# The Bald Truth Radio Show > The Bald Truth: Show Archives >  Spencer Kobren Speak With Dr. Coen Gho - Is Hair Stem Cell Transplantation(HST) The

## tbtadmin

Spencer Kobren speaks with Dr. Coen Gho, about the current status and efficacy of his proprietary hair restoration technique, Hair Stemcell Transplantation (HST). For daily updates on the world of hair loss follow Spencer Kobren on Twitter @spencerkobren Subscribe: iTunes (audio) | iTunes (video) | Zune (audio) | Zune (video) | RSS (audio) | RSS [...]Spencer Kobren Speak With Dr. Coen Gho  Is Hair Stemcell Transplantation(HST) The Future of Hair Restoration? is a post from: Hair Loss Show: The Bald Truth



More...

----------


## Tracy C

I come away from this with some confirmations - from Dr. Gho himself.

1)  Dr. Gho admits that he cannot restore full density.  The degree in density restoration from his treatment is not much better than traditional FUT hair transplantation - if better at all.

2) Regeneration realistically takes about seven years and therefore it will be several years before Dr. Gho will be able to prove regeneration in any truly significant way (non-microscopic photographic evidence).

3) Even Dr. Gho realizes that it is not a good idea to restore a male to a Norwood I.

4) Even Dr. Gho realizes that hair transplantation is not a good idea for patients who are younger than their 30's and less than a Norwood III.

I gained a lot of respect for Dr. Gho with this interview.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> I come away from this with some confirmations - from Dr. Gho himself.
> 
> *1)  Dr. Gho admits that he cannot restore full density.  The degree in density restoration from his treatment is not much better than traditional FUT hair transplantation - if better at all.*
> 
> 2) Regeneration realistically takes about seven years and therefore it will be several years before Dr. Gho will be able to prove regeneration in any truly significant way (non-microscopic photographic evidence).
> 
> 3) Even Dr. Gho realizes that it is not a good idea to restore a male to a Norwood I.
> 
> 4) Even Dr. Gho realizes that hair transplantation is not a good idea for patients who are younger than their 30's and less than a Norwood III.
> ...


 Yeah, so much for the holy grail in HT treatment.

Than again, maybe Gho is just being over conservative. There are some HT drs like this, such as Bernstein.

----------


## Tracy C

> Yeah, so much for the holy grail in HT treatment.


 No form of hair transplantation will ever be "the Holy Grail" of hair restoration.  Non-surgical regeneration such as Histogen (injections alone) will be the "Holy Grail" with Replicel's minimal surgical process (punch + injections) not far behind.

However, even though 50% to 60% density restoration is not much better than traditional FUT, it is still significant.

I should have added a fifth confirmation to my post above...

5)  Dr. Gho himself confirmed that he can achieve a better harvest from a previous FUT patient than he can from a previous FUE patient.  That is a very important point for those of us who have already had a procedure - or those who are considering a procedure in the near future.

----------


## 534623

> I should have added a fifth confirmation to my post above...
> 
> 5)  Dr. Gho himself confirmed that *he can achieve a better harvest from a previous FUT patient* than he can from a previous FUE patient.  That is a very important point for those of us who have already had a procedure - or those who are considering a procedure in the near future.


 Sure, because the donor area is much bigger thereafter than before ... sure ...

... and therefore he can harvest MUCH MORE HST grafts per procedure, sure.

Wake up girlie.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> No form of hair transplantation will ever be "the Holy Grail" of hair restoration.  Non-surgical regeneration such as Histogen (injections alone) will be the "Holy Grail" with Replicel's minimal surgical process (punch + injections) not far behind.
> 
> *However, even though 50% to 60% density restoration is not much better than traditional FUT, it is still significant.
> *
> I should have added a fifth confirmation to my post above...
> 
> 5)  Dr. Gho himself confirmed that he can achieve a better harvest from a previous FUT patient than he can from a previous FUE patient.  That is a very important point for those of us who have already had a procedure - or those who are considering a procedure in the near future.


 If I have to wear a concealer, it is not worth the time or aggrevation.

Disappointed. I was expecting at least 70 or even 80% with this.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

Also I dont understand why Gho doesn't train up Doctors like:

Ferundi and kessel

Who are based in Europe.

----------


## Tracy C

> Wake up girlie.


 I have obviously been much more awake about this you have been.  Maybe you should watch the interview again and try to stay awake this time.

BTW, there is absolutely no need for the gross pictures.






> If I have to wear a concealer, it is not worth the time or aggrevation.


 Then you might as well shave your head and move on with your life.






> Disappointed. I was expecting at least 70 or even 80% with this.


 That is not likely to ever happen with transplantation.  Wait for Histogen and Replicel if that is what you need to be happy.






> Also I dont understand why Gho doesn't train up Doctors like:


 Then you should probably watch the interview again.  Dr. Gho clearly explained the profile of the doctors he wants to train.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> I have obviously been much more awake about this you have been.  Maybe you should watch the interview again and try to stay awake this time.
> 
> BTW, there is absolutely no need for the gross pictures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then you might as well shave your head and move on with your life.


 At a NW2 with thick hair, not going to happen.  :Smile: 




> That is not likely to ever happen with transplantation.  Wait for Histogen and Replicel if that is what you need to be happy.


 I am.

And btw histogen is no magic cure, it is only effective on hair that is thinning not slick bald scalp.

----------


## Tracy C

> At a NW2 with thick hair, not going to happen.


 Then why are you even here.  Go out and live your life to the fullest.






> And btw histogen is no magic cure, it is only effective on hair that is thinning not slick bald scalp.


