job for gene therapy or HM.

----------


## maripgonzles

> here's some more work by hitzig.  the back looks thicker to me.


 Wow this looks promising. The back does appear thicker.

----------


## t-bone

Congratulations! Looks amazing! The acell helped me as well!

----------


## crowningglory

Interesting!! Fingers crossed that this effect is permanent. I'd love to see the long-term data (obviously) - as with other such treatments/procedure the disappointments only come in the long run...

----------


## RichardDawkins

Hope you guys know that this is after a transplant

----------


## mkamph

the front is after a transplant, but the back is just the injection of acell/prp i believe.

----------


## Dutch_Dude

> the front is after a transplant, but the back is just the injection of acell/prp i believe.


 the back as in the crown, or the donor?

----------


## mkamph

the crown.

----------


## Dutch_Dude

then it's impressive...so basically he regenerated hair by injecting stuff into his crown. nice. 

what i'm more concerned about is the bad results that hitzig shows on his website...

----------


## UK_

> then it's impressive...so basically he regenerated hair by injecting stuff into his crown. nice. 
> 
> what i'm more concerned about is the bad results that hitzig shows on his website...


 What bad results?  You got a link?

----------


## gillenator

> Thanks for posting this video, UK_.
> 
> It seems we've not heard from Dr. Cooley, in some while, on this topic. I'd be interested to read how is experiments with ACell are coming along.


 To date, Dr. Cooley undoubtedly is still observing and documenting the trial periods, meaning, it first takes many patients to participate in these trials in order to obtain enough clinical results from these substances to substantiate his findings and conclusions.  There will be more to come when he is ready to publish all in proper timing.

In simple terms, these things take time.

----------


## Dutch_Dude

> What bad results?  You got a link?


 Type in Dr. Hitzig and then you get to his clinic...most of the results are not very impressive if you compare them to others...

----------


## HairTalk

> To date, Dr. Cooley undoubtedly is still observing and documenting the trial periods, meaning, it first takes many patients to participate in these trials in order to obtain enough clinical results from these substances to substantiate his findings and conclusions.  There will be more to come when he is ready to publish all in proper timing.
> 
> In simple terms, these things take time.


 Just curious about your signature, Gillenator: what is your association with the mentioned doctors (i.e., Drs. Charles, Cooley, Harris, True, and Dorin)?

----------


## gillenator

They simply support what I do as an independent hairloss advocate in helping patients world-wide resolve their hairloss dilemmas.  In other words, they endorse me but I am not employed by any of them.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

Dr. Cooley is now dipping follicles in Acell as part of the standard FUT.

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=5356

I had wondered if doing so might increase the likelihood of the transplanted grafts taking straight away and not going into the usual shed and hibernation period. Dr. Cooley informed me that unfortunately this is not the case and that the rare occurence of the hair not shedding after HT is the same as before.

Thought this might be useful information for the thread.

----------


## gillenator

> Dr. Cooley is now dipping follicles in Acell as part of the standard FUT.
> 
> http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=5356
> 
> I had wondered if doing so might increase the likelihood of the transplanted grafts taking straight away and not going into the usual shed and hibernation period. Dr. Cooley informed me that unfortunately this is not the case and that the rare occurence of the hair not shedding after HT is the same as before.
> 
> Thought this might be useful information for the thread.


 FDR, good info to know.  A few additional thoughts.  My premonition is that Acell will increase overall yield which IMHO, is very important.  And since we all have limited donor reserves, every effort to promote "graft survival" by minimizing the effects of ischemia reperfusion is worthwhile to the patient.  Free radicals are not good for grafts once they leave their natural environment.

I am also interested in observing any long term positive effects in minimizing shockloss as well.  In other words, "Can Acell also help reduce the level of trauma in the surrounding tissue in the recipient area?"  

What do you guys think?

----------


## gillenator

Anyone feel that Acell has improved their overall yield?  It may still be too early in use.  Time will tell.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

There is no question that Acell will benefit transplanted grafts.  We encourage all patients to apply Acell fine particle to all the grafts and to have a low concentration of Acell injected into the recipient area.  Hair transplant yields can vary based on a number of factors.  One is the transection during graft harvesting and preparation.  Another is trauma during graft implantation.  Another is the storage solutions and temperature that grafts are stored in prior to implantation.  

Graft transection is far more common than anyone will admit to in my experience.  While visiting a clinic recently, i found that they were trimming off their transected hairs and implanting grafts without the transected hairs.  In the absence of Acell, these transected hairs might have a 30 to 50% chance of survival, but not in the trash can.  I encouraged them to stop trimming of the transected hair follicles and to also add acell to their grafts in an effort to stimulate growth of the damaged hair follicles.  

Even without transection, follicles are traumatized.  Most physicians still use normal saline to place their grafts in prior to transplantation.  Why?  Because it is cheap and many others use it.  What is the problem with normal saline?  First, the ph drops over time because there are no buffers and the water reacts with CO2.  Second, when you chill normal saline, the cell membrane is paralyzed and can no longer pump water.  Because the osmotic gradient is into the cell, the cell swells and then potentially bursts.  Not a good thing for cells or graft survival.  The way around this problem is to chill your tissue in hypothermosol.  What's the problem with that?   It costs over 200.00 USD per liter compared to under 10.00 USD per liter.  How many physicians are willing to pay the extra price?  Not many based on my expereince.  Thus, Acell might even make up for the inherent cheapness associated with doing surgery.  

In my opinion, you use chilling, a good cold storage solution, and Acell to maximize the growth potential of your grafts.  that's the solution given todays current optimal standard of care in my opinion.

----------


## HairTalk

> There is no question that Acell will benefit transplanted grafts.  We encourage all patients to apply Acell fine particle to all the grafts and to have a low concentration of Acell injected into the recipient area.  Hair transplant yields can vary based on a number of factors.  One is the transection during graft harvesting and preparation.  Another is trauma during graft implantation.  Another is the storage solutions and temperature that grafts are stored in prior to implantation.  
> 
> Graft transection is far more common than anyone will admit to in my experience.  While visiting a clinic recently, i found that they were trimming off their transected hairs and implanting grafts without the transected hairs.  In the absence of Acell, these transected hairs might have a 30 to 50% chance of survival, but not in the trash can.  I encouraged them to stop trimming of the transected hair follicles and to also add acell to their grafts in an effort to stimulate growth of the damaged hair follicles.  
> 
> Even without transection, follicles are traumatized.  Most physicians still use normal saline to place their grafts in prior to transplantation.  Why?  Because it is cheap and many others use it.  What is the problem with normal saline?  First, the ph drops over time because there are no buffers and the water reacts with CO2.  Second, when you chill normal saline, the cell membrane is paralyzed and can no longer pump water.  Because the osmotic gradient is into the cell, the cell swells and then potentially bursts.  Not a good thing for cells or graft survival.  The way around this problem is to chill your tissue in hypothermosol.  What's the problem with that?   It costs over 200.00 USD per liter compared to under 10.00 USD per liter.  How many physicians are willing to pay the extra price?  Not many based on my expereince.  Thus, Acell might even make up for the inherent cheapness associated with doing surgery.  
> 
> In my opinion, you use chilling, a good cold storage solution, and Acell to maximize the growth potential of your grafts.  that's the solution given todays current optimal standard of care in my opinion.


