A&G Hair Complex from A&G Skin Solutions

Melon Collie · Post by **Melon Collie** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 3:50 pm

Well, actually I guess it was the lack of any elaboration on his statement. It would be kind of nice to have some experienced forum members to have been testing this for a while. Don't you think that Dr. AQ would have said something about it here?

Looking forward to trying it myself.

bug · Post by **bug** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:29 pm

davidb · Post by **davidb** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:38 pm

just signed up to post that image too!

its crazy.. whoevers designing the website has no clue really..

but its interesting.. what the heck does this graph say?

AQ mentioned patients received 40% regrowth. so what he really meant was 40% of people involved in the study showed regrowth.

which is not impressive at all really..

bug · Post by **bug** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:48 pm

Dr AQ

Congratulations on the launch of your hair complex!

Now that the product has been released could you answer a few of my questions?

Human fibroblasts secrete a number of growth factors. Could you tell me which growth factors are secreted in your conditioned media?

Could you tell me which cell lines your human fibroblasts come from?(Im asking this in hopes of determining which growth factors are secreted. I dont know if it will help me)(does this study provide clues? http://www.ijdb.ehu.es/web/contents.php ... i=082590le

How do you overcome the "500 Dalton Rule" ? Most of the relevant growth factors in skin and hair are huge(10 000 - 40 000 daltons) how are they expected to pass through the corneal layer and be viable?

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/m ... 3/art00001

The 500 Dalton rule for the skin penetration of chemical compounds and drugs

Authors: Bos, Jan D.; Meinardi, Marcus M. H. M.

Source: Experimental Dermatology, Volume 9, Number 3, June 2000 , pp. 165-169(5)
Abstract:
Human skin has unique properties of which functioning as a physicochemical barrier is one of the most apparent. The human integument is able to resist the penetration of many molecules. However, especially smaller molecules can surpass transcutaneously. They are able to go by the corneal layer, which is thought to form the main deterrent. We argue that the molecular weight (MW) of a compound must be under 500 Dalton to allow skin absorption. Larger molecules cannot pass the corneal layer. Arguments for this “500 Dalton rule” are; 1) virtually all common contact allergens are under 500 Dalton, larger molecules are not known as contact sensitizers. They cannot penetrate and thus cannot act as allergens in man; 2) the most commonly used pharmacological agents applied in topical dermatotherapy are all under 500 Dalton; 3) all known topical drugs used in transdermal drug-delivery systems are under 500 Dalton. In addition, clinical experience with topical agents such as cyclosporine, tacrolimus and ascomycins gives further arguments for the reality of the 500 Dalton rule. For pharmaceutical development purposes, it seems logical to restrict the development of new innovative compounds to a MW of under 500 Dalton, when topical dermatological therapy or percutaneous systemic therapy or vaccination is the objective.

As a potential customer I need to know which growth factors I am applying to my head before I send you 200 dollars. There are certain growth factors I wouldnt apply to my head if you paid me $200 to do it. I wouldnt do it for $20 000. So Its important that I(and all customers) know what it is we are applying to our scalps. Additionally I need to know that these large proteins and polypeptides are able to reach their targets. Otherwise they are wasted on the surface of the scalp.

I know there a few posters here that dont care about the answers to my questions but I can promise you there are very many people who do care.

Im looking forward to your responses and hopefully based on those responses becoming a customer

bug

Jajo · Post by **Jajo** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:07 pm

bug wrote:As a potential customer I need to know which growth factors I am applying to my head before I send you 200 dollars. There are certain growth factors I wouldnt apply to my head if you paid me $200 to do it. I wouldnt do it for $20 000. So Its important that I(and all customers) know what it is we are applying to our scalps. Additionally I need to know that these large proteins and polypeptides are able to reach their targets. Otherwise they are wasted on the surface of the scalp.

I know there a few posters here that dont care about the answers to my questions but I can promise you there are very many people who do care.

Im looking forward to your responses and hopefully based on those responses becoming a customer

bug

Dr AQ

I wholeheartedly agree with bugs expectations above - not only is this a reasonable expectation, it should be a GIVEN.

and please, just answer it directly - no more subterfuge [-o<

Jajo

perga · Post by **perga** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:16 pm

Also, I am not understanding that graph... is that an average of both groups or what? It must be, otherwise it doesn't even make sense.

So the average regrowth was 40% for the A&G group ... ? Right? It couldn't possibly mean that 40% of the A&G subjects saw regrowth, since how would they determine a threshold for "regrowth" ? Would a single hair put them in the "regrowth" category? NAY!! NAYYYY I SAYYyyyy!

If the average result was a 40% regrowth on A&G, I'm getting it for sure, however...

What is this "hair length" category...? People on saline's hair didn't grow during the course of the study? This graph is a bit confusing.

perga · Post by **perga** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:17 pm

And how can you measure scalp rejuvenation?

justthin · Post by **justthin** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:18 pm

[quote="Jacob"]B/A pictures don't always speak volumes..as we all know. Someone mentioned elsewhere that it would have been a good idea for them to let 5 or so well-known respected posters try the stuff out and report back. I don't know how many posts I've already read that question the new posters who for whatever reason decide to post in the A&G threads.

