Jump to content

Top Members

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 02/10/2019 in all areas

  1. 6 points
    The mostly useless topic of manual versus motorized should be relegated to the trash heap. It may have held relevance at some point in time, but it means little today. Patients should also be leery of dogmatic statements made about how an individual conducts his or her practice as the only person who can provide definitive detail as to what is done and how it’s done is the surgeon himself. The fact is that I use multiple devices for extracting grafts, with the device of choice depending on the situation at hand. There are days when a motorized technique is best and days when a manual technique is best. There are days when a straight-wall trephine is best and days when a flared-wall trephine is best. There are days when a straight-edge trephine is best and days when a serrated-edge trephine is best. This argument reminds me of guys arguing which is better, a straight-edge screwdriver or a Phillips screwdriver. Of course the answer is that it depends on the situation at hand. Also remember, there are some talented surgeons who can use every technology effectively and some who, despite having the best of the best instruments, can’t extract quality grafts on a consistent basis. When it’s all said and done, it’s not the instrument that matters as much as the surgeon choosing the instrument to use for the situation at hand. If you place the world’s finest and most expensive Steinway piano in front of most people, very few would be able to generate a beautiful song. On the other hand, place one of the world’s top five pianists in front of a Walmart special keyboard and you will probably hear some darn good tunes.
  2. 2 points
    What is my opinion on clinics that utilize technicians for extracting grafts? Hmm… Answer these three questions: 1) Would you allow a tech to remove a brain aneurysm on your mother? 2) Would you allow a tech to perform coronary artery bypass on your father? 3) Would you allow a tech to remove a testicular cancer on you? If the answer is “yes” to any of these questions, you should do nicely in a tech-driven hair restoration facility. If, on the other hand, you answered “no” to all questions, then ask yourself why you would allow a technician to perform a surgical procedure on your scalp. Also, if you answered “no” to all questions, and you decide to use a facility that uses technicians for graft extraction – without direct supervision by the operating doctor – ask your doctor why he or she is not performing the procedure, but rather uses the service of a technician to perform what I deem to be a surgical procedure. Questions I would direct to the physician if he or she uses technicians for graft extraction without direct doctor supervision: 1) Do you use a technician because you have poor eyesight? 2) Do you use a technician because you have a tremor? 3) Do you use a technician because you will be in another room maximizing your profit for the day? 4) Do you use a technician because you don’t believe patient care and supervision is important? 5) Do you use a technician because you are lazy and prefer to surf the web or check your stock portfolio? 6) Do you use a technician because you lack surgical skills and believe the technician is capable of delivering a better quality graft than you would be capable of delivering? 7) Do you believe harvesting grafts is a “simple” component of the surgical procedure or that harvesting grafts is “no big deal” such that it can readily be delegated to a technician? The bottom line is that I believe hair restoration is a surgical procedure that should be performed by a doctor. It is not a mundane and simplistic task that is capable of being delegated to the technician level. Face it, most technicians have little to no formal education, i.e. they receive “on the job” training. Who is training them and who is supervising them? We in this practice respect the doctor-patient relationship and feel that the patient is entitled to the doctor’s presence in the operating room from beginning to end.
  3. 2 points
    Reputations are built over time and with significant hard work and consistency. I would like to know the procedure on how doctors get disqualified from being recommended on this forum. There has to be a set of criterion which includes 2-3 botched or sub-par results. This is serious business and takes a financial and emotional toll on patients. This forum is about helping patients makes informed choices on doctors and bad results should be presented as they are, and doctors dis-qualified when they do not meet the standard. This is biggest value the forum can provide. I notice that there is too much debate on bad results and many times the marketing folks come in and provide some justification or basis for it. Whilst its good to have a debate, it doesn't help the guy who is suffering or others who are trying to decide. Just my 0.2 cents.
  4. 2 points
    Then simply ACT like you have a full head of hair....
  5. 2 points
    I've reviewed about 50 patient submitted cases of de Freitas on recuperar and about 30 of Couto, will probably have gone through their entire roster shortly. Couto is definitely more consistent and impressive, though de Freitas is close behind. I don't think his 4-5 year wait list is because of his celebrity soccer players alone, though I'm sure that's helped. One of the threads with Javier Farinos (FARI78) is pretty funny, as most of the users doubt it's him until the doc posts a picture of them together. 4350 FUE procedure with 10/10 results. Couto is the best I've seen, does with FUE what Koni does with strip. Occasionally de Freitas will have a case where you're like 'Wow what went wrong there." For the most part elite level results though, and seems to have become more consistent over the last few years. Similar to Lorenzo, beyond most of the North American guys. I would probably put de Freitas slightly above even Feriduni, Bisanga and Erdogan. They both do beautiful hairline work as well, some of the best I've seen. Perhaps the slight difference has to do with tech variability, not sure. To a greater degree we are ranking their support staff in Europe -- I wished they published more information about specific techs, owing to their greater involvement in extraction and placement. Would be nice to have excellence at that level acknowledged as well. That's why it's so helpful when patients include information about the entire staff when they submit their own cases. Both C & F tend to use higher graft numbers and the donor wounds seem larger then those of Lorenzo or Koni, though I'm not sure of the exact caliber. de Freitas quoted me 2.8 k as compared to 2 K most other places I've asked. Not sure if they count the grafts on extraction or implantation.
