TWO TYPES OF EXPERIMENTS INVOLING MACROSCOPIC AND MICROSCOPIC HAIR COMPARISONS WERE EACH CARRIED OUT THREE TIMES. IN THE FIRST, THREE LABORATORY TRAINEES WERE GIVEN A SAMPLE OF 80 HAIRS FROM THE SCALP OF A CAUCASIAN INDIVIDUAL. THEY THEN WERE GIVEN 100 SINGLE HAIRS FROM 100 INDIVIDUALS, 1 OF WHICH CAME FROM THE ORIGINAL REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE. TWO OF THE THREE TRAINEES CORRECTLY MATCHED THE ONE HAIR WITH THE SAMPLE, AND THE THIRD TRAINEE FOUND FOUR HAIRS SIMILAR TO THE SAMPLE. THE SECOND EXPERIMENT COMPARED 1 HAIR TO 100 STANDARD SAMPLES; AGAIN, THE CORRECT MATCH WAS ACHIEVED BY TWO OF THREE TECHNICIANS, AND THE THIRD PICKED TWO POSSIBLE SAMPLES, THE CORRECT ONE AND ONE SIMILAR. THESE EXPERIMENTS POINT OUT THAT HAIR ANALYSIS IS SUBJECTIVE, BUT STILL CAN BE VALID AS SUPPORTING EVIDENCE OR AS A MEANS OF RULING OUT POSSIBILITIES. WHEN HAIR HAS BEEN BLEACHED OR DYED, IT BECOMES EVEN MORE USEFUL AS EVIDENCE. THE USE OF HAIR TO DETERMINE RACIAL CHARACTERISTICS AND TO DETERMINE SEX IS DISCUSSED. A CASE HISTORY DEMONSTRATES THE USE OF HAIR ANALYSIS TO FREE A SUSPECT IN A MURDER CASE; A SECOND PERSON LATER CONFESSED. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT ALTHOUGH HAIR STRANDS WILL NEVER BE AS INDIVIDUAL AS FINGERPRINTS, USE OF HAIR ANALYSIS CAN PROVIDE VALUABLE EVIDENCE. REFERENCES ARE APPENDED. (GLR)