 Dr. Cole, do you feel ACell will permit in-vivo hair multiplication (thereby very greatly expanding the donor supply, if not making it limitless [for all practical purposes]), be it in conjunction with plucking or with intentional-transection F.U.E.? In the latter technique, do you believe the quality of re-growth from transected follicles  that is, the color, texture, and thickness of hairs  will be acceptable? I understand patients, even now, sometimes get wiry or coarse re-growth, perhaps from grafts or recipient-incisions that have been subjected to trauma.

Thank you.

----------


## gillenator

Possibly that is why some grafts regrow with a wiry projection of the hair shaft, due to partial transection? 

Another question, "Can Acell improve hair shaft diameter?"

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Yes, i do believe that Acell has the capacity to regenerate hair in donor area extractions.  I am concerned about how often this occurs.  I have a difficult time believing what your eyes are telling me.  I want to see more proof.  I am still open to the plucking theory, but continue to have my doubts, but them i have my doubts about what I seeing with donor regeneration, as well.  I'm thinking of additional objective studies to evaluate what I am seeing.  I also am concerned about the delivery of Acell.  Very recently i switched to a more viscous hyaluronic acid that rapidly metabolizes to deliver the Acell.  

I do think Acell might increase hair shaft diameter, Gillenator.  This is good and bad.  On the hair line, i really don't want this, but in other areas, it can improve coverage.  

I really don't know what causes some hair to grow in curly or kinky.  It can happen with any form of HT, be it FUT or FUE.  It is not terribly common, but it occurs.  i have not seen an increase incidence with Acell, however.

It is always good to see your comments, Gillenator.  I miss hanging out with you in DC.  I also miss your chili.  It is awfully good.  I hope you are in good health.

----------


## UK_

Acell seems to work wonders _for some_.

http://singularityhub.com/2011/07/12...le-for-marine/

----------


## RichardDawkins

Thanks Dr Cole for the valuable input here.

Try to extract the hairs like in the Gho protocol, i think regeneration will be more consistent then.

But i was right Dr Cole will be the first to admit if he was wrong in the past and the first who asks the community for help. Such a shame that other clinics still run with the FUT i dont care about anything else thing.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

This was pretty impressive.  While a child that amputates the tip of a finger is likely to regrow the tip without Acell, an adult is not.  This is not to say that it cannot happen in the absence of Acell in an adult.  Still, it may be more likely in the adult and child with Acell.  What is described in this article is quite amazing and indicative of the power of this extra cellular matrix.  Certainly, without Acell, we did not see the follicle regeneration that we are seeing in FUE extraction sites that we are seeing with Acell.

Furthermore, with Acell we are seeing improvement in hypopigmentation when follicle regeneration does not occur.  Both the diameter and degree of hypopigmentation  in FUE extraction sites with Acell is reduced when follicle regeneration does not occur.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

You know, i've tried to get Dr. Gho to tell me specifically what he is doing, but have not been able to get this information from him.  It is very hard to get behind something you don't know much about.  When FUE first came out in the turn of this century, no one knew how to do it.  When i first began doing it in 2002, i had no idea if the grafts would grow because they lacked adipose tissue.  i tried my best to have patients wait for results, but they just kept coming.  Fortunately, the grafts grew beautifully.  We had a few poor results that were over come with advancements in the procedure, but over 98% were great from the beginning.  Body hair was a different animal in that sometimes it did really well, while other times it did not do so well.  The point is that I did not know what Dr. Woods was doing in 2002 and I don't know what Dr. Gho is doing today.  It is impossible to replicate a procedure that you do not know how it is specifically done or how to improve upon it based on how it is currently done.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

By the way, you are seeing the beginning of acceptance of FUE by the FUT physicians.  I've always said that it will take the patient community to demand the change.  You cannot expect the vast majority of physicians to see the potential of a new protocol or procedure.  What you need is patient demand to make most physicians alter their treatment protocol or methods.  you are seing a very rapid acceptance of Acell and PRP, but FUE has taken a decade to gain acceptance.  In 2002 hardly any physicians offered FUE.  In 2008 over 10% of all hair transplant surgeries were done by FUE.  By the time the 2010 census comes out don't be surprised if over 15% of the procedures done to restore hair loss are by FUE.  Every FUE procedure takes away from the percentage of FUT procedures.  Eventually 50% or more of all restoration procedures will be done by FUE.

----------


## UK_

http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs...46630903359814

I dont know if Dr Gho is using Acell or not.

He states that he has a waiting list of patients until mid-2012 for his HST procedure.

_______________________________________________

Dr Cole, I dont know whether you caught eye of the research coming out of Berlin Tech, the full article can be accessed here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21277344

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Thanks.   My skeptical mind would first lean toward how do we know which follicles were there before transplantation and which were the after transplantation.  This is not answered.  Even a bald scalp might have some pre-existing hair that was either there or resting.  If resting, it might soon begin to grow after a study resumes.  Here we have only hair that was partially removed yet was able to regrow in both areas, the transplanted area and the donor area.  Great, but how do we know this occurred other than the investigator's supposition?  We don't other than to take his summation of the results.  While i want to concur with his results, I cant' based on the lack of objective data.  Furthermore, we lack methods here.  How were the follicles extracted and what did they look like.  What were the minimal requirements for an extracted follicle?  Perhaps Dr. Gho is on to something, but he has not given up enough information to repeat his findings.  Without this information we are paralyzed  Give us more so that we can better understand his protocol.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

Dr. Gho is charging other surgeons 50,000 euro for training and the rights to his patented triple wave extraction tool and proprietary preservation medium. I think the phenomenon of transection and transplantation that Dr. Gho describes is real but with what consistency and results. In the interview with Spencer Dr. Gho offered to even go to another doctor's practice to demonstrate and share his technique. I'm still skeptical but it would be interesting if someone took him up on his offer.

