TheEmperor

Without seeing your face, we cant really see your overall look. I'm not going to say you look great with the buzz cut, but you may. Having hair is as much a style issue as it is a "looks" issue, so you have right to be concerned. I can tell you for a fact that people act differntly when you have hair. You are a good candidate for HT. Your loss pattern is establised and you are not loosing far down in the back. HTs will not restore your native density, but you may be be able to retain a good look with enough grafts. You will need 4500+ to finish the front top, and maybe another 2500 for the crown.

Honestly, the area is red or pinkish for 2-3 months, but even if the redness fades, the area will be unsightly until significant new growth has emerged. I lost the hat around 5 1/2 months which was the point where new growth did not look abnormal and was roughly equivalent to the remaining native hair I had before the surgery. Unsightly? Each incision leaves a tiny divot that will diminish in appearance over time and as hair starts to grwo, but until about 5-6 months, your scalp will look "rough". You will go through a difficult period. Because of the strip removed in back, your side an back hair will be long and unkempt to hide the healing strip. It just doesnt look normal until the new hair has started to grow in significantly. If you have alot of native hair or a small procedure, you may look normal alot sooner. You have to decide if you are going to hide for 5+ months, or are comfortable with everyone knowing. They will figure it out eventually so maybe you shouldnt hide it. If you have native hair on top that is going to be shaved down for the procedure, I would recommend buzzing the top and sides very short so everyone gets used to seeing you bald. Do this about 2 months before the procedure so the hair has grown out enough to cover the scar. This way there will not be a drastic change in your appearance when you return. As soon as the redness fades, you can probably loose the hat. Good luck.

I have a tricho scar and its not as good as many post online. I would say its between 4-6mm through the whole length and has been since taking out the staples, its not a stretch issue. Keeping the hair an inch or longer on the sides will hide it but I do not think I could buzz down. Combing through the hair the scar is very easy to see. videos of some patients -- the scar is almost invisible. I think much of this has to do with native hair quality. No tricho hair appears to be growing in the scar, my guess is that the cross cut required of tricho kills the follicles in some patients, myself included. Wonder if I would have done better without? Tricho is not a silver bullet, people are still getting substanttial scars. I'm not particularly happy with the yield either. With FUE the yield might be even less but I would stil be able to buzz the sides.

If someone is reading my posts that closely and remembering everyhting I say. . thats just sad.

The quality of the staff and consultants is almost as important as other factors -- the consultatns will be your communications link to the doctor in many cases. If you get a bad vibe from one of the culsultants and believe it is unwarranted arrogance, look elsewhere. I would agree that some of them lay it on pretty thick and will often make exaggerated claims to get you in (their) chair. In my research prior to my HT, I contacted two of the docs on your list. One was disqualified because the office (while they have a good reputation here) seemed to approach scheduling a HT like getting a haircut. "Sure, we can get you in for a 2500, next Tuesday" (gum chewing noise in background). The other clinic was disqualified because they were very struuctured in their "screening" process and even getting some of the consultatnts time for a phone consult required an appointment. I'm no going to wait a week to speak with a non-doc. Lesson to docs, your consultants are a huge part of your business. The doctor I eventually chose has perhaps the best reputation in the HT community and his consultant was very professional and accomodating.

Unfortunately, that looks about right. . . 2100 Grafts is not alot for the area planted. Look at the native hair on top of your scalp. About the first inch and a half layers on top of itself before it can hide your scalp. Given the low density of your transplant, which is less than th e native hair, it doesnt have enough hair to provide coverage. Combed forward, it does reduce the size of your bald spot.

This is said, but I disagree. 50% density apears like 50% density. You may be able to stlye it so it looks like you are not going bald, but make no mistake, 50% is 50%.

I would guess that HT prices should track other luxury items like SUVs, large cars, large plasma TVs, etc. IOW, prices should come down.

