Hair Restoration Discussion Forum - By and For Hair Loss Patients
Go Back   Forum By and for Hair Loss Patients > Surgical Hair Restoration > Hair Restoration Questions and Answers

Welcome! This forum has over 180,000 posts and 12,000 before and after photos going back several years. To research a topic or physician, click on "Search" and enter the name.

You are currently a guest with limited access. By joining our FREE community you can post on this forum, reply privately to other members and or create your own profile, blog and photo album. Registration is easy, private and free so Join Today!

If you have any problems with the registration or login process, please contact us. If you are new please visit our FAQ.

Hair Restoration Questions and Answers Post a question for other knowledgeable forum members here. Any hair loss sufferers with good advice are also encouraged to respond.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Top  
Old 07-22-2012, 11:31 PM
Mickey85's Avatar
Senior Member
Celestial Follicle Club Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,158
Last Online: Yesterday 11:21 AM
Default Have 'ethics' risen or fallen in the last few years?

Or have they stayed consistent? I know it's a hard question because there are many Doctors but has the general consensus changed? Are more grafts being extracted/used? Areas packed more densely? More liberal harvesting of donor hair(FUE and strip)? Lower hairlines? For good or bad? What are you opinions? Just thought it would be a cool topic to discuss.
__________________
The only 2 threads you will ever need:

Revamped Advantages/Disadvantages of FUE. Myths dispelled. Educate yourself

Everything FUE. Manual, motorized, ARTAS, NeoGraft, physician details and more

Due to an influx of inquiries, I advocate Dr Lorenzo, Bisanga, Feriduni, Mwamba, Maras, Erdogan & Reddy. I receive no remuneration and am unaffiliated with any clinic. Pro-FUE and pro-patient!
Reply With Quote
  #2   Top  
Old 07-23-2012, 12:40 AM
scar5's Avatar
Senior Member
Honorary Real Hair Club Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 812
Last Online: 09-20-2014 09:37 PM
Default

I don't think ethics have changed on the supply side i.e. the doctors and clinics. I define ethics as motive not message. They still push the boundaries, make tactical retreats, gamble, strategize, disappear, reappear, refine their gambit with the same underlying motivations as ever.

THe message has obviously changed, as the proliferation of social media and the new technologies have mingled to create a new and vast portal of information and choices for us HT consumers. Nowadays, they are aware that even a Bosley consumer will do a web search and stumble on a site like this. The HT clinics that have survived have done so because they not only adapt, they exploit these changes and all the doubts us mortal HT sods harbor.

But a doc is still a doc, a rep a rep.

I think the posters have changed. A shill used to be regarded like spam, but now he or she is more legit. The boundary is blurred.
Reply With Quote
  #3   Top  
Old 07-26-2012, 08:32 PM
Spanker's Avatar
Senior Member
Celestial Follicle Club Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,741
Last Online: Yesterday 07:52 PM
Default

I think it is a little of both.

Clinics like H and W are getting 10k grafts more often than before.

I do think that some clinics push the envelope and some stay pretty conservative. They are both available to those that do their research. It is a supply and demand kind of thing.
__________________
I am an online representative for Dr. Raymond Konior of Chicago Hair Institute.
You can email me at Spanker.CHI@gmail.com
View Spanker's Website
I am not a medical professional and my opinions should not be taken as medical advice.
Reply With Quote
  #4   Top  
Old 07-26-2012, 10:14 PM
Future_HT_Doc's Avatar
Forum Co-Moderator
Celestial Follicle Club Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,962
Last Online: Yesterday 09:51 AM
Default

I know your questions were a bit more specific, but I think in general, ethics in hair transplantation have increased greatly in the past decade.

Not to "toot my own horn" here, but I really do think online hair restoration communities, the ability to widely spread information (online), and the ability to post results online has brought a new level of transparency and accountability to the field. Whether it was a natural progression or forced evolution, I personally think ethics have increased greatly in the past 5-10 years.
__________________
Blake (Future_HT_Doc)

Forum Co-Moderator and Editorial Assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, the Hair Loss Learning Center, the Hair Loss Q&A Blog, and the Hair Restoration Forum

All opinions are my own and my advice should not constitute as medical advice.
Reply With Quote
  #5   Top  
Old 07-27-2012, 02:11 AM
scar5's Avatar
Senior Member
Honorary Real Hair Club Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 812
Last Online: 09-20-2014 09:37 PM
Default

I must concede, as much a I hate to, to a degree of transparency that has a good flow on effect. But is a punter just as likely to regret it today, as much as 30 years ago? Is that a fair question?

I honestly think that adapting to the new reality does not mean more honest ethically or even more accountable. I think accountable is relative.

I was turned away by a doc in 1983 at 19 for an HT because I was deemed to be too young and because 'i might regret my decision'. (Went back 5 years later)

Just think of the 2000 - 2010 period and the ethical 'imperative'

1) The laser comb
2) The Neograft machine
3) The trichophytic closure
4) The crusade to save us from the 'poison of FUE' *
5) Revivogen
6) The continuous denial of telegen hair loss in strips
7) The body hair scandal
8) SMP - and it's emerging profile
9) Nape hair use when it is prone to DHT
10) The ongoing trickiness required to participate online honestly
11) The cryptic disclaimers we still sign at the clinic
12) the 'bait - and - switch' marketing tactics still used




(and I was plundered by sub-standard FUE work myself)

Last edited by scar5; 07-27-2012 at 02:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6   Top  
Old 07-27-2012, 08:32 AM
Mickey85's Avatar
Senior Member
Celestial Follicle Club Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,158
Last Online: Yesterday 11:21 AM
Default

Wow, you bring up some very good points Scar5. You do seem a bit apprehensive about the hair transplant industry on a whole.