FUT just seems barbaric to me. I like the idea of FUE as it seems better to thin the donor all over and have more of a balance between top density and side density than cutting a strip out and giving you half the density or less on top. There is always the problem though of not enough hair and we still can't create any new hair (c'mon Acell with FUE & Plucking). FUT has some awful implications when it comes to scarring, hair length and trying to maintain a decent hair style as the sides and back seem to race ahead and create the bozo the clown look.

I look forward to future developments such as Aderans and Histogen when we can have the best solution.

----------


## UK_

Well if it comes to a hair transplant, what would you rather do?  Risk it with the HST or have a regular FUE...? I would take the HST any day...  Dr Gho was in the news recently over here, that's where it stated he had a growing waiting list until 2012...

----------


## Kiwi

Hey UK, can you please explain what the HST is?

----------


## RichardDawkins

www.hasci.com

----------


## Kiwi

Well I think Gho can go blo.

Here we all are praising Cooley, Histogen and the likes for all their efforts. The HT community is working and collaborating and trying to get Plucking and Acell etc sorted. And then there is Gho... Gho who won't share a god thing unless he's paid 50K. 

I don't want to know him. He's no better then any of the drug companies holding back on better solutions. He's actually against everything we advocate and talk about here.  

Although... that said maybe we should all chip in and send Cooley over - he can learn the goods and then share it with everybody. Done!

Lets reverse engineer him and then open source his IP!!! ;-)

----------


## HairTalk

> Well I think Gho can go blo.
> 
> Here we all are praising Cooley, Histogen and the likes for all their efforts. The HT community is working and collaborating and trying to get Plucking and Acell etc sorted. And then there is Gho... Gho who won't share a god thing unless he's paid 50K. 
> 
> I don't want to know him. He's no better then any of the drug companies holding back on better solutions. He's actually against everything we advocate and talk about here.  
> 
> Although... that said maybe we should all chip in and send Cooley over - he can learn the goods and then share it with everybody. Done!
> 
> Lets reverse engineer him and then open source his IP!!! ;-)


 It's just a matter of transecting follicles while extracting them as in F.U.E. I believe Dr. Bernstein is studying this technique, himself, and I'm eager to read his findings, when they're shared.

----------


## UK_

Ive been waiting on Gho for far too long - 12 years is too long to be waiting for this cure - and his lack of openness when other professionals want in on his technique is really suspect.

Dr Cole has tried to contact Gho - is there something Gho is trying to hide?

If he is so confident he has the surgical holy grail then why doesn't he let Dr Cole in on the process?

----------


## UK_

> By the way, you are seeing the beginning of acceptance of FUE by the FUT physicians.  I've always said that it will take the patient community to demand the change.  You cannot expect the vast majority of physicians to see the potential of a new protocol or procedure.  What you need is patient demand to make most physicians alter their treatment protocol or methods.  you are seing a very rapid acceptance of Acell and PRP, but FUE has taken a decade to gain acceptance.  In 2002 hardly any physicians offered FUE.  In 2008 over 10&#37; of all hair transplant surgeries were done by FUE.  By the time the 2010 census comes out don't be surprised if over 15% of the procedures done to restore hair loss are by FUE.  Every FUE procedure takes away from the percentage of FUT procedures.  Eventually 50% or more of all restoration procedures will be done by FUE.


 Dr Cole here is more reference for Dr Gho's procedure, I really dont know why he is unwilling to share the technique with anyone - we would love to have an independent professional such as yourself review it.

http://dewittevrouwenhof.nl/algemeen...naal_08_uk.pdf

----------


## CVAZBAR

> Dr Cole here is more reference for Dr Gho's procedure, I really dont know why he is unwilling to share the technique with anyone - we would love to have an independent professional such as yourself review it.
> 
> http://dewittevrouwenhof.nl/algemeen...naal_08_uk.pdf


 Wow Gho really has balls to be promoting this procedure the way he does. I mean it's hard not to believe the guy with all the attention he is getting. He is pushing his shit hard and really putting his reputation on the line, once again. I don't know what to think.

----------


## UK_

> Wow Gho really has balls to be promoting this procedure the way he does. I mean it's hard not to believe the guy with all the attention he is getting. He is pushing his shit hard and really putting his reputation on the line, once again. I don't know what to think.


 The results are not convincing - the donor area on that guy where he's pulling his hair back still looks thin - how do we know they're the same guy and the results lower down look worse than regular FUE.

----------


## RichardDawkins

thats why others have to jump in and test it. Pros like Dr Cole for Example because they are able to create superbe hair lines.

Oh And IronMan i know you will screencap this here so "Hey how are you doing"

----------


## CVAZBAR

> The results are not convincing - the donor area on that guy where he's pulling his hair back still looks thin - how do we know they're the same guy and the results lower down look worse than regular FUE.


 No doubt. At this point we don't know shit, I'm just amazed how Gho sticks with his claims and disregards the possible consequences. 

Wesley Sneijder looks pretty clean to me. We need more evidence though.

----------


## RichardDawkins

I think the truth lies in between. If i had to guess i would say that all the before patients were lets say Guinea Pigs and that Gho is now coming closer to the ultimate solution in terms of graft yielding and density.

Some user at the german forum said when he called hasci they said that 70 grafts per square centimeter are not a problem, and that was a few months ago. I think right now he has figured out how to get a consitent regrowth rate etc.

I mean even Cole got an average of 50% regrowth rate with FUE, Acell and minimal depth approaches.

Right now i am waiting for only one thing

"The first doc(clini who admits that HST works" i think this will come soon, Cole somehow did admit it slightly which at least in my case gave him huge respect points and thats rare in my case

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

I find it  interesting that individuals continue to turn to Aderans and Histogen as if they offer some sort of miracle solution.  After all, who is Aderans?  Aderans is a wig provider from Asia.  They made so much money selling people expensive wigs that they were able to buy Bosely and MHR  in the USA.  As the owners of such businesses, I really dont see why anyone would expect anything ground breaking to come out of this organization.  In order to create products that induce hair growth, one needs some pretty good research folks and some people with some amazing ideas.  What was the last new, ground breaking idea to treat hair loss that originated from Aderans, Bosely, or MHR?  In my opinion, Aderans keeps their search for a cure to hair loss in progress simply to add credibility to their mass marketing TV approach.  In todays society, quite honestly, if you need to market your medical services on TV, you really dont have a strong reputation. Having a research center helps give them credibility, but theyve produced nothing so far.  Im not putting my money behind Aderans.  I hope Im wrong, but I just cant get behind them.  