 That is pure uninformed speculation that makes no sense at all and has no merit.  If the treatment repairs follicles, it repairs follicles.  It does not make any sense that it could not work on a slick bald head.  The injections don't care if the scalp is slick bald or not.  If it works, it works.  You are paying too much attention to people who obviously have no clue about what they talk about and not enough attention to those few people who actually do have clue about what they are talking about.  I have no idea why you are doing this - but whatever.  Knock yourself out.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> Then why are you even here.  Go out and live your life to the fullest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is pure uninformed speculation that makes no sense at all and has no merit.  If the treatment repairs follicles, it repairs follicles.  It does not make any sense that it could not work on a slick bald head.  The injections don't care if the scalp is slick bald or not.  If it works, it works.  You are paying too much attention to people who obviously have no clue about what they talk about and not enough attention to those few people who actually do have clue about what they are talking about.  I have no idea why you are doing this - but whatever.  Knock yourself out.


 Have you even seen their latest results?

----------


## Tracy C

> Have you even seen their latest results?


 Of course I have.  I am paying a whole lot more attention than you are.  I also know how to interpret data.  You obviously do not.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> Of course I have.  I am paying a whole lot more attention than you are.  I also know how to interpret data.  You obviously do not.


 Boy, you are so conceited.

----------


## JJJJrS

First, I'd like to thank Spencer for the interesting interview.  :Smile:  I think nearly all of the key issues remaining from the first interview were addressed. 

The most interesting things from my perspective:

- After regeneration, the hair root becomes slightly "modified". Although it is possible to extract this follicle during subsequent procedures two, three times, it is a little more difficult.

- Dr. Gho mentions a patient who has had 9 procedures over 7 years and 13k transplanted grafts, who now has a full head of hair and minimal loss of density in the donor area. He promises at least 80-90% donor regeneration with HST.

- Dr. Gho describes the procedure as producing no visible scarring, citing recent patients who have shaved their donor area after the procedure as examples.

- A limiting factor is how densely Gho is willing to pack the grafts. The maximum density he will transplant is 50-60%, sometimes 70%, of the original density, based on the patient.

- Dr. Gho does not seem to have any plans to train existing hair transplant surgeons in HST. He seems to have a strong preference for new medical doctors who do not come from the hair transplant field.

- A new clinic is opening in Jakarta, Indonesia and possibly Singapore in the future. However, the chances of him offering the procedure in the US in the near future is low due to FDA approval for an ingredient in his "hair fertilizing solution."

- Spencer seems interested in visiting HASCI possibly next year and documenting a procedure, possibly live, at the clinic.

----------


## 534623

> I am paying a whole lot more attention than you are.  
> *I also know how to interpret data.*  You obviously do not.


 Coooool. 

1) Please interpret my interpretation in this thread:

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=10051

2) Thereafter, please try also to interpret Dr. Cole's Histogen-Images-Interpretation - and google "*Caution Advised Regarding Hair Marketing Campaigns*".

3) Let us know your final interpretation.

----------


## JJJJrS

Another point I forgot to mention:

- He will not turn down difficult patients like burn victims or young men with a high degree of baldness


My impression after watching the interview is that Dr. Gho is sincere. I think it's a positive sign that he is willing to talk honestly about the limitations of HST instead of sensationalizing the procedure. I think the fact that he's willing to tackle even the most difficult hair loss patients is another positive sign.

----------


## 534623

> First, I'd like to thank Spencer for the interesting interview.  I think nearly all of the key issues remaining from the first interview were addressed.


 This is true. The interview is pretty cool. Anyway, finally we could hear nearly all remaining key issues straight from Dr. Ghos mouth. But what we still don't know: The reason for the delayed publication of the interview ...



> - Dr. Gho does not seem to have any plans to train existing hair transplant surgeons in HST. He seems to have a strong preference for new medical doctors who do not come from the hair transplant field.


 Wow  I must be Nostradamus 

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpos...0&postcount=15

----------


## Tracy C

> Boy, you are so conceited.


 For darn good reason.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> For darn good reason.


 Yeah - no wonder why you fall out with everyone  :Smile:

----------


## Artista

I had listened to the Gho  interview a few times last night. 
I THANK Spencer for taking the time to do this and I was moderately impressed overall. 
Tracy, your points are very valid and I thank you for creating this post. 
What I am having a hard time understanding is the first of his 4 reasons that this method is not being brought to the USA.

To paraphrase ,
 Dr Gho said that 'some materials and instruments have a special (?) medium that cant be used in USA'

I could not understand what the (?) word was. 
Further more whatever it is, why would it not be allowed by the FDA? 

One last thing, I do not understand why some of you have been criticizing Tracy here.  She makes valid points in re to this topic and I respect the woman.   Is it due to a  personal thing from earlier conversations?  NOT that i want to side track the Gho topic. 

Back to the Gho limitations ..anyone have an answer to my question? Thanks.

----------


## chrisdav

I think it was good, and Spencer asked all the right questions.

----------


## amadeus

I think the interview was excellent and very telling to say the least.  Personally I think Tracy is right on point with her assessment.  We are all desperate for a better technique, but I am in no way convinced that HST is it.

I was a little taken aback at Gho's uncomfortable response when Kobren asked if he had photos of the patient who had 9 procedures over a 7 year time period.  We all know that anyone will sign off on non-identifying clinical images and most doctors, especially those who are trying to revolutionize an industry  would have solid documentation of such a significant medical achievement. He says that this patient now has a full head of hair, so I guess we should all just take his word for it right? :Smile: 

Another issue I had was when Gho claimed to have 5000 happy patients. Where is all of the documentation? How does every hair transplant surgeon on the planet have the ability to document their patient results time and time again, but Gho can't seem to accomplish this? Also, in order to have performed over 5000 procedures in the 7 years since HST has been released, he would have to perform an average of 714 transplants a year. Since he claims to only perform one case per day and only relatively recently (past couple of years) trained new doctors, how could this be possible, even if they work 365 day per year?

