HM: Density

[News2]

I've got a question about HM: I can see how it works on a completely bald head, but, what happens if you're just thinning out? I mean: How can they make sure that it looks regular/even (rather than patchy)? My hairline has receded about 1 cm, and I've got diffuse hairloss all over. Ideally I want my old hairline back, and I want really dense hair. In order to achieve this they would have to implant more cells in that 1cm strip at the front where I've got no hair, but less on top & at the back, as I've still got hair there. How can they make sure that eventually I've got the same density all over? (And what's more, if I continue to lose hair, I will definitely have to go back for top-ups.)
Maybe they're gonna implant the cells in stages - every three months or so - so they can see where more hair is needed. (This is just a guess.) Does anyone have any information about this?

 

[michael barry]

This is cut from a post at hairsite from John the Revelator. JTR, as most of us call him, is probably the second most knowledgable poster concerning HM in all the forums behind a guy called James Bond.

He said "#38221, "RE: JTR"
In response to In response to 29
Mon Jul-10-06 06:01 PM by John The Revelator



I never said I thought HM works only by introducing new follicles.

I've always believed that it's MORE LIKELY that HM works PRIMARILY by generating new follicles, but also that there is a very real potential for stimulation of existing, miniaturized or miniaturizing follicles.

By contrast, apparently Dr. Gho claims (per JB) that his method of HM works primarily by stimulation of existing, male pattern baldness-affected follicles, not by generating new ones.

I don't think it's a 100% either/or thing, anyway. Just because HM generates new follicles, doesn't mean that some stimulation and strengthening of existing follicles is ruled out.

But you can only strengthen them to the degree that the donor follicles are strong. You can't create stronger follicles than the donor follicles, because the donor follicle cell lines pass on their genetic expression to the new follicles in the recipient site.

If your donor follicles are weak and thin, chances are that any resulting new follicles (or any stimulative effect) will also be pretty weak, and the HM hair will be no thicker than the donor hair."


The experiments that took vellus hairs from bald men and some donor hair from the same men, moved them to the backs of immuno-deficient mice, and thus seen the vellus hairs regenerate to be just as big as the donor hairs is an example of the fact that these hairs aren't really dead, but are being held back by (what most of us think) the immune system attack on them. In HM, donor area hair cells >might> inject their own cellular DNA into the papilla's of shrunken hair follicles. This would make a >percentage> of those hairs exhibit donor hair characteristics theoretcially. Its been bandied about quite a bit on the forums that perhaps a big round of HM injections to a man, before he starts to male pattern baldness, might keep him from going bald if this is true. Coen Gho thought this is where he was primarily having success in his manual follicular neo-genesis method. But, Gho's method, being manual and just cutting dermal papilla's in half and injectecting the top two-thirds into the frontal scalp, could only move about 500 hairs a session (and then you have to wait at least one year for the donor hairs to recover). It has not been commercially successful (very expensive, limited results).

We will see. JB thinks the potential is there for JTR to be right. Anyone wanting to know cloning can read their posts on the subject. They buy the medical journals where findings are published, JB has interviewed a few docs over the years (Gho, Cooley I think, couple of others) and spend alot of their personal time on that stuff. They are the best sources on this that Ive been able to find.

 

[News2]

This is interesting. Thank you.
In the first interviews about HM they often mentioned the possibility of miniaturized follicles being stimulated by the procedure. However, in the more recent interviews that I've read this wasn't mentioned anymore. (Maybe I missed an interview in which this was addressed?)

I guess it doesn't really matter whether it works or not, because if the multiplication factor is as high as they claim it is, you can create all the *new* hair you need. (However, I cannot help but think that it would probably be easier to create regular hairgrowth if you could just stimulate dormant follicles.)

 

[DaSand]

Interesting information, I guess I can get the head of hair that I want. Now we play the waiting game as Peter Griffin says...

 

[Chrisknight]

But you can only strengthen them to the degree that the donor follicles are strong. You can't create stronger follicles than the donor follicles, because the donor follicle cell lines pass on their genetic expression to the new follicles in the recipient site.

If your donor follicles are weak and thin, chances are that any resulting new follicles (or any stimulative effect) will also be pretty weak, and the HM hair will be no thicker than the donor hair."

This really worries me as some of my donor hair isn't what is used to be... I really think it's Curis's Hh or bust for a lot of us.

Michael, a two part question for you.

What is your opinion on insulin resistance and hairloss/sides and back thining because IR? If you reverse IR, would hair return to normal? I'm curious because of your opinion about the immune system attacking hair.

 

[Chrisknight]

Bump for Barry.

 

[CCS]

can we choose the hairline we want, or will it multiply and grow down to where it chooses or where the old hairline was? i want to choose where mine will be.

 

[Apoc]

I'm interested in hairlines as well because you need to make a line not a zigzag border of hair. Well if HM can't give you a nice one you can get one done by Alvi Armani after you get a full head of hair by HM.