I see the lasercomb people do not take kindly to criticism. Any thoughts about that? The link is here on the official hairmaxforum.com

I took the time to review their data and contrary to their protestations that there was not enough resolution in the photographs, I would challenge that statement. If they felt the photos didn’t well represent their claims, why would they bother posting them? In fact, the resolution in the photos were excellent (we looked at the macro photos, which quite clearly show the hairs or lack thereof), as was their scientific methodology, and that is why I was willing to state what I said, that the conclusions of their ’scientific paper’ were inaccurate. I have declared that I am an expert in viewing these photographs because I am the inventor of the technology that they used to do the very experiment being challenged by me (U.S. Patent 5,331,472 issued July, 1994). I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but based upon the data I reviewed, their conclusions are not credible.

Just so everything is easy to find, here was the follow-up email I received from Lexington after my initial blog post — Email Response from Managing Director of HairMax LaserComb.

Paid advertisements (not an endorsement):