Like tracy said, I do respect Dr. Gho for doing the interview with Spencer, but his presentation just does not add up. Just because he says he can regenerate a 3 hair follicular unit, does not mean that he can! Now I am not saying that he can't, but this is not proof.

Another issue is how does he know when he is going back into the same follicle that was previously harvested? If there is no scaring or markings indicating that he had been there before, the truth is he can not know. There is really no logical explanation as to how he could decipher if he is re-utilizing a previously extracted follicle. It would be more of a hit or miss scenario since he is harvesting the same area, he must just assume that some of the tissue is coming from previously use follicles, but there is no way he can be sure. 

I really did think that this was a great interview. Spencer asked all of the right questions and I think that we got some telling responses from Dr. Gho. We can not just take Dr. Gho's word for this. In my opinion, things just don't fully add up yet.

----------


## Kirby_

> I think the interview was excellent and very telling to say the least.  Personally I think Tracy is right on point with her assessment.


 [Post removed]

As stated before, BTT intends to fully comply with Dr. Gho's request to discourage and moderate inappropriate, inaccurate, disparaging, intentionally argumentative and defamatory commentary concerning his colleagues, and other available hair restoration techniques (FUE/FUT) in relation to HST or Dr. Coen Gho himself.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> I had listened to the Gho  interview a few times last night. 
> I THANK Spencer for taking the time to do this and I was moderately impressed overall. 
> Tracy, your points are very valid and I thank you for creating this post. 
> What I am having a hard time understanding is the first of his 4 reasons that this method is not being brought to the USA.
> 
> To paraphrase ,
>  Dr Gho said that 'some materials and instruments have a special (?) medium that cant be used in USA'
> 
> I could not understand what the (?) word was. 
> ...


 We criticise Tracey because she has an attitude problem.

She can't seem to speak to people without having an arrogant tone about her.

If used to think it was me, but she falls out with a lot of posters on here  :Smile: 

TBH I wouldn't be bothered if it hits the US or not, simply because if it only regeneates 50-60 percent then it is not that much better then FUE.FUT.

----------


## dex89

> Sure, because the donor area is much bigger thereafter than before ... sure ...
> 
> ... and therefore he can harvest MUCH MORE HST grafts per procedure, sure.
> 
> Wake up girlie.


 Bro, I just threw up my lunch!

Is this a process of a HT??

----------


## DepressedByHairLoss

I agree with Amadeus.  We are all really in dire need for a much better treatment for hair loss but I'm not convinced that Gho has it either.  I never jumped on the Gho bandwagon because I simply don't believe that any form of hair transplantation is the answer that the majority of us are looking for.  Even if Gho is able to regenerate donor hair, it would take lots and lots of hair transplants just to achieve anything close to a full head of hair, especially on a Norwood 6 or 7.  And this wouldn't even work for thinning areas of the scalp, which would be prone to shock loss.

What we really need is some kind of stem cell hair regrowth (what Aderans and Replicel are working on) or a way to activate dormant hair follicles (what Histogen is working on).  If something like this would be brought to the mainstream, it would be beyond awesome: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=a6OdEa5VFNV8.  But I really think lots of doctors have tunnel vision; they exclusively perform hair transplants and nothing else, and do not look into any kind of new and non-surgical methods to regrow hair.  I really believe that is because hair transplants generate loads and loads of money.  We really need non- or minimally-invasive methods to regrow hair or stimulate its regrowth, not simply relocate it from one place to another.

----------


## DepressedByHairLoss

And also, Spencer confirmed what I suspected to be true with Gho's method: that after you pluck a follicle, the follicle that supposedly regenerates in its place is a degraded version of the original follicle.

----------


## Tracy C

> Coooool. 
> 
> 1) Please interpret my interpretation in this thread.


 This question highlights why I want to see non-microscopic photos of Dr. Gho's results.  Since hair follicles have cycles of growth, shedding and resting, it is basically impossible to do direct microscopic side-by-side comparisons of photos that are three months or more apart.

A very important detail you need to take into consideration is that 3 months is plenty long enough for hair follicles to go into a different phase of their cycles.  It is not at all likely that all the hair follicles that were present in the first picture actually have hairs poking out of them in the second picture.  Close examination of the two photos does reveal that you are not seeing all the same hairs in both pictures.  That is to be expected because hair follicles are not static and they all cycle at different times.

Another very important detail is that every treatment for hair loss induces a period of shedding.  This also reduces the possibility that you are looking at the exact same hairs in the second picture that you can see in the first picture.  Again, close examination of the two photos does reveal that you are not seeing all the same hairs in both pictures.  And again, this is to be expected.

I do find it interesting that you arrived at the exact same hair count as before.  That is very interesting indeed, but still inconclusive.

----------


## Tracy C

> Yeah - no wonder why you fall out with everyone


 Certainly not everyone.  Just people with attitudes like yours.

----------


## Tracy C

> We criticise Tracey because she has an attitude problem.


 My attitude is actually not the problem.






> She can't seem to speak to people without having an arrogant tone about her.


 I do not use an arrogant tone nor are there arrogant tones in my thoughts.  If you are hearing an arrogant tone, it is coming from within your own head.






> If used to think it was me, but she falls out with a lot of posters on here


 Actually, it's not that many - and those that have don't really matter much.