Jacob, I was only trying to be helpful with the B/A pics. If you don;t want them then I guess just don;t look at them. They do speak volumes from what I read everyday on the forums(not just this one). Everyone always askes for them, and Dr.AQ has been asked repeatedly for them.I do know many others think that you have to be a regular or a post veteran to have any validity to pics or comments but I don;t think that the B/A pics would hurt by any means if they were from a first time poster. You have to start somewhere and I am afraid It would take me years to get the amount of posts I see you have on many forums...does not make my B/A pics any less important in my eyes or the others praying for a cure or good treatment with no sides out there.

Also, the reason I signed up was to show people the emails I received due to all the questions regarding this product. I have seen and read all kinds of cures and treaments etc.. and so far this one excited me and many others the most. If this treatment is what DR.AQ says it is , then this will erstore alot of missing things in my life besides hair. That makes me excited ..how bout you? lol

All kidding aside, I do hope that the product does what the good DR.AQ says it does.

Jacob, this is not an attack on you by any means , just my point of view. Not every first time poster will be from A&G or in other threads from whatever product they are trying to sell are fakes. Some , probably many are but we shouldn;t count out everyone or anyone untill proven. I do see alot of people (as you said) get attacked when they are first time posters on a forum especially when a new product is launched so I did expect a bit of this.

AS far as the complex is concerned...if this is a scam or a BS treament, you can kiss the rest of A&G goodbye. They will prob never sell another product again.I am saying this due to the fact that these forums hold alot of power in the public eyes.We can get the message out fast about A&G in the media and forums about their deception.However, that is getting ahead of ourselves.

Perga...the website is a joke ( i design websites as well) and the guy should give his head a shake and get the job done properly.

Good luck to all who are trying this product and try and keep us all posted on updates with B/A pics and visual descriptions as you can!!

Thanks again all!

Jajo · Post by **Jajo** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:23 pm

perga wrote:Seriously, whoever is doing this website is killing me.

If you view the source it looks like they fell asleep on the keyboard and repeated a useless line like 1000 times (which is why the page takes so long to load)

Dr AQ, let me do the damned thing, I'll have the pictures up in 20 minutes

Also, I am not understanding that graph...

perga -

I literally almost wrote that same post verbatim the other night after having a looksie at the source code myself...although I think 20 minutes is an over-estimate!

Sh*t - if I had all the product info, study results etc at my disposal, I could beat that website with some cardboard and a box of crayons!

Jajo

James · Post by **James** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:25 pm

That graph is so ambiguous, we don't even know the process the researchers went through to get that data. Who knows if it is even valid?

Jacob · Post by **Jacob** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:32 pm

justthin..you have to remember it's OTHER people that are saying it...which is what I said.

Although it is going to look suspicious if all or most of the "newbies" do well and the veterans don't.

Just so you and others know. I have defended A&G quite a bit...and I've also questioned them on many things either by playing devils advocate or being very serious about it. I'd be doing so even if I'd have actually been sent a trial box myself..ahem.

On their website..I wish he'd just post the stuff here first..or send it to me or someone else to do so.

redbird · Post by **redbird** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 7:33 pm

perga wrote:Also, I am not understanding that graph... is that an average of both groups or what? It must be, otherwise it doesn't even make sense.

So the average regrowth was 40% for the A&G group ... ? Right? It couldn't possibly mean that 40% of the A&G subjects saw regrowth, since how would they determine a threshold for "regrowth" ? Would a single hair put them in the "regrowth" category? NAY!! NAYYYY I SAYYyyyy!

If the average result was a 40% regrowth on A&G, I'm getting it for sure, however...

What is this "hair length" category...? People on saline's hair didn't grow during the course of the study? This graph is a bit confusing.

The graph maxes out at 100, so that almost implies that it's 40% of the people that used it saw regrowth, which doesn't really say much. If it is an average, it would nice to see more detail on the numbers. I mean if somebody had 10 hairs on top of his head, then grew another 50 hairs, that would really skew the average up without much regrowth to show for it.

justthin · Post by **justthin** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:00 pm

Jacob wrote:justthin..you have to remember it's OTHER people that are saying it...which is what I said.

Although it is going to look suspicious if all or most of the "newbies" do well and the veterans don't.

Just so you and others know. I have defended A&G quite a bit...and I've also questioned them on many things either by playing devils advocate or being very serious about it. I'd be doing so even if I'd have actually been sent a trial box myself..ahem.

On their website..I wish he'd just post the stuff here first..or send it to me or someone else to do so.

My apologies Jacob if I implied that you were the one attacking newbies...I thought I mentioned that MOST/OTHER people not just you or even you..do attack any first time poster if they come in promoting or defending a product.

