Since the treatment works by healing in a particular area thus encourages the cells to do their thing, it is (as far as I know) a reasonable assumption that there is only so many cells than can be "activated" so to speak, to proliferate into desired outcome at any one time.
My basis for this is strain on various systems and metabolic resources that the body allocates when multiple wounds are taken and in close proximity, which is exactly what is happening in Follica's treatment.
From WoundcareInc.
"If you have multiple wounds or have undergone a severe trauma (e.g. surgery) your body’s defense mechanisms will be limited and slow wound repair."
We know that the window to form hair is limited and if the allocation isn't there to form hair in time, it probably defaults to skin.
I struggle to believe the same phenomena doesn't apply here, especially where reconnecting blood flow and vessels are concerned. Obviously though, once you have healed, your body's mechanisms are less limited.
@occulus reasoning of "follica would have said so" is the closest thing I have seen to an actual rebuttal, but I don't think it's a good argument because we don't actually know what the final density they spoke of was.
Further, as evidenced by users like Somebody, who have been successful dermarollers for years and had advanced hairloss; regained ostensibly a full head of hair. The Dhurat study's results were impressive, but all the big wounding studies thus far have not done sufficient follow up. Still, my point stands that there is presently no good scientific reason to believe the results cannot be compounded.
Lastly, regarding release date; I have a difficult time believing — given the pictures of the product, presentations and such — and coupled with their previously expected release date of 2018, that a six month delay or so would suddenly set them back as far as 2020. It's obvious that their infrastructure is more advanced and less demanding than other developing therapies than people are giving them credit for.