----------


## JJJJrS

> I agree with Amadeus.  We are all really in dire need for a much better treatment for hair loss but I'm not convinced that Gho has it either.  I never jumped on the Gho bandwagon because I simply don't believe that any form of hair transplantation is the answer that the majority of us are looking for.  Even if Gho is able to regenerate donor hair, it would take lots and lots of hair transplants just to achieve anything close to a full head of hair, especially on a Norwood 6 or 7.  And this wouldn't even work for thinning areas of the scalp, which would be prone to shock loss.
> 
> What we really need is some kind of stem cell hair regrowth (what Aderans and Replicel are working on) or a way to activate dormant hair follicles (what Histogen is working on).  If something like this would be brought to the mainstream, it would be beyond awesome: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=a6OdEa5VFNV8.  But I really think lots of doctors have tunnel vision; they exclusively perform hair transplants and nothing else, and do not look into any kind of new and non-surgical methods to regrow hair.  I really believe that is because hair transplants generate loads and loads of money.  We really need non- or minimally-invasive methods to regrow hair or stimulate its regrowth, not simply relocate it from one place to another.


 Of course, I totally agree that some type of injection that would restore your original density, or the hairs that are currently in miniaturization to a full  level, would be the ideal treatment.

Hair transplants depend on the skill of your surgeon, so the final aesthetic results will always depend on the artistic skill of the surgeon, regardless of how big your donor supply is.

At the same time, I think the injection I described is unfortunately decades away. I really have no faith in Replicel and Histogen after the recent results and pictures they posted.

At this point, I'm more interested in enjoying my hair now instead of waiting until I'm 40-50 years old for some miracle cure. In the end you have to make due with what what's available and ask yourself whether it's worth it or not.

----------


## JJJJrS

> What I am having a hard time understanding is the first of his 4 reasons that this method is not being brought to the USA.
> 
> To paraphrase ,
>  Dr Gho said that 'some materials and instruments have a special (?) medium that cant be used in USA'
> 
> I could not understand what the (?) word was. 
> Further more whatever it is, why would it not be allowed by the FDA?


 I think the word he uses is "preservation."

After extracting the grafts and before implanting them in the recipient area, HASCI stores the grafts in a special preservation medium which apparently increases the grafts' chances of survival and is essential to the success of the procedure.

According to Ghos' paper:




> The medium is composed of the following ingredients: sodium chloride, potassium chloride, magnesium sulphate, sodium phosphate, calcium chloride, glucose, sodium bicarbonate, sodium lactate, sodium pyruvate, human serum albumin, insulin, bis(maltolato)oxovanadium (BMOV) and alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E) (Hair Science Institute).


 One of those ingredients apparently isn't allowed in the US. I'm not exactly sure but I believe the ingredient that is causing the problems is human serum albumin.




> TBH I wouldn't be bothered if it hits the US or not, simply because if it only regeneates 50-60 percent then it is not that much better then FUE.FUT.


 During the interview he says that a minimum 80-90% of the extracted grafts regenerate. If that's true, then it's obviosuly a much, much better procedure than FUE or FUT, which have 0% regeneration.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> Certainly not everyone.  Just people with attitudes like yours.


 Let me rephrase:

"Just with people whose attitude contradicts mine"

 :Smile:

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> During the interview he says that a minimum 80-90% of the extracted grafts regenerate. If that's true, then it's obviosuly a much, much better procedure than FUE or FUT, which have 0% regeneration.


 Then why is the density only 50-60%. BTW at 50% is when you first start noticing thinning.

Maybe a better question to ask, what density can NW6s achieve when maxed out of their donor?

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> My attitude is actually not the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not use an arrogant tone nor are there arrogant tones in my thoughts.  If you are hearing an arrogant tone, it is coming from within your own head.
> 
> 
> ...


 If I really could be bothered. Which I am not. I can go through your post achieve and find at least 5+ different posters falling out with you.

----------


## Tracy C

> Then why is the density only 50-60%.


 You really need to learn how to pay attention if you are going to participate in discussions.  That is the achievable density of the recipient area.  The reason that is the achievable density is because that is the maximum density that can be safely planted into the recipient area.






> BTW at 50% is when you first start noticing thinning.


 For some people yes.  It depends on the texture of their hair.  However, 50% density is all that is needed to achieve the look of a full head of hair.






> Maybe a better question to ask, what density can NW6s achieve when maxed out of their donor?


 Regardless of how much area needs to be covered, the maximum density is between 50% and 60%.

----------


## Tracy C

> I can go through your post achieve and find at least 5+ different posters falling out with you.


 5, 10, 15, 20 or more, it is still an insignificant number.  It does not matter  how many anyways because whoever they are they just don't matter.  I get tons of PM's from members telling me how much they appreciate me and that they want me to stick around in spite of these jerks - yes I am not the only one who realizes that these people are jerks.  Spencer himself encourages me to stick around here.  He has even done so during the show.  So guess what?..






> Let me rephrase:
> 
> "Just with people whose attitude contradicts mine"


 You are reaching into thin air - yet there is nothing to grasp.

----------


## didi

Average donor density is about 80g/cm2..some have more and some less

he said that 50-60 g/cm2 is possible with hst and sometimes 70 grafts per cm2

in most cases 50-60 grafts per cm2 is more than 50&#37; of density , its more like 70% of original density

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> *You really need to learn how to pay attention if you are going to participate in discussions.*  That is the achievable density of the recipient area.  The reason that is the achievable density is because that is the maximum density that can be safely planted into the recipient area.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For some people yes.  It depends on the texture of their hair.  However, 50% density is all that is needed to achieve the look of a full head of hair.
> 
> 
> ...


 Stop being so patronising; you can make the point without doing so.

**** - its annoying.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> Spencer himself encourages me to stick around here.  He has even done so during the show.  So guess what?..


 So that gives you the excuse to act like a conceited jerk?