  6. 1 point
    I had the pleasure of visiting Dr. Mohebi in Los Angeles, Ca. I observed Dr. Mohebi and his experienced technicians perform an FUE procedure. Check out our visit
  7. 1 point
    Any update? Is the new place able to help?
  8. 1 point
    Vega protein is pretty good. You can buy it on amazon. If you live in the US it's at Vons also.
  9. 1 point
  10. 1 point
    I know others have already offered their feedback but allow me to offer my input on this as well. Hair transplant surgery is referred to as the illusion of density because there is simply not enough donor hair available to re-create true density in most cases. Hair transplant surgery is about supply and demand. The overall scalp with a full head of hair possesses approximately 100,000 hair follicles or 50,000 follicular unit grafts. Approximately 25,000 grafts make up true density on the entire top of the scalp. But nobody has that many grafts available in their donor area for transplanting. If you are really lucky and one of the fortunate, you might have close to 10,000 or 12,000 grafts available. That means if you placed all you’re available donor hair on top of the scalp in an evenly distributed fashion, you would have approximately 40 to 45% true density. However, most hair transplant surgeons will place more follicular units in the front than in the back in order to make it appear more natural. Now regarding the illusion of density, most hair loss suffering men and women don’t even notice any visible signs of hair loss until they’ve lost about 50% of their original density. That means, a surgeon doesn’t have to re-create true density for an individual to appear like they have a full head of hair. They only need to re-create about 50%. This is referred to as the illusion of density because it looks and appears as dense as if it were true density. Now where the illusion begins to fail is when you begin taking photos under harsh lighting or even standing under harsh lighting such as a bathroom or other fluorescent lights such as an office, etc. Your hair will also appear a bit thinner when it’s wet if you only have re-created 50% or less density. Since nobody has enough donor hair to restore hair to a completely bald head, surgeons re-create what’s referred to as an illusion of density by restoring 50% of an individual’s original density or true density to the most vital areas and a bit less density to areas that aren’t as vital such as the crown. Does this make sense? Best wishes, Bill
  11. 1 point
    Well, I would say this for 2 reasons. #1 - When understanding the process of a HT procedure, no Dr will ever guarantee that growth will be significantly apparent at 3 months. Actually, forget "no Dr will ever guarantee", no Dr of any status will say that results should be visible at 3 months. It wasn't so long ago that you were still in the "healing" stage. It is the same for all guys who have undergone HT procedures, we have all followed guys and seen results which have shown ridiculously early growth, and we ALL want to be one of those guys, in that category. I couldn't quote the percentages of guys who are in that category, but it for sure the minority. With the evolution in techniques, experience and HT´s in general, maybe that percentage is slowly on the rise, for sure more than it was 10 years ago, but that doesn't mean to say that it is the norm. So don't become disheartened that you are not in the top 8% in regards to early growth. As we all know, this is a long term commitment, a long term solution, and we are all looking for longterm lasting results. Would you rather see growth at 3 months and achieve a longterm 6/10, or see growth at 6 months and receive a long term 9/10? Society is now always in need of "quick fix" results. We are a civilisation that struggles with patience. Don't you be! #2 - I think that it is fair to say that the majority of guys who consider and ultimately undergo HT procedures spend too much time and energy thinking about their hair. That the majority are insecure of how their hair looks, and for that reason decide to take the path of surgery whilst spending large amounts of money and investing a lot of time in their hair. We already obsess too much about our hair. Most guys these days are reasonably well educated of the process of a HT, and understand the risk/reward in taking the decision of a HT. Even if you were not expecting/hoping for results until 6 months, you would still be obsessing about your hair everyday. Checking for new sprouts of hairs, how is the donor, is the reddening subsiding, shock loss, further loss of native hair, etc. etc... It is a painstaking process. So what positive aspect can worrying at 3 months possibly bring to the table? NOTHING! It can only bring more anxiety, stress and worry, which will completely change your frame of mind and can affect all aspects of your life. Including how you view you HT. You did your research, your due diligance. You made your decision and chose one of the best Drs in the business. Trust the process. But understand the process isn't a 3 month process. I wish you the best of luck and will be positively awaiting your next several months updates!