Veterans or not B/A pics should help..you don;t have to have 1000 posts to have results with a product..just solid proof.

I also must thank you Jacob for getting Dr.AQ on here as well as defending the product based on what you know.I have followed your posts on A&G and you def do not have to let me know that you have defended them on many occasions on many sites. Also your input and feedback on many sites including this one is valuable to me and so many others, much thanks. I have read many of your posts before and you seem to always be level headed and unbias..a definite rarity!

I appreciate all you and all of the other "veterans" have done for hairloss sufferers across the globe and I hope you continue your excellent work.

perga · Post by **perga** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:02 pm

Who did they send trial packs to, Jacob? What was the results?

Jacob · Post by **Jacob** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:06 pm

perga wrote:Who did they send trial packs to, Jacob? What was the results?

I have no idea..except that "chore boy" claims to have been using it for 2 weeks now. Both he and Dr. AQ should have made this known well before then, imo..IF it's true.

justthin · Post by **justthin** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:11 pm

Jacob wrote:
perga wrote:Who did they send trial packs to, Jacob? What was the results?
I have no idea..except that "chore boy" claims to have been using it for 2 weeks now. Both he and Dr. AQ should have made this known well before then, imo..IF it's true.

IMO , chore boy was joking! lol

bug · Post by **bug** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 8:53 pm

Dr AQ

Congratulations on the launch of your hair complex!

Now that the product has been released could you answer a few of my questions?

Human fibroblasts secrete a number of growth factors. Could you tell me which growth factors are secreted in your conditioned media?

Could you tell me which cell lines your human fibroblasts come from?(Im asking this in hopes of determining which growth factors are secreted. I dont know if it will help me)(does this study provide clues? http://www.ijdb.ehu.es/web/contents.php ... i=082590le

How do you overcome the "500 Dalton Rule" ? Most of the relevant growth factors in skin and hair are huge(10 000 - 40 000 daltons) how are they expected to pass through the corneal layer and be viable?

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/m ... 3/art00001

The 500 Dalton rule for the skin penetration of chemical compounds and drugs

Authors: Bos, Jan D.; Meinardi, Marcus M. H. M.

Source: Experimental Dermatology, Volume 9, Number 3, June 2000 , pp. 165-169(5)
Abstract:
Human skin has unique properties of which functioning as a physicochemical barrier is one of the most apparent. The human integument is able to resist the penetration of many molecules. However, especially smaller molecules can surpass transcutaneously. They are able to go by the corneal layer, which is thought to form the main deterrent. We argue that the molecular weight (MW) of a compound must be under 500 Dalton to allow skin absorption. Larger molecules cannot pass the corneal layer. Arguments for this “500 Dalton rule” are; 1) virtually all common contact allergens are under 500 Dalton, larger molecules are not known as contact sensitizers. They cannot penetrate and thus cannot act as allergens in man; 2) the most commonly used pharmacological agents applied in topical dermatotherapy are all under 500 Dalton; 3) all known topical drugs used in transdermal drug-delivery systems are under 500 Dalton. In addition, clinical experience with topical agents such as cyclosporine, tacrolimus and ascomycins gives further arguments for the reality of the 500 Dalton rule. For pharmaceutical development purposes, it seems logical to restrict the development of new innovative compounds to a MW of under 500 Dalton, when topical dermatological therapy or percutaneous systemic therapy or vaccination is the objective.

As a potential customer I need to know which growth factors I am applying to my head before I send you 200 dollars. There are certain growth factors I wouldnt apply to my head if you paid me $200 to do it. I wouldnt do it for $20 000. So Its important that I(and all customers) know what it is we are applying to our scalps. Additionally I need to know that these large proteins and polypeptides are able to reach their targets. Otherwise they are wasted on the surface of the scalp.

I know there are a few posters here that dont care about the answers to my questions but I can promise you there are very many people who do care.

Im looking forward to your responses and hopefully based on those responses becoming a customer

Dr.AQ · Post by **Dr.AQ** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:45 pm

Greeting friends
I knew I had to stop by before going to bed (my ears were burning)

Bug: Thank you!! It gives me great pleasure to see you asking all of these questions (since day 1) and I do value your points. Just to put you at ease, the A&G Hair Complex is different from our skin care products. The fibroblast conditioning media is the term used in cosmetics to describe growth factors (GF) its the law. I know you are worried about TGF-Beta and IL-6 and 3. Many of the papers you used were done on mice and many link the results to humans. GFs are major regulators of growth and play critical role in signaling and cell turn over (repair). Always keep in mind that not everything published is true. I will argue that many of the 'good' data is not published but filed as a patent or kept as a business secret. I just got a paper accepted in Nature

a week ago and I believe if the paper have any information that can be used to develop a drug, this paper/research won't see the light and a new company will be established. If I tell you the percentage of factors and the process we use to 'compound' our active ingredients, I assure you A&G will be out of business. You and many here have all the rights to question the technology/science and demand answers, but in the same time, understand that sometime A&G will have to protect its assists (intellectual property) and not answer. Its not personal, its just the ugly side of business. Try to send Coca Cola an email and ask them for the ingredients

.