You have 3 surgeons: Hasson, Wong, and Rahal who are among the best, but turn out different style of results. Look closely at their approach. When you can tell a differnece between their results, then you can make an informed decision. My impression of the three is this: Rahal: Typically the most agressive, his session sizes are a bit smaller on average than hasson and wong. He focuses on the front with lower hairline and typically closes temples in first pass. This is good if patient is a low norwood, but when performed on a higher norwood, imposes a "no turning back" approach that will require more grafts behind. He endeavors to recreate the most youthful hairlines of the three. Hasson: Has distinction of largest documented sessions, his approach when getting large 5K+ sessions is to "carpet bomb" from front to back with a fairly agressive (straight) hairline with minor temple closure. These patients often return for a follow up to add density throughout, but have sometimes gone from completely bald to the appearance of no hair loss. Wong: Does large sessions, second only to Hasson. Is probably the most conservative of the three and tends to not close temples, placing more grafts midscalp which layer forward. His approach seems geared towards overall balance and making "standalone" results out of 4K-ish procedures. In follow-up sessions he will lower hairlines and complete crowns, if needed. My subjective impression is that Wong does the softest hairlines and recreates the most natural look with a finite number of grafts. Doing large session sizes with conservative hairlines, he has access to many 1's and can recontruct the complete hairline (first cm) using only 1's. Doesnt seem to go as large or low as Hasson, but has some very impressive (youthful) results for those who return for a second procedure. He seems to reserve this for a second procedure. Hasson pulls the largest sessions, puts more in the front in the first procedure and seems to rely upon getting more grafts to support this approach. His hairlines appear more dense and are a bit more straight that Wong's, but they appear more coarse because he is using more 2s closer to the front, where Wong seems to put more density behind, to support the all-1s hairline in the front. Because of his hairline styles and overall graft counts, he appears to have the most "home runs" from frontal shots posted on the web. Rahal seems to do the densest front-packing and lowest hairlines of the three. I havent seen as many complete NW5/6 transformations as from H&W, but his hairlines are broad and he closes temples from first session. I believe this appraoch may suit young patients, but imply a long term commitment. There seems to be more overlap between Hasson and Wong's philosophies, and less with rahal, however I believe Wong's low density/conservative results are better than Hassons (Hasson's 4K sessions are designed to comb back, Wong's 4K sessions you typically see combing forward), but hasson's hairline shapes are typically more youthful and he endeavors to carpet bomb the entire head with massive graft counts. Rahal's hairlines have an artistic quality of their own that I can see would appeal to the youngest patients. If you are researching these three, also check out shapiro, he is in the same league.

When I started losing hair, it thinned out at the beginning, but I was able to hold on to much of my hair for another 10 years. After 15 years of diffuse loss I was a good candidate for hair transplant. If medication doesnt halt your hairloss, you may be a good candidate for HT. Hair loss is not the end. Good luck.

H&W Raised their prices recently so you might want to stay with Rahal. Either could do the job.

If you type in "Lehr Hair Transplant" in Google, it brings you to HTN. Of course there is no information on Lehr here, but it certainly helps this community. This is how HTN gained prominence in the 90s, by faking search engines to show up first in the query list. That used to be an art. Google's search technology has fixed this to some degree. Lehr is the real deal, but he is not a member of HTN. I feel bad for him that HTN shows up first in google when searching for him. His site shows up third or fourth.

Thats a tough, but not unanswerable question. It comes down to how well you were able to pull of the look as you were losing your hair. If you were able to pull it off when you had between 30-50% of your original density, then yes. To restore the front to near native dentsity could take 5-7K grafts. If you put in 2500, then that would be about half-density or less. I have not seen any successful "long" hairstyles after HT. Only one that comes to mind is shuffle.

Yeah, this is perhaps the scariest post I have seen on this forum. Fake hair + dead transplant grafts. .

I really disagree with this. when you've researched this long enough -- in the 2 year range -- you will start to notice differences in style, even between docs who trained other docs. Frankly, there are a wide range of hairline designs and approach, differnces in long term strategy (or unfortunate absense of strategy), how the work will be spread across procedures, realative density, angles of plantation, blade vs needle, dense packing ohilosophy, shave philosophy, lateral vs saggital, etc. Then you get into other factos such as size and quality of staff, consistency of results, etc. You will notice that all these things influence the results you see in the finished product. Then when you look at the results more you will see subte differences in the finished product, ease of styling, layering, etc. Its really a dynamic product because hair is not static, it moves, is styled, and reacts to the environment. When I chose a doctor, it was after 10 years of research. I chose my doctor because of reputation, abilty to do large session sizes, and largely because his showcase patients had loss and characteristics similar to mine and I noticed a "trend" in his results that seems to make sense for me. (And this did not mean I chose a doc who went with the lowest or most remarkable hairlines -- you will start to detect faults with those kinds of hairlines when you see enough pics. ) I'm between 7-8 months in results and they have slowly improved. While my HT is not perfect, I see other results that I do not like stylistically and realize I could have been stuck with a result that was much worse, even from another top doc. (I cringe to think what my result would be if I had gone to a doc who can only move 2500-3000 in one session. Also I see some docs place with a more "relaxed" angulation which almost suggests the hair needs to be combed backwards -- which I did NOT WANT! (Some guys like this look, or maybe they are stuck with it.) I hate to say it, but IMO, you really should go to a doc with 10+ years of experience, There are some "rising stars" who I might consider, but only docs with a long time tracking patient results and seeing what works can a doctor incorporate that feedback into his art and make the most of every patient. Most of the "rising stars" seem to focus on technical aspect of dense packing the front but resource allocation is something subtle which is more important, IMO. Good luck in your choice.