  12. 1 point
    don't worry ...I have shown my pics on here at 5 months where the growth was starting to be noticeable because a lot of guys were freaking out about their growth at 5 months ..I will look and see if i can find a 3 month pic ...I know it's stressful man but honestly 3 months is just the beginning . Just read through your post ..understandable why you are extra nervous as you had an unsatisfactory transplant before ...the work looks good with Asmed I'm sure at 4 months you will notice the start of the growth ...
  13. 1 point
    Great results and great presentation post! This is the way all clinic/doctors SHOULD post their patient results. Well done.
  14. 1 point
    I stopped taking Fin at the endocrinologist’s advice and oh what a change. It’s only been a few days but the difference in libido, firmness of erections, quality of orgasams and mood is very noticeable. Anybody who says Fin sides aren’t real doesn’t know what he’s talking about. I’m not going back there...
  15. 1 point
    Either way it’s down to the skill of the surgeon, focus on the services the clinic provide and the end result.
  16. 1 point
    It’s not the technique , but the clinic and the results u should be concerned about ..
  17. 1 point
    Anyone who has MPB will experience a progression of loss over their lifetime. The primary reason doctors recommend finasteride and minoxidil is to slow the rate of progression which for the majority of users, will help to preserve their native hair over longer periods of time. So anyone with MPB has some weak hair and some that is miniaturizing.
  18. 1 point
    I started taking Fin leading up to my HT and took it for a couple of years, and I also stopped due to mild side effects, primarily, weaker erections. I don't remember how long it took for things to return back to normal, but they did. It's a choice I made that I am happy with. It's been 4 1/2 years since my HT, which at the time was focused primarily on my hairline. My crown has gotten a little thinner over time - but there's no way to definitely know how different that would be if I had continued with Fin. The crown is something that may need to be addressed in the future, medication or not, and so I'm just hanging tight until then. For now, I'm in no immediate need for round 2, so I'm confident in my decision to stop taking it - and ultimately chose my sex drive and sex life over hanging on to some of my hair a little bit longer.
  19. 1 point
    Guys i have written a post some time back on my experience with Eugenix and taken liberty to attach the thread below, if you are to take a decision on chossing a Clinic in India i suggest you should read my post below. In my experience of 4 transplants i have understood making the slits and designing the hairline is the most important part of a hair transplant procedure. With respect to Eugenix they have innovated on FUE technique and made it better by the DHT (Direct Hair Transplant) process. In this DHT case they have one guy who is an expert in extracting, then the around 2 guys who are loading the grafts onto the implanters and then a Doctor implanting the grafts onto the bald head. in my case this was all done under the supervision of Dr Sethi. This works seamlessly like a factory and the graft is barely out of you body in foreign conditions for less than a minute, hence i believe is the reason why Eugenix gets amazing results. so coming back to the Doctor doing the procedure question, i dont think you should consider a Doctor who does the whole procedure on his own. the success of a Hair transplant process i think come from the synergy between the Doctors and this Technical team. Wishing you all the best on your procedure whomsoever the Doctor maybe.
  20. 1 point
    Hey mate, I wouldn't be too stressed. Your result at 4 months is really good compared to a lot of people. You will see much more growth from mo the 6-8, so try not to stress so much. It really can take a lot of time!
  21. 1 point
    The crown doesn't look bad. Maybe just go for the 1000 in the front via FUE.
  22. 1 point
    Hey guys, just a quick update on the situation. I have shared this thread with my contact at ASMED and have been offered a touch up on the frontal area free of charge, this May or April. The number of grafts are to be determined on inspection but I will definitely take this offer up. I'm really happy about this because I really didn't' think anything would come of it. This to me really shows that they not only take pride in their results but genuinely care about their customers. Hi Mick, I am currently at 13 months. I have been updating since 7.
  23. 1 point
    You won't see decent results until about 11 months and you'll never notice new hairs popping up. I surely didn't so don't waste your time in the mirror counting specs. One day you just kinda look at yourself in the mirror and notice it's looking better. Despite my posts I'm not upset about the hair that's grown, please don't take my tone through this thread as an unappreciative and regretful guy. It's not the case at all! There's no doubt that I'm in a much better position than I was. This is all just a matter of what should be. Plus your results will be different. The regrwoth stage is the worst and a lot of doubt is going to kick in but don't add to it. Be patient and see. It's all good man! You've taken the right steps into fixing your problem so take a breather and loosen up!
  24. 1 point
  25. 1 point
    I'm not gonna lie it does look a bit sparse at the moment, with that being said, you still have another 6 months of growth, hopefully you're a slow grower, have you mentioned this to the clinic? May I ask did technicians perform the extractions or did Dr. Bhatti? Also, one thing to consider is the length of your hair, I recommend not cutting the top anymore and letting it fully grow out that's how you get the most bang for your buck.