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> Average donor density is about 80g/cm2..some have more and some less
> 
> he said that 50-60 g/cm2 is possible with hst and sometimes 70 grafts per cm2
> 
> in most cases 50-60 grafts per cm2 is more than 50% of density , its more like 70% of original density


 I see - and how much donor hair on average do we have in total?

----------


## didi

> I see - and how much donor hair on average do we have in total?


 Between 4000-7000 grafts of usable donor on average, some have 9000

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> Between 4000-7000 grafts of usable donor on average, some have 9000


 And gho does 13000?

Double - that makes sense.

----------


## didi

its possible but he didnt show photo, should we just believe him coz he seems like a nice guy?

I understand that guy wants to remain anonimous but there are other 5000 patients, couldnt he buy some off?

----------


## Tracy C

> So that gives you the excuse to act like a conceited jerk?


 I don't act like a conceited jerk.  I don't even think like a conceited jerk.

----------


## chrisdav

I have always been skeptical about this, even though I am interested and I sincerely hope it is a success.

But I must admit, I find it very strange that someone can claim to have 5000happy patients, but yet has not produced any formal proof to back up this claim.

If the clinic had put out hundreds of before and afters of high documentation with clear pictures & videos of the progress like some of the leading clinics do,it would remove a lot of the questions we have been asking for a while. I have not really been impressed with any of the results I have seen, but this maybe due to his conservative approach. 

I think the hypothetical 13000 grafts in the hands of one of the leading surgeons would definitely aid results significantly. But for a surgeon who states he is conservative, and my added opinion that he is not as technically gifted as a large number of surgeons at creating the illusion of density by strategically placing the grafts, it will leave patients unhappy.

The USP is the regeneration of donor supply. Without that, it is just an average clinic.

----------


## The Alchemist

> I don't act like a conceited jerk.  I don't even think like a conceited jerk.


 You're pathetic.

----------


## didi

> I have always been skeptical about this, even though I am interested and I sincerely hope it is a success.
> 
> But I must admit, I find it very strange that someone can claim to have 5000happy patients, but yet has not produced any formal proof to back up this claim.
> 
> If the clinic had put out hundreds of before and afters of high documentation with clear pictures & videos of the progress like some of the leading clinics do,it would remove a lot of the questions we have been asking for a while. I have not really been impressed with any of the results I have seen, but this maybe due to his conservative approach. 
> 
> I think the hypothetical 13000 grafts in the hands of one of the leading surgeons would definitely aid results significantly. But for a surgeon who states he is conservative, and my added opinion that he is not as technically gifted as a large number of surgeons at creating the illusion of density by strategically placing the grafts, it will leave patients unhappy.
> 
> The USP is the regeneration of donor supply. Without that, it is just an average clinic.


 
I m guessing there would be guys out there who had 9,10,11k grafts done by hasci

when you think 5 000 patients is a big number and only a few came on forum to share their results.


why Gho thinks photos are not important?

----------


## 534623

> I am having a hard time understanding is the first of his 4 reasons that this method is not being brought to the USA.
> 
> To paraphrase ,
>  Dr Gho said that 'some materials and instruments have a special (?) medium that cant be used in USA'
> 
> I could not understand what the (?) word was. 
> Further more whatever it is, *why would it not be allowed by the FDA?*


 This is actually easy to explain  because between Dr. Ghos fertilizer solution and for example Histogens Hair Stimulating Complex or any other NEW and unknown solution on the medical market, there is basically no difference from the FDAs point of view and their regulations.

In detail 
For example, one (and just ONE!!) of Dr. Ghos main components/ingredients for his miracle storage solution (aka fertilizer) is human serum albumin (HSA).
HSA is (in general) widely used in clinical and cell culture applications all over the world. But simply HSA as such doesnt exist  at least not for any health authorities like the FDA. That means, if someone is talking about human serum albumin, for clinical applications it always depends on WHO, in fact, is the approved producer/manufacture of "HSA"

Human serum albumin is basically a sterile, liquid preparation of albumin, derived from large pools of human plasma. All units of this human plasma used in the manufacture of human albumin by any pharma company, MUST be provided by FDA-approved blood establishments only. For the manufacture of HSA, the latter is priority #1  the usage of human plasma from FDA-approved blood establishments only. But this is still not enough for the FDA 
The final product of HSA produced by such a manufacture/pharma company must be approved by health authorities, like the FDA, IN ADDITION!

For example...
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Biologi.../UCM211622.pdf

In this case, the manufacture of HSA is a pharma company in Austria  they got approval for their "HSA" product from the American FDA. But this doesnt mean that they got approval for their product not even in Austria (I dont know). So I think you guys understand now how complicated all this is  just due to 1 component/ingredient of a final product. 
But what exactly is the final product where one of its components is e.g. HSA?
How about all the other components? Are they also already FDA cleared?
How about the final product as such? Is it safe?

*Fictitious example:*

1 component of a final product is WATER;
1 component of a final product is CEMENT;

If you mix these two components  what will be the final product? Is it possible that the MIXTURE of these 2 components (= final product) can harm more than just water or cement alone? You will know it if you drive with 100 mphs against it  

Anyway, concerning Dr. Ghos fertilizer solution, the FDA doesnt have all the answers to all mentioned questions in this post. The same counts for evey other new or unknown "solution" or "complex" on the market.

----------


## ccmethinning

> And also, Spencer confirmed what I suspected to be true with Gho's method: that after you pluck a follicle, the follicle that supposedly regenerates in its place is a degraded version of the original follicle.


 Nothing like this was confirmed. 

It's funny how people on both sides only heard what they wanted to hear with this interview.