Perga : A&G made a major mistake hiring a web designer. I had to ask a friend to help put today's data up and he told me it wasn't easy. A&G know science and how to make great products, everything else we are below average.

The chart was supplied to us by our collaborators and the 41% is the average hair growth recorded by the trailists, that does NOT mean only 41% of the people who tried it showed growth. The placebo is used as a control to be used for statistical analysis.

Everything is going well with the orders and everything will be shipped on time. If you don't receive a confirmation from us, that's OK, we only email confirmations to people with special instructions (for example, " I am a sailor and will be in sea for 14 days, can you delay my shipment until I email you"). Paypal will send you a confirmation, that means we received your payment. Once the payment is received, that means an order slip with the address is issued and sent to the shipping department. In the last 2 years or so, we have not missed or misplaced any order. I know many here have ordered our skin care products, I hope they can forth and testify.

.

Have a great weekend and please forgive us for the short comings on our website.

justthin · Post by **justthin** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:02 pm

Thanks for coming on to ease our minds a bit Dr.AQ ! I understand how some webdesigners can be so no worries for the lack of web updates..etc. When you say "growth" do you mean "regrowth"?

I am one of the first orders so hopefully by next week I will start the product and in a few weeks be able to provide feedback..good or bad!

Dr.AQ · Post by **Dr.AQ** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:14 pm

justthin wrote:Thanks for coming on to ease our minds a bit Dr.AQ ! I understand how some webdesigners can be so no worries for the lack of web updates..etc. When you say "growth" do you mean "regrowth"?

I am one of the first orders so hopefully by next week I will start the product and in a few weeks be able to provide feedback..good or bad!

YES, I meant regrowth, thanks for the correction. I look forward to your feedback.

bug · Post by **bug** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:29 pm

Thanks for the reply Dr AQ!

Actually there is a mountain of published studies showing that tgf-beta is bad(induction of catagen) for hair using human hair experiments either in vitro or using skin grafts or manipulating parts of the pathways using small molecules. Im sure I could post many links.

I agree that mouse models are poor for human hair. I also agree that patents are the best source of information. I have had various peptides synthesized just for personal experimentation with the amino acid sequences taken from patents.

Could you answer my question about the molecule size and penetration through the stratum corneum? At lot of reasearch is going into small molecule agonists/antagonists rather than supplying the growth factors directly due to stability and size problems.

Thanks again!

Dr.AQ · Post by **Dr.AQ** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:10 pm

bug wrote:Thanks for the reply Dr AQ!

Actually there is a mountain of published studies showing that tgf-beta is bad(induction of catagen) for hair using human hair experiments either in vitro or using skin grafts or manipulating parts of the pathways using small molecules. Im sure I could post many links.

I agree that mouse models are poor for human hair. I also agree that patents are the best source of information. I have had various peptides synthesized just for personal experimentation with the amino acid sequences taken from patents.

Could you answer my question about the molecule size and penetration through the stratum corneum? At lot of reasearch is going into small molecule agonists/antagonists rather than supplying the growth factors directly due to stability and size problems.

Thanks again!

cool, making a peptide using the cell's machinery (DNA-RNA-ribosomes-peptides)?
delivery of large compounds can be achieved by breaking them into small stable pieces and then allowing them to recombine inside the tissue by providing high affinity catalysts. This is the best I can do to answer your question without giving out much.

Whoop · Post by **Whoop** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 3:19 am

Good to see these updates, no new pics though?

Those results seem pretty good. I like the high percentage of hairloss prevention. I'd be happy already if I only maintained what I have right now

. Thickening up would be awesome, experiencing regrowth would get me do a lot of happydancing

.

Can't wait for my salary to be at my bankaccount, lol

Subb · Post by **Subb** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 4:47 am

hi i'm new here but this is the only way i can contact Dr. AQ, i could send him a email but i think this question is
not only important for me.

dear Dr. AQ,

on your website there is an instruction in how to apply the serum:
1. Wash hair and scalp with shampoo (preferably during morning).

2. Dry hair and scalp and apply A&G Hair Complex® in small doses to the area you wish to treat to prevent spilling.

3. Massage the area of application for a minimum of 5 minutes. Allow the A&G Hair Complex® to stay unwashed for a minimum of 8 hours (preferably left over night).

4. Repeat steps 1-3 every other day until completion of all 5 vials.

but i am going to use a own made laser helmet. My laser helmet doesn't cover my whole head, so i have to laser my head in 3 parts.

can you tell us, between witch number are we supposed to do the laser treatment. and how long is recomended? (maybe it is an idea to put it on your website, because not everybody is reading this, just to make things crystal clear)

can you tell me, how i have to use my laserhelmet, because i have to do it in parts.

thank you in advance

perga · Post by **perga** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 7:07 am

Dr.AQ wrote:cool, making a peptide using the cell's machinery (DNA-RNA-ribosomes-peptides)?
delivery of large compounds can be achieved by breaking them into small stable pieces and then allowing them to recombine inside the tissue by providing high affinity catalysts. This is the best I can do to answer your question without giving out much.

ooolala, I didn't think of this. TIME TO MAKE A COMPETING PRODUCT !!!! MUAHAHAHAHAH! no, just kidding.

40% average regrowth is spectacular. I am dying to see a few more pictures, and if they look good I'll be ordering right away.

Thanks Doc!

bone1999 · Post by **bone1999** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 7:18 am

perga wrote:I am dying to see a few more pictures, and if they look good I'll be ordering right away.

I think I'm in the same boat... I'm considering this and a laser helmet, but its a pretty heft leap of faith at that price (college student here)...

Hoping for the best as always

nate · Post by **nate** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:18 am

Dr. AQ,

Can you answer flat out 1.) are there any more pictures coming, 2.) When will they show up? 3.) Are they better than the first set?

Jacob · Post by **Jacob** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:24 am

Dr.AQ wrote:

cool, making a peptide using the cell's machinery (DNA-RNA-ribosomes-peptides)?
delivery of large compounds can be achieved by breaking them into small stable pieces and then allowing them to recombine inside the tissue by providing high affinity catalysts. This is the best I can do to answer your question without giving out much.

I know EXACTLY what you mean.

Thanks for the updates..and for finally touching on the ingredients and size issues. Now if you were to encapsulate those small stable pieces..... I'll do the rolling eyes for you

redbird · Post by **redbird** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 9:28 am

perga wrote:
Dr.AQ wrote:cool, making a peptide using the cell's machinery (DNA-RNA-ribosomes-peptides)?
delivery of large compounds can be achieved by breaking them into small stable pieces and then allowing them to recombine inside the tissue by providing high affinity catalysts. This is the best I can do to answer your question without giving out much.
ooolala, I didn't think of this. TIME TO MAKE A COMPETING PRODUCT !!!! MUAHAHAHAHAH! no, just kidding.

40% average regrowth is spectacular. I am dying to see a few more pictures, and if they look good I'll be ordering right away.

Thanks Doc!

I wouldn't get too excited about 40% average regrowth yet. That number doesn't really mean anything without the proper context. If I had 10 hairs on the top of my head, then after the treatment I had 14 hairs, that would be 40% regrowth. We really need more data to know what that average 40% regrowth means.

Whoop · Post by **Whoop** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 9:41 am

About the 40% growth, let me quote Dr. AQ:

YES, I meant regrowth, thanks for the correction. I look forward to your feedback.

So if growth = regrowth, we are talking about 40% regrowth. I do not think people that have lost 10 hairs will use this product to get back 4 hairs.
So I think we have to see the results as 40% regrowth of what was lost. Then again, I'm only hoping I am right here, cause that would be friggin awesome

.

Subb · Post by **Subb** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 9:58 am

Whoop wrote:About the 40% growth, let me quote Dr. AQ:

YES, I meant regrowth, thanks for the correction. I look forward to your feedback.

So if growth = regrowth, we are talking about 40% regrowth. I do not think people that have lost 10 hairs will use this product to get back 4 hairs.
So I think we have to see the results as 40% regrowth of what was lost. Then again, I'm only hoping I am right here, cause that would be friggin awesome .

I hope your right..!! FRIGGIN awesome

redbird · Post by **redbird** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:15 am

Guys. You are getting excited about a number that doesn't mean anything. To use the same example, just because somebody goes from 10 to 14 hairs, does not mean one will go from 10000 to 14000 hairs. We need to know the individual data points to know if that 40% even means anything. Perhaps it does. Perhaps it doesn't. But unless they provide the before and after numbers, that 40% could mean exactly what I said.

Also, what if one guy went from 10 hairs to 50 hairs. That would be a 400% increase! Now let's say 9 others with "normal" hairloss (say nw2 or nw3) got less than 1% regrowth. The average of all of those would be 40% regrowth! Yet only one person had regrowth, and it was only 40 hairs.

Don't get caught up in the 40% unless they are willing to release the data that supports that 40%. It means absolutely nothing at this point.

astro_boy · Post by **astro_boy** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:28 am

Dr. AQ

Is 2% Ketoconazole shampoo ok to use on some of the "off" treatment days. I would also like to know the answer to a question previously asked. In between what step would lasering take place?

About the 40% graph... I agree it doesn't show anything conclusive without more information, for all we know the hairs could be not cosmetically viable. Personally I'm still optimistic but these information updates are not affecting me more or less in any way.

Whoop · Post by **Whoop** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:43 am

redbird wrote: Also, what if one guy went from 10 hairs to 50 hairs. That would be a 400% increase! Now let's say 9 others with "normal" hairloss (say nw2 or nw3) got less than 1% regrowth. The average of all of those would be 40% regrowth!

No, you are wrong here.

If a guy has 10 hairs, he has lost 100,000 hairs. If he regrows 40, he'll have a 400% increase but he doesn't have a 400% regrowth though. He will have a 40/100,000 = 0.0004 = 0.04% regrowth. If he'd have a 40% regrowth, he'd have regrown 40,000 hairs. But like I said, I hope this is how they calculated that statistic, I don't know for sure. Docter AQ, please enlighten us?

Btw,I totally agree on you though that the sample is small and average data are misleading. It's something though, because I quote from one of the first posts of Dr. AQ:

however, our results showed that the majority (77%) said they did not need to apply it again and they were satisfy.

So the average numbers should say something.

redbird · Post by **redbird** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:29 am

Whoop wrote:
redbird wrote: Also, what if one guy went from 10 hairs to 50 hairs. That would be a 400% increase! Now let's say 9 others with "normal" hairloss (say nw2 or nw3) got less than 1% regrowth. The average of all of those would be 40% regrowth!
No, you are wrong here.

If a guy has 10 hairs, he has lost 100,000 hairs. If he regrows 40, he'll have a 400% increase but he doesn't have a 400% regrowth though. He will have a 40/100,000 = 0.0004 = 0.04% regrowth. If he'd have a 40% regrowth, he'd have regrown 40,000 hairs. But like I said, I hope this is how they calculated that statistic, I don't know for sure. Docter AQ, please enlighten us?

Btw,I totally agree on you though that the sample is small and average data are misleading. It's something though, because I quote from one of the first posts of Dr. AQ:

however, our results showed that the majority (77%) said they did not need to apply it again and they were satisfy.

So the average numbers should say something.

I don't know how you could be right. I've never seen regrowth percentages measured that way. You are using a number (100,000) which is just an average number for the entire head. I was actually using a before and after hair count in the area of hairloss for my example. I've always seen regrowth measured in before and after hair counts. Not everybody has the same number of hairs before hairloss sets in. That's why the regrowth percentage should be measured against an actual number, not an imaginary number (why not 80,000? Why not 150,000? Both of those are actually possible, and would give entirely different percentages). Before and after hair counts is how I've always seen it measured. However, if Dr. AQ says that's how they do it, then I will stand corrected. But in either way, 40% still needs more data to mean something. Preferably before and after hair counts for all the trialists.

Melon Collie · Post by **Melon Collie** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:04 pm

Suub,

Dr. AQ answered that question earlier on in this thread....

Dr.AQ wrote:Redbird- Yes, you will need to leave in on over night. This because there are two parts to the Complex, 1) it stimulate hair follicles 2) it conditions the scalp. For people who have laser machines at home, its best to be under the laser for 15 min, before applying the A&G Complex, this will prep- the scalp and allow for more A&G Hair Complex to go through. Follow the application with 5 min. massage and then put the laser on for another 5 min. This is the protocol used at the clinic and have shown great results. Doing it without laser if effective too, but if you have laser at home, even better.

AQ

Hope this helps

astro_boy · Post by **astro_boy** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 1:00 pm

Melon Collie wrote:Suub,

Dr. AQ answered that question earlier on in this thread....

Dr.AQ wrote:Redbird- Yes, you will need to leave in on over night. This because there are two parts to the Complex, 1) it stimulate hair follicles 2) it conditions the scalp. For people who have laser machines at home, its best to be under the laser for 15 min, before applying the A&G Complex, this will prep- the scalp and allow for more A&G Hair Complex to go through. Follow the application with 5 min. massage and then put the laser on for another 5 min. This is the protocol used at the clinic and have shown great results. Doing it without laser if effective too, but if you have laser at home, even better.

AQ
Hope this helps

Specifically I'm looking to know if I should wash hair before or after lasering. I think Suub has a different issue because his laser helmet has 3 regions that are not lasered at the same time so he has to divide up treatments into 3 parts of his head.

Subb · Post by **Subb** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 1:23 pm

Exactly my question.. If i have to follow the protcol it would be like:
Wash hair
Laser 1 part (15 min.)
Apply serum (1 min.)
Massage (5 min)
Laser same part (5 min.)

Laser next part (15 min.)
Etc.

If that is the way to go just say so Dr. AQ, otherwise please correct me.
It's gonna take me like 1.5 hours(after washing), but ahh well possibly only for 9 days or so

I also got some little painfull zips on my head, follicle must be infected or something, will this product do anything against it?

Thnk you

Melon Collie · Post by **Melon Collie** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 1:56 pm

Wow that's pretty intense, but yeah only until your done with the serum. In which case it might be worth the extra time.

However this is probably how I would do it

1. In the morning wash hair
2. Laser as usual...15-20 min each area
3. Apply serum, message
4. laser again for 5 min each area
5. leave on til next morning

Repeat every other day

p__ · Post by **p__** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 6:45 pm

Hi Dr AQ!

Congratulations on the launch! After what appears to have been some mishaps, the website is starting to shape up. I really hope it will be updated again in answer to some of our concerns. You have been a real sport coming here, answering many of our questions, though not all. I realize that you must have a million things to do and it's easy to miss a question or two of the many that have been posed here.

As someone noted earlier, that graph by itself tells us almost nothing. If you yourself had seen that graph in relation to some product that you were potentially buying, wouldn't you think the same thing? I realize you need to cater to the less informed, who don't know how to interpret graphs and statistics and from a marketing perspective it might be a good point having a graph which shows 70% "hair loss prevention" but you must realize there is a very vocal group in the hair loss community who do know statistics and math. They are not easily impressed, as I'm sure you've noticed by now.

A table, graph or some other form of data visualization showing the DISTRIBUTION of ABOSLUTE hair counts in the study populataion before and after treatment, as well as relative counts, would be a great step toward settling some of the most important concerns regarding the graph and the study data. If the numbers indeed are as good as you claim, it would benefit you greatly to make them as open and readily available as possible!

Regarding photos, you should look upon this as a great opportunity! Don't concern yourself too much with the fake, murky, low resolution photos produced by most of the competition. Why would you settle for having just slightly better photos at best? Assuming that your product works, you have the unique opportunity to show extremely clear photos of a multitude of subjects in high resolution, with 40% regrowth on average! Think about the implications! It would be a tremendous blow to the competition, who are unable to provide such photographic evidence. It would pull the rug out from under their feet. Any doubts would be eradicated and your status as a doctor and researcher would go through the roof. And think about the unique selling point for your company! You can show things that no one else can! When someone would consider another product, you could just challenge them asking "where are their clear, high resolution pictures showing irrefutable regrowth? All I see are small, dark, ambiguous photos of poor quality in which it's impossible to see if it's actually the same subject, with different head angles, different hair lengths and different lighting! As you can see they are the exact opposite of ours. We have nothing to hide!"

So, why not do it? Post more photos! I see no reason not to! Unambiguous, high resolution photos would devastate the competition and put those who question you to shame!

If I were you, before publishing any data, graphs, photos or other info, I would sit down and think really hard and ask myself: "if I were the prospective buyer looking at the presented information, evaluating it objectively, what would I look for? What would my concerns be? What parts of the data would I think inadequate? What part of the photos would I consider dubious or inconclusive?" I would then make sure my information material and photos were more or less immaculate. Surely, you would raise the same concerns we have and could thereby easily forestall the criticism by not publishing and showing us things that you know we will justly question. I would provide and prepare ample data to support my simplified graphs. I would include all the necessary information pertaining to the graphs, the methods used in obtaining the data and producing the graphs etc. Naturally, I would also make simple graphs to put on my website, for the less informed buyer.

Specifically, for the graphs you posted, please provide the metrics used and explain in detail what the values actually mean. Scalp rejuvenation percentage? Hair loss prevention percentage? Regrowth percentage? How was regrowth measured? Is it relative anagen to catagen hair count ratio? Anagen to total hair count ratio? Relative terminal hair count increase? Some sort of average of various relevant factors, such as width, count, pigmentation etc? Subjective opinion?

Also, please provide absolute hair counts, not just relative data, provide the standard deviation, not just mean etc. You get the idea! All the things I'm sure YOU would ask for!

Thanks for putting up with us!

I really look forward to you answers!

bug · Post by **bug** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:26 pm

Dr.AQ wrote:
cool, making a peptide using the cell's machinery (DNA-RNA-ribosomes-peptides)?
delivery of large compounds can be achieved by breaking them into small stable pieces and then allowing them to recombine inside the tissue by providing high affinity catalysts. This is the best I can do to answer your question without giving out much.

No these were very small peptides(3 amino acids and 7 amino acids) synthesized synthetically using solid phase. One of these sequences was being studied for wound repair and the other for bone growth. In each of the published papers it was noted that they grew hair as a side effect. I mentioned it because they were patented as hair growth peptides but never mentioned again in journals for reasons you have pointed out

. I cant mention the names, scientists or companies because Ill get flooded with emails

Thanks for your answer about the large compounds/proteins!

As for tgf-beta ...I have never been a fan of LLLT in part because one of the things it does is greatly up-regulate tgf-beta. But there are a lot of people out there who swear it works for growing hair. So I guess if LLLT does grow hair then there is one real world example where the effect of TGF-beta is contradictory to other studies. I thought it was strange that you tried lasers with your hair complex. I was thinking what compelled you to do that. After thinking about it is it because of the growth factors it upregulates?

Thanks again for taking the time to respond!

bug

Dutchboy · Post by **Dutchboy** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 2:15 am

Mr. AQ,

I have a question: in an earlier statement you told us that 89% of the individual participants were satisfied about the product. How is that possible when you look at the results on your website? 'Just' 70% of the participants showed that they didn't loose hair anymore. I thinks that's the least spectaculair result that could be reached.

Thanks for your reaction!

