Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Dr. Rushton Hairmax Study Resuts...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2012

    Default Dr. Rushton Hairmax Study Resuts...

    Although it was a small sample size, the study was designed fairly well. Here's it is:

    Our first speaker of the day was one of our own members, Dr. Hugh Rushton DSc PhD FIT MAE with a presentation entitled ‘HairMax® Laser Comb Therapy in Male Pattern Hair Loss’. Jeremy J. H. Gilkes MD FRCP and Dominic Van Neste MD PhD joined Dr. Rushton in conducting research into the effects of the Laser Comb in male pattern hair loss. David Michaels from Lexington International donated the laser combs for use in these trials.

    Two subjects were used – one had been using propecia/minoxidil for 3 years and the other had had no treatment for 2 years. The trial involved half of the head for 6 months. A unit area trichogram was performed before and after the trial and hair variables evaluated were hair cm-2, hair diameter, hair length and phase of growth.

    After 6 months some of the results from the control group were better than the treated group. The conclusions therefore were that no significant change in hair variables could be found using the Laser Comb between treated and untreated areas. Some seasonal variation was observed. Limitations of the research were limited number of subjects but the strengths included validated evaluation methods, half head design and blinded observers. Further studies are required.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2008

    Default Hairmax clinical studies

    Hi Pete -

    Thank you for your post.

    This so-called study by Dr. Rushton cannot in any way be considered a "study" as it involved just 2 patients and is therefore impossible to draw any conclusions from. In order to be classified as a clinical study, it must be conducted under Good Clinical Practices (GCP) based on information contained in this link: The design of a clinical trial is a very detailed and rigorous process as you will see from the link and the Rushton study in no way complied with the guidelines for GCP's.

    This HairMax blog post will also be informative: - "BEWARE OF CLINICAL STUDY REPORTS THAT

    We suggest that you access: This will give the real picture of the outstanding efficacy of the HairMax from 7 clinical studies involving 460 subjects conducted under strict GCP guidelines. Also, we suggest your access: to read the results of the key clinical study from 2006 that was published in 2009 in a peer review journal. The conclusion of this study was: "The results of this study suggest that the HairMax LaserComb is an effective, well tolerated and safe laser phototherapy device for the treatment of AGA in males". Since that time we have completed studies and received FDA Clearance for the treatment of females.

    In closing, 2 patients is not considered a study - it is observational. Only when a study is conducted under strict GCP guidelines, with a large number of patients and the active device is compared to an inactive device in a double blind manner, can any conclusions be drawn. This of course does not fit the Rushton study, so to us it has absolutely no meaning what so ever. The HairMax has been proven in 7 GCP studies with 460 subjects to consistently work in treating hereditary hair loss and promoting hair growth.

    Thank you for the inquiry and we hope that this has set the record straight on this so-called study which is when all is said and done - is meaningless and has no value what so ever.


    Visit the website:
    Follow us:
    Access the HairMax Blog:
    Online ordering of the HairMax LaserComb:
    Last edited by LAS; 02-18-2012 at 09:37 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2012


    Fair enough. Just thought I'd see what you had to say with regard to this study.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts