This looks like it could help a lot of incompletes achieve some degree of mobility. From what I understand from the presentation of the HAL therapy, all of the eight chronic incomplete subjects in the pilot study and 35 out of 50 chronic patients who were treated later -- all of whom had already been through quite extensive conventional rehab -- achieved significant functional improvement with the HAL therapy, so that after a period of training with the HAL robot they were able to do some level of functional walking, with or without assistive devices, WITHOUT the robot. Question for those of you who know more about neuroplasticity than I do: Do I understand correctly that the people who regained function thanks to the HAL therapy did so because the robot enabled them to repeatedly perform actions that they had been unable to perform before, but that became possible with the robot, leading to increase in muscle size and strength (because they were finally exercising previously unexercised muscles), peripheral neuron sprouting and the creation of a feedback loop? Does training with the HAL give better results because this feedback loop includes actions that the person was not able to perform naturally but that he now has the chance to practise and reinforce? Is this the big difference that HAL therapy is able to offer compared to "conventional" intensive rehab therapy, where the person is generally only able to reinforce what he can already do? Thanks for your replies.