Joanne · Post by **Joanne** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:16 am

I've been lurking here since this subject came up...and even more so with the strange malware issues on Regrowth. Also used to post on HLH as Worried Woman, so I'm not an undercover shill for A&G, even tho this is my first post here.

As I read through all 23 pages of this particular thread, it seems like many of the questions some people are asking (all very smart, valid questions) really can't be answered without the doctor tip-toeing into FDA land. It's being sold as a cosmetic product, so they have to be careful about wording. Something similar happened with a Jan Marini product about 2 years ago. In fact, it was an eyelash growth formula. And they ended up having to pull the product. If the FDA jumps on this one, It might be a long time before it's back on the market. Just a thought...

perga · Post by **perga** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:18 am

@bug

Did the grow hair?

Whoop · Post by **Whoop** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:32 am

Because Dr. AQ is probably busy doing other stuff, I emailed AG with these questions:

- Will there be new photos of trialists coming up on the website? I read somewhere that Dr. AQ said there will be, but I've been checking your website (looks very nice now I must say!) a lot of times recently and seen updated quite often. There are no new pictures though, so, are they still coming? If so, when could I expect them? I'm almost addicted to refreshing your webpage, so an answer to this would be a great relief!

- The graph that is on your website at the moment looks very promising. Though I don't really know what these statistics mean and how they are measured. Do you have some kind of description to the statistics available (meaning and way of determination)? I am particularly interested in 'over all growth', 'hair loss prevention' and 'length'.

These are the answers:

Thank you for the kind email. Yes there will be more before and after pictures coming up and will be loaded on our website, however, at this time we don't know when, as the next pictures will be submitted by people like you or others who tried it. We are expecting some this coming week, I hope people stick to their words. The graph represent the improvements noticed on people who used A&G Hair Complex. The data were collected and measured by specialist and hair counting machines. In the case of prevention for example, subjects were asked to count the hair loss in the morning after brushing a month before using A&G Hair Complex and write done the number and do the same after a month of using A&G. After collecting these numbers from many subjects, we calculated the difference in hair loss, thus came with the % of prevention. Hair length was determined by measuring the length of the hair in a period of 1 month. Then do the same after using A&G Hair complex and determined the length increase. People with Alopecia their hair can only grow to a certain length, after using A&G Complex, we noticed increase in hair length.
I hope I answered you questions.
Thank you,

Kimberly,
Customer Care
A&G Skin Solutions Inc.
www.agskinsolutions.com

Jacob · Post by **Jacob** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:42 am

There are supposed to be plenty of other pictures not coming from posters in these forums..but from previous trialists etc.

shivs1 · Post by **shivs1** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:52 am

Are they serious? This is how they scientifically measured hair loss prevention? Normal daily shedding of your hair occurs and differs from week to week even when you dont have mpb. Correct me if I am wrong. How would you be able to measure this accurately with this method, unless your confined to a bubble, you cant possibly measure the amount of hairs that fall out of your head. Ill break out my trusty magnified glass and search for any loose hairs that I mightve missed haha j/k

"In the case of prevention for example, subjects were asked to count the hair loss in the morning after brushing a month before using A&G Hair Complex and write done the number and do the same after a month of using A&G. After collecting these numbers from many subjects, we calculated the difference in hair loss, thus came with the % of prevention."

Melon Collie · Post by **Melon Collie** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:54 am

Whoop,

Unfortunately, Kimberly didn't respond to the "overall growth (re-growth)" part of the graph you asked about.

Interesting....maybe Joanne is right.

Post by **HairLossFight.com** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:58 am

shivs1 wrote:Are they serious? This is how they scientifically measured hair loss prevention? Normal daily shedding of your hair occurs and differs from week to week even when you dont have mpb. Correct me if I am wrong. How would you be able to measure this accurately with this method, unless your confined to a bubble, you cant possibly measure the amount of hairs that fall out of your head. Ill break out my trusty magnified glass and search for any loose hairs that I mightve missed haha j/k

"In the case of prevention for example, subjects were asked to count the hair loss in the morning after brushing a month before using A&G Hair Complex and write done the number and do the same after a month of using A&G. After collecting these numbers from many subjects, we calculated the difference in hair loss, thus came with the % of prevention."

I think that the graph was more of a marketing tool, but I personally am waiting to see better before and after pictures and to hear the testimony of more users that have tried the product in these forums. It's important that those of you who are purchasing and using the product take lots of before and after pictures. You should upload them here. I can also provide a place where you can keep an album of all your pictures... actually it already exists on the site, but not many are using it yet. Anyone who would like to use this, PM me and I'll help you setup.

Whoop · Post by **Whoop** » Sun Mar 22, 2009 9:02 am

Melon Collie wrote:Whoop,

Unfortunately, Kimberly didn't respond to the "overall growth (re-growth)" part of the graph you asked about.

Interesting....maybe Joanne is right.

Yes, noticed that. Asked her for an answer to that question too. They respond pretty quickly I must say btw, I like that

Who is online