Agio, I looked closely at your pics and your loss and hair color is similar to mine. Also I had about the same # of grafts as you, about 800 more hairs total. I think my hair may be a finer quality than yours, but it is straight. My doctor dipped down in the front a bit more (with the temples receded a bit more with no closure.) Also I believe he angled the hairs a bit farther forward. This has the effect of layering the hairs from behind to add density to the front. I use a thickening mouse, a hair dryer, and a round brush to style the hair forward/across and add some body. Surprisingly, if I do not style my hair, just comb it across it is fairly cohesive and well managed but with less body. Im not having any problems with the quality of the hair and because of its color, the see-thru nature is not devastating. It was about the 5.5month mark where everything "came together" for me. Somewhere around 5.5months there was enough hair to do something with. Looks like your 5mo pics. After that, it seems that lengthening of hair has added to the layering and perceived density. You probably have that to look forward to. I think you have higher hairline density than me. One trick which I would urge you to try is to get a "robocut". Its one of those vaccum cleaner hair cutting devices. You can accurately control the length of hair. MY impression is that your top hair suffers from the contrast of how much side hair you have. Good luck! I think it will come together for you in the next month or so, but youve got to take responsibility for the styling to make it look its best.

They say there will be some thickening through the next few months, so even if my result improves it will still probably be in the same ballpark of what I have now. Anything extra will be appreciated. I know the doctor and his consultant made some very specific claims about how good my subjective result would be in comparison to other patients. Perhaps the benefits were oversold or perhaps I just need another 3-4K grafts to achieve what I was hoping for. My hair does not look "good" by any stretch of the imagination. (if carefully styled, it does not look "bad") The HT hasnt reduced any years because the temples are receded and the hairline is high. (It frames my face a bit better than the "combforward" of bridge hair I had before.) However, I am not "bald" anymore. It really hasnt improved my self confidence much. I detect slightly improved reaction to my look from the opposite sex (strangers). However, the majority of people that I work with know it was done and I have to contend with that- even though surprisingly only two people have said anything, one positive and one negative. In some ways having no hair was more liberating than having "bad hair". Now Ive got something extra to do in the morning with mousse and a hair dryer. When you lose the majority of your hair and cut it short, it is less worrysome than having thin wispy hair that need to be styled correctly to not look bad. I guess I've reversed my hairloss situation about 3-5 years (although five years ago my crown wasnt bald.) I believe that I will require another procedure to fil in the crown , connect better on the one side and lower hairline . I realize that with enough time and money I can get to a good place but Im not there yet. Quite frankly, the scar is what is causing me alot of anxiety. I feel like Ive made a trade off - gained some hair on top, but cant use clippers on the side or back ever again. I'm really on the fence if this was a good idea. I think I realize that if I have another one or two procedures, I will eventually get _close_ to where I want to be, maybe then I will be happy. With the scar and future loss I'll need to be careful in coming years. I really dont want to go through another surgery or spend more money on this but im only half way across the river. May just decide to stop where I am now with a bald crown. Just dont know.