Who is Histogen?  This is another company whose primary clinical researcher used to be the top physician producer for MHR.  What ground breaking idea has anyone associated with Histogen ever done to improve results for hair loss suffers?  If you look at the single example that I saw on the Histogen website, I was not impressed at all.  When you first begin to loose hair, you loose diameter and color.  You loose density later.  Histogen shows an area on the scalp that has good density on the bottom and poor density on the top.   Whats going on here?  Its certainly not classic androgenic alopecia where the affects are more diffuse.  One does not see something like this in an area affected by androgenic alopecia.  Then you look at the after photo.  The after photo looks like the hair suddenly appeared out of nowhere on the top ½ of the circle, but the bottom ½ of the circle looks similar to the before photo.  Could these be two different spots?   There is no tattoo to confirm the two spots are identical.  Divide the circle into four quadrants.  Where is the three hair follicular unit that was in the lower left quadrant on the before photo.  Its not there on the after photo.  The lighting is different too.  The after photo looks darker.  I feel a darker photo makes the hair stand out more.  

What happened to Intercytex?  After many years they vanished with no clinically significant results.  

Id look more to the research coming out of Korea and Philadelphia.  I did ask the Koreans if they had seen any major breakthroughs in growing hair while visiting with them in Bangkok at the end of June.  Their answer was succinctly put.  NO.  

Thus far, the most interesting thing Ive seen is Acell.  Its not a panacea, but at least these are potential results we can get behind.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

What is causing the red color at the top of the before photo that is more prominent in the right upper quadrant?  Where are the two follicular units inside the circle in the after photo?  Either the two areas are different or Histogen had a negative affect on these two follicular units.  

What happened to the red color.  Could this red color indicate that something other than androgenic alopecia was causing the hair loss on the top of the photo?

----------


## CVAZBAR

Are we going to get another reply later changing your mind, just like you did with Acell?

----------


## RichardDawkins

Maybe but this time i will stick with Dr Cole here for obvious reasons.

If you look at in situ multiplication (doenst matter if Acell or HST just doesnt matter) you can see some results to feel, you know in the donor area you have only two ways, regeneration or not. Its not all about white spots, thats not the point.

But if you dont have any white spots and no significant disturbances in your graft order (disruptions like follicl follicle no follicle follicle follicle no follicle) then you can be pretty sure that in situ multiplication works

To me Ari and Histogen may have some good approaches but they just wont work to the extend we want them to work.

Let me put it this way : If you would have the choice right now between

1) Ghos HST or Cole doing his early HM or Cooley doing his plucking with guaranteed 70 Grafts per square centimeter on your whole head from the front to the back with donor regeneration

OR

2) A injection shot of Ari or Histogens Stuff

What would you choose? To me its simple, i would choose the first option anytime because here you have your donor hair on the rest of your head and you dont need to eat finasterid or use rogaine.

Also in the first option you sometimes have the slim chance of getting multiple hairs prouting from one transpanted stem cell reservoire. Dont forget 12.000 Grafts are needed for a successfull NW7 to NW1 transformation and an 70 density on an average head. And even witj limited donor we saw some NW6 to NW2 transformation with way lesser grafts.

Anyway Dr Cole, do you have any plans to get in touch with Gho or to see or get a licence for his HST? Maybe you can improve some things with Acell usage

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

I'm not certain how i confused someone.  My opinion in Acell and hair plucking remains the same. You will sacrifice yield when you pluck hair and treat them with Acell.  You will not see full regrowth in the donor area.  Follicle size of transplanted hairs that are plucked may be finer than the original hair, thus resulting in a reduced degree of coverage.  I don't see this as a viable solution to treating hair loss.  I also would think that those physicians involved in this effort would have by now stopped doing strips and focused fully on this non-scarring method of hair transplantation if indeed it worked as well as they implied.  

Acell used to treat minimal depth extraction sites does seem to induce follicle regeneration.  I have not seen enough cases return to suggest that this is a method we should all consider doing.  

No, i do not have plans to see Dr. Gho at this time, but I wish him great success in his efforts.  I'd like to visit him.  i'm not sure he is accepting visitors right now.  I may venture to London in late September as we are looking to open an office there devoted to FUE.  Perhaps I can stop by Maastricht.  

There are some real research centers working on hair multiplication.  Let's hope they can come up with something.  Their training in this subject is far superior to my training.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

It will be interesting to see if Dr. Gho eventually decides to open up a clinic in the US. The thing that really interests me is that Dr. Bernstein is looking into hair multiplication with Acell using a method very similiar to Dr. Gho's. If Bernstein has good results the method will surely become standard. 

Perhaps Dr. Gho's method really works the way he says it does. I can't help but feel his short comings in the past re hair multiplication are damaging his credibility. It is reassuring to see that we have great doctors in the field like Dr. Cole and Dr. Cooley who have open minds regarding potential new treatments. As with all things, time will tell.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

I'll be keeping a good eye on Wesley Sneijder's hair. It's looking damn good so far and he's certainly a good advert for Dr. Gho's HST.

----------


## UK_

> What is causing the red color at the top of the before photo that is more prominent in the right upper quadrant?  Where are the two follicular units inside the circle in the after photo?  Either the two areas are different or Histogen had a negative affect on these two follicular units.  
> 
> What happened to the red color.  Could this red color indicate that something other than androgenic alopecia was causing the hair loss on the top of the photo?


 Dr Cole, thank your for your opinion.

The larger pictures of the scalps of the individuals involved in the study clearly showed classic male _'pattern'_ hair loss.

Dr Cole, would you also suggest the results of Mayumi Ito to be equally wrong?  Through the use of wnt proteins Mayumi Ito and his team were able to restore grey hairs to their original colour and also saw growth of *new hairs*.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/s...-the-past.html

How do you respond to this?

I personally also, simply do not believe Histogen are trying to pull the wool over our eyes here, such a contention really *demands factual evidence*.

Is there something you know that we dont?

----------


## UK_

http://www.famigliacristiana.it/fami...711152804.aspx

(Google translate).

Also... How old is this: http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/SUA06/bald.php (?)




> Although his work did not involve hair diseases, biology Prof. Robert Hoffman of the University of California-San Diego – who founded the oldest freestanding biotech company, AntiCancer, in the city 27 years ago – had fascinating things to say. He has spent years researching stem cell markers in the brain that were called Nestin. Incredibly, Hoffman discovered them in abundance in human and murine hair follicles. They can differentiate into neurons, muscle cells and others, and thus “could eventually become an easily accessible source of adult stem cells to produce new organs – even to repair spinal cord injuries.”
> 
> With hair, the sky is the limit, and it’s all in your head.


 _Comments on 15th Annual Meeting of the European Hair Research Society (EHRS) (2011)_

From here: 

http://www.jpost.com/ArtsAndCulture/...aspx?id=229673

(last paragraph)

----------


## mlao

> In my opinion, Aderans keeps their search for a cure to hair loss in progress simply to add credibility to their mass marketing TV approach.  In todays society, quite honestly, if you need to market your medical services on TV, you really dont have a strong reputation. Having a research center helps give them credibility, but theyve produced nothing so far.  Im not putting my money behind Aderans.  I hope Im wrong, but I just cant get behind them.


 Dr Cole are you implying that they are advertising future hair cloning in television commercials? 
I doubt the layman watching a Bosley commercial would connect them with Aderans cloning research.
I have never seen Bosley ever mention hair cloning.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Boy, I'm getting hammered with good questions.  I'll try to answer them, but may have to refer back to the questions and do a continuation.  

First, i don't know what Dr. Bernstein is doing.  He has a clever mind as Dr. Cooley.  I'd like to know.

Second, Wnt proteins do all sorts of things.  They even cause cancer.  With mice, you can toss any research in the waste bin because mouse hair does not respond like human hair.  Interesting, but they need to show me human results.  You can rub a nude mouse and it might grow hair.  You already know you can't do the same on your scalp.  

Wnt has been around for some time and smart people have been studying it in relation to hair growth for a number of years.  The people i know have not come up with any new revelations.  

I'm not attacking Bosely commercials or suggesting that their research is not real.  Why wouldn't someone want to find a cure for hair loss with medication?  you'd make even more millions.  what i'm saying is that while they might have a financial inducement to produce clinical results, their total marketing package might be to include a hair research center that is not properly funded in an effort to add credibility to their brand.  How else do you get over the hurdle of 30 years of bad work?  You add credibility in other ways. Aderans is Bosley.  Why did they hire Ken Wieshnik?  He added credibility; he certainly knew very little about hair transplants.  He knows alot about Propecia and other hair loss drugs, but that's his strength.  Aderans is not trying to clone hair.  They are trying to create cell multiplication.  No one has found a solution to this yet, either.  

Not sure about the other results regarding histogen.  All i can say is that the results on their website are not impressive.  If i were promoting a product, i'd put more impressive photos on my website.

----------


## mlao

> Not sure about the other results regarding histogen.  All i can say is that the results on their website are not impressive.  If i were promoting a product, i'd put more impressive photos on my website.


 This is a statement I agree with 100&#37; never before has so much hope been pinned on so little photo evidence.

that said I hope I'm 100% WRONG!

----------


## HairTalk

> All i can say is that the results on their website are not impressive.  If i were promoting a product, i'd put more impressive photos on my website.


 Sorry, Dr. Cole, but most of the images on your own Web site are anything but impressive or revealing; often, they're blurry, shaky, low-resolution pictures. Sometimes, they're just odd and ridiculous glamor shots:

----------


## Havok

the results look pretty good to me, but i suspect it's because the patient was a good HT candidate judging by his pre-op photo.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Hair Talk, we will try to do a better job in the future to satisfy your photographic needs.  In the meantime, we are promoting hair transplant surgery, a proven entity.  We are not trying to raise speculative dollars selling a technology like Histogen.  Histogen is held to a higher standard because their technology is not proven.  They need perceived results to fund a round of speculation from their investors.  Most of their investors do not have the experience that someone like myself has to analyze their photographs and recognize that the photos are inconsistent with the pre-operateive photos.  Maybe you would give them a million dollars to further investigate these unimpressive photos, but I would not and i would not encourage any of my friends to invest in a unproven technology.   

In general, we have far more results than we post.  We don't post as many as we have simply because we have always felt that patients hold us to a higher standard.  If it looks good, but does not meet our standard, we will not post it.  If there are obstructing things like hair clips hiding the results, we will not post them.  With over 10,000 hair transplant procedures, I can assure you that I have many more results than i post.  Of course only a limited number of patients allow their photographs to be posted, but even then we allow only those patient results that are fair and balanced to be depicted on our website over the course of time. Anyone can change the lighting to make a result look better.  That's not our modus operandi.  

Having said all this, i would put our results up against what I've seen from Histogen 7 days a week. 

Regarding blurry, i don't like that.  i like clean and crisp.  I think you need to be able to focus on a result.  i've seen far to many results that were not clean and crisp to the point that you cannot magnify them.  I've always felt this was important and i will speak with my webmaster to insure that we do not deviate from my personal standards.  Of course you can't always insure that patients send you the highest quality pre-op or post-op photos, but you can ensure that you post the highest quality images to your webslte.  We've done this in the past.  i don't micromanage my non-surgical staff, but I also don't allow anything other than perfection.  In my surgery room I have my eye on everything  Outside it, I can only evaluate what was done such as photographs.  Sill given that our only photographs are of the highest standards and we cannot control photographs that patients send us, I honestly feel that you are maliciously over reaching in your comments, Hair Talk.  There are far more clinics with obvious suboptimal photographs, but you have singled mine out.  What is your objective?  How could you compare my results to those of Histogen, when those of Histogen are nothing short of misleading?

----------


## UK_

> I'm not attacking Bosely commercials or suggesting that their research is not real.  Why wouldn't someone want to find a cure for hair loss with medication?  you'd make even more millions.  what i'm saying is that while they might have a financial inducement to produce clinical results, their total marketing package might be to include a hair research center that is not properly funded in an effort to add credibility to their brand.  How else do you get over the hurdle of 30 years of bad work?  You add credibility in other ways. Aderans is Bosley.  Why did they hire Ken Wieshnik?  He added credibility; he certainly knew very little about hair transplants.  He knows alot about Propecia and other hair loss drugs, but that's his strength.  Aderans is not trying to clone hair.  They are trying to create cell multiplication.  No one has found a solution to this yet, either.


 If your theory is true, then why has Aderans been acquiring past small biotech companies that were working with primarily DP cells? (I.e. Intercytex).

Why bother if it's just a marketing scam?

I am sure there are better ways to overcome bad press than spending millions on adulterated clinical trials... McDonalds found a great way - buy out Subway sandwiches and sell to the health conscious that way.

By the way Dr Cole - I doubt if [for arguments sake] Aderans were to be found out about this proposed marketing scam, it wouldn't be the consumers that would be angry due to being fooled into believing Bosley are better than they are (rolf), you would see a massive investor backlash, lawsuits would run riot - sorry, but I can't see it.