----------


## 534623

> In detail 
> For example, one (and just ONE!!) of Dr. Ghos main components/ingredients for his miracle storage solution (aka fertilizer) is *human serum albumin* (HSA).


 btw - here are the MAIN components of Dr. Gho's fertilizer solution:

The medium is composed of the following ingredients:

- sodium chloride,
- potassium chloride,
- magnesium sulphate,
- sodium phosphate,
- calcium chloride,
- glucose,
- sodium bicarbonate,
- sodium lactate,
- sodium pyruvate,
- human serum albumin,
- insulin,
- bis(maltolato)oxovanadium (BMOV)
- and a-tocopherol (vitamin E)

Again, all these component are just the *MAIN components*.
That means, that there are also other components involved.

----------


## 534623

> Nothing like this was confirmed. 
> 
> It's funny how people on both sides only heard what they wanted to hear with this interview.


 Could you PLEASE post - word-for word - what exactly Dr. Gho, in fact, said concerning this issue? THANKS in advance!

----------


## 534623

> Could you PLEASE post - word-for word - what exactly Dr. Gho, in fact, said concerning this issue? THANKS in advance!


 This part/question starts around 07:40 in the video ...

----------


## JJJJrS

> Could you PLEASE post - word-for word - what exactly Dr. Gho, in fact, said concerning this issue? THANKS in advance!


 On re-using the same follicle:

"We tried, we tried to have the same follicle for the consecutive treatment, of course. And what we discovered is, for the first time it is no problem. But the second time, of course, the hair follicle is already a little modified. So you can actually, you can use the same follicle again and we have succeeded in that two, twice, three times. But of course, the hair root itself, it's already a little bit modified, so you have to be very careful, if you have sufficient tissue to extract, to regenerate somewhere else the same type and characteristic hair."


On density:

"...we are not able to copy mother nature. The density which mother nature gave us is very, very high. Look at the donor area. We cannot place the grafts that close to each other. So, the maximum density you can achieve is around 50 to 60, sometimes 70, depending on the, of course, on the type of hair that you have."

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> You're pathetic.


 Imagine being married to her, god, she will boss you around. :Big Grin:

----------


## Tracy C

> Nothing like this was confirmed.


 Actually, it was.






> You're pathetic.


 No.  I'm not.






> Imagine being married to her, god, she will boss you around.


 To be painfully honest about it, there is no way I would even date someone like you or The Alchemist.  Much less marry either of you.  I would not get involved with a guy who needed bossing around.  My standards are much higher than that.  Any partner of mine needs to be at least as smart as me.

----------


## didi

Please folks stop these stupid personal attacs, 
Focus on the topic and have civilized debate




Isnt 70 grafts/cm2 something close to 90% of original density(80g/cm2)?

----------


## ccmethinning

> Please folks stop these stupid personal attacs, 
> Focus on the topic and have civilized debate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Isnt 70 grafts/cm2 something close to 90% of original density(80g/cm2)?


 Yes it is. And you only need 50% density to appear normal in dry conditions.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> Yes it is. And you only need 50% density to appear normal in dry conditions.


 Then why does Gerard Joling look thin without topix on?

----------


## ccmethinning

> Then why does Gerard Joling look thin without topix on?


 Because I believe on the first go around Gho only does 35 grafts/cm2. 

Also, his procedure was very recent.

----------


## didi

OK, 35g/cm2 would be around 40-45&#37; of original density, just on the border, slightly bellow

Its enough for buzz cut but not if you want it longer as it will appear too thin,plus daylight would kill it

----------


## The Alchemist

> Actually, it was.
> 
> No.  I'm not.
> 
> To be painfully honest about it, there is no way I would even date someone like you or The Alchemist.  Much less marry either of you.  I would not get involved with a guy who needed bossing around.  My standards are much higher than that.  Any partner of mine needs to be at least as smart as me.


 

Lets not kid anyone, you're a bald female; and nasty, pyschologically damaged one at that.  You're not even in the gene pool anymore -sexually irrelevant. Your "standards", though i'm sure they provide you comfort late into your dateless, tv-filled nights, are nothing more than vestigal remnants from a time that is no more for you. Your outbursts, pedantic nonsense and constant pleas to be taken as an authority on these boards are just symptomatic of your situation.  It's very sad, really.  Hopefully you can get some help and come terms with what must be a very difficult position for you.

----------


## BaldinLikeBaldwin

the hair loss community can be so cruel sometimes...

why must my people fight each other I often wonder. can't we see we're only hurting _ourselves_?

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> the hair loss community can be so cruel sometimes...
> 
> why must my people fight each other I often wonder. can't we see we're only hurting _ourselves_?


 Tracy has an attitude problem, the fact that The Alchemist chimed in out of his own accord should tell you that a lot of people are sick and tired of her arrogance.

If she was a lot nicer nobody would be an asshole to her.

----------


## Tracy C

> Lets not kid anyone...


 There was not a single word of honesty in that statement.  Not a single word.  Everything you said was completely fiction.






> If she was a lot nicer nobody would be an butthole to her.


 You are still not paying attention, so you would not know how nice I am - or how nice I am not.  I have actually helped a whole lot more people here than you know about - because you don't pay attention.  I am not very nice to you because you do not deserve it.  The reason you don't deserve it is because you don't pay attention and you act like a butt hole.  If you deserved it, I would be a whole lot nicer to you.  I honestly do not care about the butt holes anyways.  Butt holes are going to be butt holes.  So I don't waste my time or energy worrying about them.

----------


## Tracy C

> Tracy has an attitude problem.


