I haven't posted on this site in years but checked in last night and came across this micro-needling frenzy. The results seem encouraging, but a few things give me serious pause:
1. The study (http://www.ijtrichology.com/article...lume=5;issue=1;spage=6;epage=11;aulast=Dhurat) is published in a very low quality academic journal (low impact factor; high acceptance rate for articles, @ 59%). I'm a career academic (entirely unrelated field). All academics strive to publish in highly influential, top tier journals. If we fail to do this, it is because: 1) the paper does not make a strong contribution (i.e., it's proving something that's already been shown, time and again); 2) the methods are dubious. 2 seems more likely, in this case.
2. It seems that one of the authors of the study has a vested financial interest in microneedling: http://www.rachitaskincentre.com/
3. The hair growth density counts are higher than propecia and minoxidil. This is remarkable, if true. Or it may simply reflect a poor study design or a dishonest reporting of results.
Sorry if these points have been cited by earlier posters. I'm too lazy to read through the 400 forum pages leading up to my comment.
Good luck to us all.
PS: Here's a citation for the journal's acceptance rate: http://www.journalonweb.com/IJT/ In my field, a great journal has an acceptance rate around 4%-10%. A reasonable journal is around 30-40%.
1. The study (http://www.ijtrichology.com/article...lume=5;issue=1;spage=6;epage=11;aulast=Dhurat) is published in a very low quality academic journal (low impact factor; high acceptance rate for articles, @ 59%). I'm a career academic (entirely unrelated field). All academics strive to publish in highly influential, top tier journals. If we fail to do this, it is because: 1) the paper does not make a strong contribution (i.e., it's proving something that's already been shown, time and again); 2) the methods are dubious. 2 seems more likely, in this case.
2. It seems that one of the authors of the study has a vested financial interest in microneedling: http://www.rachitaskincentre.com/
3. The hair growth density counts are higher than propecia and minoxidil. This is remarkable, if true. Or it may simply reflect a poor study design or a dishonest reporting of results.
Sorry if these points have been cited by earlier posters. I'm too lazy to read through the 400 forum pages leading up to my comment.
Good luck to us all.
PS: Here's a citation for the journal's acceptance rate: http://www.journalonweb.com/IJT/ In my field, a great journal has an acceptance rate around 4%-10%. A reasonable journal is around 30-40%.