Dr Bernstein is a great guy - and so is Dr Rassman... but here is another individual who proposed the utter impossibility of growing a hair follicle outside the lab... low and behold a year later our friends in Germany grew a fully functioning hair follicle (Lauster et al).

----------


## UK_

Dr Cole don't you think it is just typical that Dr Bernstein/Rassman have both stated it is near impossible for a follicle to be grown in vitro - and a year later German scientists totally proved them wrong?  lol.

Rassman has also been attacking Gho's procedure - sorry but as a consumer if I had &#163;10,000 to spend on a surgical procedure what would I spend it on?  regular FUE or HST (or head tattoo lmfao)?  Bear in mind I personally have never seen an FUE doc produce donor results/pictures similar to the ones seen by Dr Gho.

----------


## UK_

Dr Gho's procedure pwns all FUE clinics.

http://www.6park.com/news/messages/33777.html

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

UK, what is this link to?  

I don't think it is impossible to clone hair.  i just think it is more difficult than our present state of research can manage.  

I've not seen any of Dr. Gho's patients in many years.  I honestly can't comment on the work he is doing today.  We spoken by phone in the past.  He's a nice man.  I know that his donor areas looked good and the grafts had a good yield though the grafts were not placed at a high density yeas ago.  

I'm not familiar with Dr. Bernstein's comments on follicle growth.  i do know that he forms opinions and once formed, they are difficult to modify.  

You could well be correct about Aderans.  They are an enormously successful company.  There is no doubt that it will be in their best interest financially to find a solution to inducing follicle growth.  The same can be said for Histogen.  My primary point is that I don't expect the breakthrough to come from Aderans, ever though i wish them all the success in the world.  My other point was that the example Histogen gave did not appear to be the same place on the scalp.  That made me skeptical about Histogen.  It seems they have other results that look more impressive, however.  You guys are giving me some good information and I'm processing it.  I really appreciate the feed back.  It is helping me to better formulate my opinions.  Thanks.

----------


## UK_

The last post was a general post to the rest of the community - Wesley Sneijder had a HST procedure with Gho, his results look great, I have also seen pictures of his donor, granted from a distance but I see no thinning as he keeps his hair shaved grade 2.

----------


## RichardDawkins

Dr Cole no one is attacking you but i personally think that you will be one of the first docs to get something with hair cloning done for the patoents and even if its some form of Ghos HST.

The reason for this is simple, you keep on learning therefore i dont attack you for changing your opinions from time to time. I think those changes of mind are much more important then the same old clinic statements " Hair multiplication is impossible and will maybe available in 10 to 20 years"

I would really prefer your clinic to get in touch with Gho and if the evidence is good, to offer HST done by yourself, because i like your work and i think that your reaults with an way expanded donor will be more then just amazing, but thats my opinion

----------


## Follicle Death Row

Dr. Cole the link is to a page with Dr. Gho's most high profile patient, Dutch football player Wesley Sneijder. That's him with his hair shaved down to about a 2 or 3 all over. I know Dr. Gho will generally only do 2000 grafts in one HST session but it looks as if Wesley has had substantially more. Perhaps it is the favourable skin hair colour contrast but the density looks very high. The result is remarkable. All the moreso if indeed there is 90% donor regeneration.

It would be interesting to compare the preservation medium that Dr. Gho uses with Acell.

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

Ok.  Now I understand.  Yes that does look like a nice result.  I'll put it on my list of things to do next week to look further into what Dr. Gho is up to these days.  

I think there are alot more talented folks working on cloning right now, but I appreciate the vote of confidence.  Hey, i thought FUE was the craziest thing I'd ever heard of 11 years ago, but now I love it and hate strips.  I definitely  change my opinions.  People should always learn from their mistakes and keep an open mind.  That is the only way progress is made.

----------


## jeffro5422

I was searching online to find a pic of Sneidjer's hair loss and came up with this one.

http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/wp-co...17set_1469.jpg

Its a good angle and similar lighting and cut to his current pics.  You can really see the improvement when you look back at the before.  Is it certain that Gho procedure is the only transplant he had?  If so, I'm really impressed and hopeful that its the real deal.

----------


## CVAZBAR

Dr Cole is a good man and a true professional. UK I'm glad you presented this info to Dr Cole. Richard Dawkins, I like that idea of Cole investigatin Ghos HST and if legit, maybe one day he can do the same for us here in the states. I would definitely go with Dr Cole.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

> I was searching online to find a pic of Sneidjer's hair loss and came up with this one.
> 
> http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/wp-co...17set_1469.jpg
> 
> Its a good angle and similar lighting and cut to his current pics.  You can really see the improvement when you look back at the before.  Is it certain that Gho procedure is the only transplant he had?  If so, I'm really impressed and hopeful that its the real deal.


 Not sure when Sneijder got married but I think his hairloss was even worse than that picture by the time he went to the Hair Science Institute in Maastrict. It is remarkable that his hair appears that dense when cut so short.

http://hairstylesarea.com/tag/wesley...der-hairstyles

The interesting thing surrounding the whole hoopla over Dr. Gho's HST technique was that when many of the Benelux clinics tried to take Dr. Gho to court over false claims last year, Dr. Feriduni who was dubious of Dr. Gho's claims, retracted his name from the case, presumably after realising that Dr. Gho's HST is legimate. I wonder if Dr. Feriduni plans on learning the technique especially since his own FUE work is excellent.

If this technique really works as described then the days of strip are numbered. We know this much, the phenomenon of donor regeneration and hair multiplication in humans is real and the literature says as much. The question is with what consistency and efficacy?

I would not be surprised if Dr. Bernstein comes out with a similiar technique within the next 2 years.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

Oh yeah, the Hair Science Institute won the case too.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

> Dr Cole is a good man and a true professional. UK I'm glad you presented this info to Dr Cole. Richard Dawkins, I like that idea of Cole investigatin Ghos HST and if legit, maybe one day he can do the same for us here in the states. I would definitely go with Dr Cole.


 I agree with all of the above. It would be very reassuring to see another top clinic validate the technique and offer it themselves. If this technique works as described then the first clinic in the US to adopt it would have a huge advantage over the field.

I was at first skeptical of HST as Dr. Rassman didn't believe it could be done but then I did some background reading and realised he said the same about FUE when Dr. Woods introduced the technique. Dr. Rassman worked on it himself and came out with FUE a while later claiming to be it's pioneer. Perhaps Dr. Bernstein sees what Dr. Gho's doing and he's trying to figure it out himself so he can be the first to introduce it to the North American market.

I can't help but feel that the stick and place technique in conjuction with dipping the grafts in the preservation medium or ECM would be the safest protocol. Surely when extracting such a fine amount of tissue, (the needle is approx. 0.6mm diameter!) time out of the body is more critical than ever.