 BTW, I am not the one with the attitude problem.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> There was not a single word of honesty in that statement.  Not a single word.  Everything you said was completely fiction.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are still not paying attention, so you would not know how nice I am - or how nice I am not.  I have actually helped a whole lot more people here than you know about - because you don't pay attention.  I am not very nice to you because you do not deserve it.  The reason you don't deserve it is because you don't pay attention and you act like a butt hole.  If you deserved it, I would be a whole lot nicer to you.  I honestly do not care about the butt holes anyways.  Butt holes are going to be butt holes.  So I don't waste my time or energy worrying about them.


 **** off Tracy.

Arguing with you is like arguing with a brick wall.

----------


## Tracy C

> Arguing with you is like arguing with a brick wall.


 That's only because you are wrong.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> That's only because you are wrong.


 There you go, that one line sums you up.

You are arrogant, you ALWAYS want to be RIGHT and derail threads once someone challenges your vews by calling them a butthole.

You dont bring as much value to this place as you think.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> There you go, that one line sums you up.
> 
> You are arrogant, you ALWAYS want to be RIGHT and derail threads once someone challenges your vews by calling them a butthole.
> 
> You dont bring as much value to this place as you think.


 And to add, when you do give good advise its normally has a patronising tone to it. 

Look at the way a poster in didi writes and compare that to your own writing style.

If you can't see whats wrong, then nothing can save you.

----------


## Artista

Can we move beyond this?  I'm not criticizing either one of you and I have never been involved with squabbles here. Dont want to be.
Regardless as to who is right or wrong , can 'we'  diplomatically absorb what has been said, reconsider our approaches, reassess the way we approach issues here , if needed, and remind ourselves that we are all here for the same serious problem. 
Spencer's site IS the better hair loss website/forum and allows for  wide latitude in free speech, keep in mind.  
 As i have viewed it here, each and every one of you do a great job in contributing to this forum.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> Some words in this thread are a bit harsh, but to add to this, *she totally ignores (or fails to acknowledge) whenever she -is- wrong.
> *
> Like my thread about the shampoo where she was telling us about how it must be a scam because Keto has a patent on it. But then when I present proof that it ran out over a decade ago she goes totally quiet on the subject.
> 
> Stacy, I think you mean well. I wish we weren't enemies. But that said, you are very condescending to a lot of people on here. You need to be a whole lot more open to the possibility that you -are- in fact wrong.


 The amazing thing is, everyone can see it.

----------


## Tracy C

> Like my thread about the shampoo where she was telling us about how it must be a scam.


 I never said that specific shampoo was a scam and you did not present any real proof that it has 1% Ketoconazole in it.  Your "say so" does not qualify as "proof".  You cannot stake a claim that I was wrong about something that I never actually said.  All that does is it makes you a liar.  You are also very sick minded.  I cannot believe anyone takes you seriously.  Sadly, some people here do.  I certainly don't.  I can't - because I know better.






> I wish we weren't enemies.


 I have no enemies.  If you consider me an enemy that is a choice that you made all by yourself.  Again, your mind is not right.  You twist what I say around and put words into my mouth that I did not say.  Others do not like the factual information that I share for whatever reason.  These are not my opinions, these are the available facts.  This is not information that I came up with all by myself.  This is information that anyone can find if they choose credible sources.  I do not have the time or the desire to worry about those people who simply do not like the facts of the matter.  I certainly do not speculate as much as many others here, but I do speculate from time to time - if I have enough information to do.  I do not care if anyone agrees with my speculation or not.  It's just speculation.

----------


## Tracy C

> If you can't see whats wrong, then nothing can save you.


 I don't need to be saved because I'm not doing anything wrong.  You are the one with the attitude problem.  Not me.

----------


## Tracy C

> The amazing thing is, everyone can see it.


 The only people who have problem with me are those who have an attitude problem - like you.  You don't notice that because you do not pay attention.

----------


## Kirby_

Tracy C and Uk_ are by far the nastiest people here.

----------


## UK_

> Tracy C and Uk_ are by far the nastiest people here.


 That's rich coming from someone who wishes cancer on other people.

Get over yourself seriously, there's more important issues the world needs to worry about than your overly introverted socially dysfunctional insecure personality complex.

----------


## UK_

I think most of you take it out on Tracy because you've been rejected by nigh on every woman that's ever walked passed you :Big Grin: .

Must suck being a loser :Big Grin: .

----------


## Breaking Bald

This thread has turned shambolic. You are all arguing like a bunch of high school kids...

----------


## Tracy C

> This thread has turned shambolic...


 I do agree that it would be good to get it back on topic.  This was a good interview.

BTW, The man in your avatar is yummie.

----------


## khan

> Lets not kid anyone, you're a bald female; and nasty, pyschologically damaged one at that.  You're not even in the gene pool anymore -sexually irrelevant.


 Alchemist, your post has got to be a new low. This is messed up on so many different levels. Get a grip on yourself.

A new flash for you, this is a hairloss forum, everyone's bald or balding.

----------


## 534623

I agree. The Tracy C-speaks-with-The Alchemist-interview is pretty interesting and informative. Now I know how HST works. Thanks.

----------


## yeahyeahyeah

> Alchemist, your post has got to be a new low. This is messed up on so many different levels. Get a grip on yourself.
> 
> A new flash for you, this is a hairloss forum, everyone's bald or balding.


 The problem is with tracy, she needs to stop creating flame wars

----------


## Tracy C

> The problem is with tracy, she needs to stop creating flame wars


 You need to work on your reading and comprehension skills.  I am not the one who creates the flame wars.  In fact you are one of those who actually starts it.  I do defend myself though when you guys start it.  The real problem is that guys like you have a problem with a woman sharing information, having an opinion and especially defending herself.  You want to beat her down and expect her to just take it.

Again, I am not the problem.  Guys like you are the problem.  Lay off this pointless nonsense and stick to the topic.