Just out of curiosity, what is bad about Revivogen?
__________________
The only 2 threads you will ever need:

Revamped Advantages/Disadvantages of FUE. Myths dispelled. Educate yourself

Everything FUE. Manual, motorized, ARTAS, NeoGraft, physician details and more

Due to an influx of inquiries, I advocate Dr Lorenzo, Bisanga, Feriduni, Mwamba, Maras, Erdogan & Reddy. I receive no remuneration and am unaffiliated with any clinic. Pro-FUE and pro-patient!
Reply With Quote
  #7   Top  
Old 07-27-2012, 08:32 AM
Shampoo's Avatar
Senior Member
Honorary Real Hair Club Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Dixie
Posts: 916
Last Online: 09-19-2014 09:22 PM
Default

some ways better....some ways worse
sites like this one & the internet have allowed patients to be way more informed
before our options were pretty limited...thats all changed for the better
But i think in some quarters they have fallen
when i see guys in their twenties posting about getting dense packing
i just shake my head
they really have no idea what the future holds
and in some cases it could get really ugly
even with what is mostly still a full head of hair
they panic at the early, early stages of aging
at 24 they gobble up precious donor hair trying to look 16 again
it's all about today, tomorrow, this year, and next year
but what happens when they are 45 years old & have a dense hairline
and behind that thick hairline is badly balding with not enough donor hair left?
and the doc that did it is long since retired 20 years later?
i suppose there's always the chance cloning will be available by then
lets hope so....but it's a gamble.

__________________
Dr. Dow Stough - 1000 Grafts - 1996
Dr. Jerry Wong - 4352 Grafts - August 2012

Pro-FUT - Pro-Patient - Pro-Truth !
Reply With Quote
  #8   Top  
Old 07-27-2012, 10:01 AM
Spanker's Avatar
Senior Member
Celestial Follicle Club Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,741
Last Online: Yesterday 07:52 PM
Default

Shampoo, do you have a link to the rest of the above case?
__________________
I am an online representative for Dr. Raymond Konior of Chicago Hair Institute.
You can email me at Spanker.CHI@gmail.com
View Spanker's Website
I am not a medical professional and my opinions should not be taken as medical advice.
Reply With Quote
  #9   Top  
Old 07-27-2012, 10:07 AM
Shampoo's Avatar
Senior Member
Honorary Real Hair Club Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Dixie
Posts: 916
Last Online: 09-19-2014 09:22 PM
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spanker View Post
Shampoo, do you have a link to the rest of the above case?
Spanker...I don't really know much about the guy pictured and just used it as a "rough example" of what a possible outcome could be for young guys that burn through all their donor hair trying to look 16 years old again. But here is the link that has some limited info about the guy pictured.

http://tinyurl.com/cqgqaov
__________________
Dr. Dow Stough - 1000 Grafts - 1996
Dr. Jerry Wong - 4352 Grafts - August 2012

Pro-FUT - Pro-Patient - Pro-Truth !
Reply With Quote
  #10   Top  
Old 07-27-2012, 10:08 AM
Spanker's Avatar
Senior Member
Celestial Follicle Club Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,741
Last Online: Yesterday 07:52 PM
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scar5 View Post
I must concede, as much a I hate to, to a degree of transparency that has a good flow on effect. But is a punter just as likely to regret it today, as much as 30 years ago? Is that a fair question?

I honestly think that adapting to the new reality does not mean more honest ethically or even more accountable. I think accountable is relative.

I was turned away by a doc in 1983 at 19 for an HT because I was deemed to be too young and because 'i might regret my decision'. (Went back 5 years later)

Just think of the 2000 - 2010 period and the ethical 'imperative'

1) The laser comb
2) The Neograft machine
3) The trichophytic closure
4) The crusade to save us from the 'poison of FUE' *
5) Revivogen
6) The continuous denial of telegen hair loss in strips
7) The body hair scandal
8) SMP - and it's emerging profile
9) Nape hair use when it is prone to DHT
10) The ongoing trickiness required to participate online honestly
11) The cryptic disclaimers we still sign at the clinic
12) the 'bait - and - switch' marketing tactics still used




(and I was plundered by sub-standard FUE work myself)
Scar,

Can you elaborate? I am not sure what your complaint is about many of these listed. I think a lot of the problem is that these techniques are kind of new and still evolving.

I feel like FUE is starting to peak and now we need to be looking at the Gho technique, or something similar.

What are the bait and switch techniques? Online trickiness?
__________________
I am an online representative for Dr. Raymond Konior of Chicago Hair Institute.
You can email me at Spanker.CHI@gmail.com
View Spanker's Website
I am not a medical professional and my opinions should not be taken as medical advice.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:20 AM.