----------


## Sogeking

Dr. Cole thank you for your insight. It was really good of you to inform some of us here who are laymen.
Also the concept of being open-minded and the ability to change your opinion when presented with evidence. The desire to investigate something when presented with hints of evidence or promise of some. Those are the qualities of true professionals, doctors, scientists and engineers. 
Thats why I'm glad that Dr. Cole is always eager to recognize and research promising new techiques. And thats why: " Dr. Cole is a good man and true professional", as CVAZBAR said.

----------


## RichardDawkins

And thats especially the reason why i wanna Dr Cole on the HST side. Because he has exactly the requirements to perform such a thing "He learns". And i am honest here, i was angry with Dr Cole in the past when he started this thread here and criticised Acell. But unlike others he admits the mistake while others keep on bashing and tell the same old stuff you hear all the time.

Also another thing which surprised me a few months back was Jotronic who was really interested in Acell and Donor Regeneration and dont forget he is more of a FUT sales person (no offense).

But to me people from other sides who are willing to investigate something are much more valuable then just a normal hair transplant could ever be. Even Gho is learning his stuff from anew every day, just remember a few weeks back he said that 2000 Grafts is the maximum in one session (yes he was overly cautious) but now he has changed it on his homepage to 2300 Grafts, which shows that even he learns some new elements from time to time(for the same price tag).

I think that those kind of decisions and opinions are very very important. What some users here may not realize, but if you do your homework you can become smarter then your average non interested surgeon, and thats a fact. I think Dr Coles work is good but lacks the donor regeneration :-) (Sorry Dr Cole this has to be said ;-) )

With donor regeneration in his CIT case (btw CIT-HST does sound good) an appointment would be a no brainer for almost everyone.

Of course first i was really negative and really sceptic about Gho, yes i destroyed a lot of stuff or i tried to but after a while and with more digging into this matter i reevaluate the whole situation and well i changed my mind in favor of Gho. Also when Dr Cole said that he witnessed black nubs in parts where he extracted follicles (where some people tried of course to downtalk his observation Jealous asshats) i was like "Ok if science says it works and even Dr Cole witnesses such a thing with "more or less primitiv" first approaches why should it not work?

And i agree here, i also hate FUT because i think its just barbaric, and it doesnt matter what results you get because FUE can achieve the same good results.

Yeah i already said to much, but to make it short, Thanks Dr Cole for looking into Ghos HST, at least ONE doc is admitting or considering it in a neutral way

----------


## CVAZBAR

> I agree with all of the above. It would be very reassuring to see another top clinic validate the technique and offer it themselves. If this technique works as described then the first clinic in the US to adopt it would have a huge advantage over the field.
> 
> I was at first skeptical of HST as Dr. Rassman didn't believe it could be done but then I did some background reading and realised he said the same about FUE when Dr. Woods introduced the technique. Dr. Rassman worked on it himself and came out with FUE a while later claiming to be it's pioneer. Perhaps Dr. Bernstein sees what Dr. Gho's doing and he's trying to figure it out himself so he can be the first to introduce it to the North American market.
> 
> I can't help but feel that the stick and place technique in conjuction with 
> dipping the grafts in the preservation medium or ECM would be the safest protocol. Surely when extracting such a fine amount of tissue, (the needle is approx. 0.6mm diameter!) time out of the body is more critical than ever.


 Im also surprised with Sneijders density. Something tells me he got more than 2000 grafts. His results are fantastic. I think he can even go lower, to say a 1 clip all around. I doubt you would see scars. 

Wanting to research more on HST is only smart. Dr Cole would benefit from this immediately. It's a win/win for everyone! Why wouldn't all the Docs want this, if it works? You would have to be an idiot to ignore this.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

Definitely seems more than 2000 considering his pattern. Looks maybe more like 4000. That's probably the most they could harvest in one go. Dr. Gho explained that you cannot reliably partially extract 2 adjacent follicles due to the potential confluence of scarring which stops donor regeneration. That's why they extract one, skip over a follicle and extract another. It's like minesweeper or something. Maybe 4000 is possible, certainly 2500-3000 anyway.

The triple wave 0.6mm extraction tool sounds mad. I know anytime you break the skin it can scar but at that size you probably can't see anything. Comparing it to a 1.0mm extraction tool the cut area is 0.28mm2 compared to 0.79mm2. Far smaller. If a 1mm extraction tool can leave a white dot then I'd imagine a 0.6mm extraction tool would leave something like a very small acne pock mark at worst. I don't really know enough but how small is 0.6mm compared to say a needle you get an injection with?

I know Dr. Feriduni believes extraction tools bigger than 0.95mm should never be used. At 0.6mm you can't take a full 3 haired follicle as far as I'm aware so I wonder does Dr. Gho only transplant 1s and 2s and they grow that way. I also wonder is there a phenomenon where if you partially extract a 3 haired follicle (say 2 hairs are taken) with enough dermal pappillae does it have an underlying architectural code so to speak so that when transplanted and shed it grows back 3 hairs rather than the transplanted 2. Maybe it does. I same this because in Dr. Gho's paper the number of hairs that regenerated in the donor was close to the number beforehand. In other words 2 hairs from a 3 hair follicle were extracted and 1 remained but 2 grew back to return the follicle in the donor to a 3 haired follicle. If that's the case does it mean the 2 transplanted hairs will regrow 3 in the recipient? That's my hope anyway.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

I also wonder if bone marrow stem cells could be used to stop the progression of MPB. I know it has worked for children (in Eygpt I believe?...might be another country) who suffer from Alopecia Universalis so maybe it has implications for MPB. Stem cells has to be the endpoint.

----------


## Follicle Death Row

I had a look at the site and the Hair Science Institute are working on a new technique called Hair Stemcell Injection. The extraction remains much the same but the stem cells are gleaned from partially extracted follicles and are injected into the scalp using a needle. As such hair is not transplanted but cells are whereas the hair shafts were transplanted in HST to carry the cells with them. Apparently they're claiming that this can be a very effective method for burn victims.

It actually doesn't sound all that different to what Aderans are supposedly at. Sounds interesting.

----------


## SilverSurfer

Having Dr Cole perform CIT with donnor regeneration would be incredible news, Hopefully Dr Cole will be able to communicate with Dr Gho and he will tell him what he is doing so as to Dr Cole could start doing it in America.

----------


## Havok

i doubt dr.cole would be willing to pay to attend one of dr. gho's seminar. you couldn't pay him to attend one of dr. gho's seminar. LOL

----------


## Havok

any update on acell? anyone recall when dr. cooley is going to present his research?

----------


## plopp

> any update on acell? anyone recall when dr. cooley is going to present his research?


 Should be this week.. hope someone can relay what he says, would be interesting.

----------


## ejj

very interesting , be good to hear Dr Bernsteins views also 
ejj

----------


## Havok

http://www.baldingblog.com/2011/09/2...-part-3-acell/

what the eff.

----------


## topcat

Yes it is always interesting to read history repeated and continue to watch the cycle. Here is an interesting article, oh wait this is not Acell, nevermind.

Aug 12, 2002 10:00 ET 

Innovative Intravenous Drug for Treating Severe Burns in Children Starts 
Phase II 


SEATTLE, Aug. 12 /PRNewswire/ -- Each year, thousands of children suffer 
burn-related accidents, often with long-lasting consequences and 
disfigurement. Burn injuries constitute one of the greatest hazards of 
childhood, and infants are at higher risk of death from burns than adults. Currently there are no drugs available to treat severe burns in children. This might change in the coming years. Professor Keppel Hesselink, manager at Gho Pharma BV in the Netherlands, announced at the International Society for Burn Injuries in Seattle, USA, the development of an innovative treatment for severe burn wounds in children. The company plans to request an orphan drug designation, based on the fact that fewer than 200 000 patients annually suffer from severe burns. 

The compound, bis(maltolato)oxovanadium (BMOV), an organic vanadium salt, has been studied by the founder of the company, Dr C. Gho, in animal studies using a standardized pig model of burn wounds. When administered intravenously following the burn injury BMOV has been shown to promote wound healing significantly, leading to the formation of thinner, more supple scars with less contraction, and better preservation of hair follicles and sweat glands. 

Investigations of the wound healing have shown that vascularization of the wound was better in treated pigs and the development of granulation tissue was less extensive. The re-epithelialization of the wound was also more rapid in BMOV-treated animals. The magnitude of this effect appeared to be dose-related following intravenous bolus injection. 

BMOV acts by limiting or preventing the secondary injury which arises as a result of tissue damage caused by the actual burn trauma or primary injury. By administering the compound intravenously, we can ensure that it reaches the target area directly. BMOV has undergone a full animal toxicological testing program using intravenous administration. In a recent human Phase I study in healthy volunteers, there were no drug-related and dose-limiting side-effects at the anticipated effective dose level. 

In early 2003 Gho Pharma is planning to start a large pivotal multi-center study of BMOV in children with hot-water burns, in cooperation with some major European Burn Centres. The company is currently contemplating a new finance round to support the pivotal trial program. 


Source: Gho Pharma BV

----------


## ejj

Well it is  almost three years since the doctors in this thread made the claims of acell being beneficial to hair transplant clients.

It would be great to see some results from this procedure, especially the  client/from London who I believe had 3k plucked grafts on a virgin scalp. please feel free to post before and after photographs at your convenience 

ejj

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

I have not seen anything from plucking follicles that I feel has been successful or promising yet.  That was my original opinion and that opinion has not changed.  

By the same regard, we have submitted a paper for publication documenting our experience with Acell as a regenerative device. Briefly, following administration of Acell to minimal depth extraction sites, we are unable to locate a mean of 47% of the extraction sites.  In a case study we discovered that 48% of the extraction sites had some follicle regeneration (one or more follicles).  In a follow up case study we saw no follicle growth in the control site and a lower regeneration of 24% in a deeper extraction.  This supports the notion that stem cells arise from the extraction site as opposed to adjacent follicles as the follow up study was a deeper extraction with the same size punch.  I feel that product seepage definitely negatively impacts the regenerative capacity of the Acell Gell we use.  

Presently, we are looking at a new product that has much smaller particles and a far greater potential for regeneration.  It is derived from human amniotic membrane.  Head to head studies against Acell with this product have shown a marked advantage for the amniotic membrane.  This is be interesting follow as time progresses.

I was interested in BMOV and I still am, but I have not been able to get Dr. Gho to respond to the interest I expressed.  No response what so ever.  I have an open door policy.  When the door is closed with no line of communication, I am suspect.

----------


## gillenator

So the smaller particles may prove to have a better degree of absorption?

Awesome update... :Wink:

----------


## t-bone

Although Acell did improve the overall health of my scalp,and even sprouted minute regrowth, the effects do not seem to last...

I would however recommend Acell-PRP, for after hair transplant surgery. (to heal quickly)

Acell-PRP did vastly improve my strip-scar area,but that was after many acell/PRP procedures.

It is not worth the money,if you are looking for regrowth! I wish it was,but it isn't.

These are just my opinions and I have been doing it, long enough to know.
The funniest thing about all of the procedures,creams and pills I've had the displeasure of using over the years.......The best thing that has worked for me up to now is doing my scalp exercises( maliniak-method) also not using shampoo with any sulfites! This is also free! oh and using my needler every day.

----------


## gillenator

Good to hear that it did improve your scar!

----------


## ejj

Thoughts ?

----------


## John P. Cole, MD

PRP does not work on all individuals.  The other aspect of PRP is how you activate the platelets.  Then there are questions such as the concentration of PRP, the optimal hematocrit, and the layer you inject the PRP.  Recent evidence supports the dermis as the layer.  Then there is the question of what size needle to use when you inject it.  Some use a PRP concentration that is no more than your normal platelet concentration.  They spend less than $1.00 to make it and you honestly get what they pay for it; of course they probably jack the price way up to essentially give you something that is nothing more than your normal platelet plasma.  Acell presents a host of other questions such as the proper concentration of Acell and what you attempt to accomplish with the Acell.  Based on epigenetics, there probably is a protocol that will work better in some individuals and another protocol that may work better on others.  Then there are some protocols that probably don't work on anyone.

----------


## ejj

It appears to me, that the long term studies needed to come to any conclusion re the benefits of acell didn`t really take place. Therefore perhaps the best protocol was to not use acell in the first place, as the results were/are very much unknown. 

I notice acell have removed any material from their website relating to hair regrowth and their product, I wonder if this is because it was not approved for this particular use and used off-label?

I cannot understand any md trialing an experimental product on people who have already been through the `hair mills`and are referred to as `repair cases` it really does make no sense to me and certainly raises the question of ethics.

ejj

----------


## rbkoreaus

It's been a couple years since any Acell talk on this thread so wanted to see if anyone has any updates on the latest and greatest, or if this conversation has continued in another thread?

----------


## MG63

it has been quiet. I've been using PRP to keep hair from aging as fast as body

----------