----------


## neversaynever

> You need to work on your reading and comprehension skills.  I am not the one who creates the flame wars.  In fact you are one of those who actually starts it.  I do defend myself though when you guys start it.  The real problem is that guys like you have a problem with a woman sharing information, having an opinion and especially defending herself.  You want to beat her down and expect her to just take it.
> 
> Again, I am not the problem.  Guys like you are the problem.  Lay off this pointless nonsense and stick to the topic.


 Its nothing to do with you being a woman per se. It is your attitude towards fin users who have seen bad sides. Your statements like the one earlier in this post "histogen can grow hair on slick bald areas", and the manner in which you convey this statement.

Your posts in the general hairloss area and about minox are informative and helpful to many, but when it comes to something you disagree with, your manner is questionable. There are worse people around though...

By the way, please point me to evidence that Histogens HSC grows hair on slick bald areas please....

Im excited about Histogen, but so far its obvious that its thinning areas that will benefit. even then, the macro photos they have provided are a bit questionable.

You might say 'if you dont like my attitude, tough', but there is actually nothing more pathetic than someone doing the 'tough' routine on an internet forum. Convince yourself all you want that you're in the battle of your life, one woman against 100s of men, but believe me, you are no Joan of ark, just another forum user with a bad attitude.

----------


## Tracy C

I do not have bad attitude.  What is going on here is a combination of one or more of these things; over exaggeration, misinterpretation, fabrication, out rite denial ad bad attitudes on the part of other members.  Some members definitely do it much more than others.  I write in a "matter of fact" sort of way.  Most of the time there is a pure neutral attitude attached to it - neither good or bad, just this is the information and it is what it is.  If you don;t like it, don't blame me because I did not create the information and I have no ownership of it.  It does not matter what I post though.  Certain members are going to hear whatever they want to hear regardless of what I say or how I say it.  I could say "Have a nice day" and these members would read it as "You rotten pond scum".  That is exactly what they do and it is their choice to do that.  Not mine.

Now please drop this stuff and stay on the thread topic.

----------


## neversaynever

On topic, HST is limited (and way too expensive), but it is for real ( i had 1200 grafts). Transplants in general are limited, thatll never change unless they figure out how to multiply hair (which noone has done yet!).

Tracy C has mentioned Histogens HSC can grow hair on a slick bald scalp, which is wrong. They have not mentioned anything like this, she has been misinformed. They initially thought it could happen, but the jury is out on this one until probably phase 3.

----------


## 534623

> On topic, 
> 
> *Tracy C has mentioned* Histogens HSC can grow hair on a slick bald scalp, which is wrong. They have not mentioned anything like this, she has been misinformed. They initially thought it could happen, but the jury is out on this one until probably phase 3.


 Oh no - now she will mention even more bs ...

----------


## amibald

> 


 jokes on you dude, you're too cynical/negative to be happy.

----------


## Tracy C

> Tracy C has mentioned Histogens HSC can grow hair on a slick bald scalp, which is wrong.


 It is neither wrong nor right at this time.  I absolutely never said it definitely would happen.  You can keep saying I said that till you are blue in the face but it is still not the case.  Remember that over exaggeration thing I mentioned above?  This is the kind of stuff I am talking about.  I do speculate that it will happen.  I can speculate every bit as much as everyone else.  My hopes are justifiably high for both Histogen and Replicel.

----------


## Tracy C

> Oh no - now she will mention even more bs ...


 Um...  You are dead wrong.  Aside from occasional speculation about future treatments, which almost everyone else also does, I do not write any BS.

----------


## UK_

> Convince yourself all you want that you're in the battle of your life, one woman against 100s of men, but believe me, you are no Joan of ark, just another forum user with a bad attitude.


 Probably explains why she didnt choose a gender neutral username/avatar.

----------


## neversaynever

> Then why are you even here.  Go out and live your life to the fullest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is pure uninformed speculation that makes no sense at all and has no merit.  If the treatment repairs follicles, it repairs follicles.  It does not make any sense that it could not work on a slick bald head.  The injections don't care if the scalp is slick bald or not.  If it works, it works.  You are paying too much attention to people who obviously have no clue about what they talk about and not enough attention to those few people who actually do have clue about what they are talking about.  I have no idea why you are doing this - but whatever.  Knock yourself out.


 Actually my dear, anything anyone says on here about Histogen is speculation. Histogen have ONLY shown and discussed HSC working on hairy areas. Therefore, it is not mere uninformed speculation that HSC might only work on thinning areas, it seems very likely. However, it is uninformed speculation that it grows hairs on slick hairs. It is you that is uninformed, blinded by pinning too much hope with Histogen. If you want to be scientific about it (you probably think you have a scientific mind), it makes more sense to base all opinions on the evidence provided. So far, the evidence makes you the clueless one.

As your speculation has no merit, you will now reply with something like "well it is my opinion, i don't care what you think, go away". YOU do not have a clue what you're talking about, and YOU are not paying attention. Get informed, idiot. Or provide everyone with some of your 'information'.....

But of course, you don't need to provide any information in these situations. You have the stubborn card that wins any disagreement. 

"If the treatment repairs follicles, it repairs follicles.  It does not make any sense that it could not work on a slick bald head"

I remember reading an interview of a highly regarded scientist (hair scientist) stating that its quite likely that hair follicles have a point of no return, in terms of regeneration. If he is not sure, what makes you so sure? You're no different to many others here with plain old blind faith, due to desperation. The difference is, you have a far better defense mechanism and that stroppy loner teenage stubborness that drives everyone up the wall. 

Get a job.

----------


## neversaynever

> Um...  You are dead wrong.  Aside from occasional speculation about future treatments, which almost everyone else also does, I do not write any BS.


 It's not speculation, its misinformation.

----------