I am a NW 5/6 that had a HT 7 monhts ago (coalition doctor). In general I'm happy, but my feeling is that there are density issues (not enough hair in some places). In some ways I look much better than before, in other ways, not much differnt at all. The ultra refined HT is of such fine quality, there is no plugginess or root effect, so it does not scream HT, except for the fact that my crown is empty. Going with ultra refined grafts seems to sacrifice density for naturalness. I look like a guy who is going bald but got lucky and was able to retain a collection of hair in the front. I am now fully aware what they mean by "illusion of density". When combed up to expose the scalp, it looks like I am almost bald, maybe 30% original density, but with hair from behind growing forward and layering on top of the hairline hair, it looks like I have more than I do. I am fortunate that I have high rim/side hair that contributes to the result, otherwise there would be _serious_ density problems. Overall I would have to rate my HT as "very clever". The hairline is not as low as I would like, but I think if it was lower or wider, the lack of hair behind and general lack of density would be hard to explain. IOW, I do not think the HT subtracted any years from my appearance, but from most angles I look better and no one would describe me as "the bald guy". I then was browsing through Bobman's (home run) results and it occured to me that some of the problems I see in my own result are present to a lesser degree in the Bobman's result. After his #1 procedure, I can see that he only has a thin bridge between his side hair and new top hair, but that from most angles the look "works". Of course he went back for #2 and #3 to greatly improve the result. He is lucky in that his hair is coarsr (or he had a greater yield). His front hair collection is more impressive. OTH, his crown and sides were farter receded. (Bobman, Im not singling you out -- you have a great result -- im only saying that I understand what im seeing much better now) My point is that unless you have had a HT, the pitures will be more impressive in some ways than the actual result. Only when you have had a HT will you really understand what you are seeing. On a related topic, there is a guy at work who has a HT (over a period of 9 months went from a good NW6 bald to a reconstructed hairline. While I originally thougt his result was impressive, now when I look at him, I realize that his result is also only "very clever" and that my HT result is much better on the virtue that my hair is finer and I had a good bit more native side hair. I would rate his HT as very skillful, but the overall lack of density combined with his coarse hair reveals it as a HT to those in the know. I am happy for him in some ways because I think he loooks much better, but OTH, he cant have much more donor left and theres really not much more he can do to improve his result. If he blasts the front with a second pass and neglects his "black hole" crown, the contrast between front and rear would be more pronounced and wouldnt hlep his case any. If he attempts to address the crown it would probably only achieve the ability to reduce the shine and put the thinnest of see thru coverage up there. I guess what I am saying is that until you have had a HT yourself, you cant accurately evaluate the elements of "density", resource allocation, or overall cleverness of the surgeon. Its quite apparent that with some poor decisions, a doctor could completely screw over a patient, (and this includes building up an area with too many grafts.) In that sense, while my HT is not perfect, I am very thankful that I can walk out in public without anyone staring or suspecting anything. Those NW 2 and 3s who we see getting their hairlines blasted with 70g/cm2 really doesnt take much skill at all.

I am a NW 5/6 that had a HT 7 monhts ago (coalition doctor). In general I'm happy, but my feeling is that there are density issues (not enough hair in some places). In some ways I look much better than before, in other ways, not much differnt at all. The ultra refined HT is of such fine quality, there is no plugginess or root effect, so it does not scream HT, except for the fact that my crown is empty. Going with ultra refined grafts seems to sacrifice density for naturalness. I look like a guy who is going bald but got lucky and was able to retain a collection of hair in the front. I am now fully aware what they mean by "illusion of density". When combed up to expose the scalp, it looks like I am almost bald, maybe 30% original density, but with hair from behind growing forward and layering on top of the hairline hair, it looks like I have more than I do. I am fortunate that I have high rim/side hair that contributes to the result, otherwise there would be _serious_ density problems. Overall I would have to rate my HT as "very clever". The hairline is not as low as I would like, but I think if it was lower or wider, the lack of hair behind and general lack of density would be hard to explain. IOW, I do not think the HT subtracted any years from my appearance, but from most angles I look better and no one would describe me as "the bald guy". I then was browsing through Bobman's (home run) results and it occured to me that some of the problems I see in my own result are present to a lesser degree in the Bobman's result. After his #1 procedure, I can see that he only has a thin bridge between his side hair and new top hair, but that from most angles the look "works". Of course he went back for #2 and #3 to greatly improve the result. He is lucky in that his hair is coarsr (or he had a greater yield). His front hair collection is more impressive. OTH, his crown and sides were farter receded. (Bobman, Im not singling you out -- you have a great result -- im only saying that I understand what im seeing much better now) My point is that unless you have had a HT, the pitures will be more impressive in some ways than the actual result. Only when you have had a HT will you really understand what you are seeing. On a related topic, there is a guy at work who has a HT (over a period of 9 months went from a good NW6 bald to a reconstructed hairline. While I originally thougt his result was impressive, now when I look at him, I realize that his result is also only "very clever" and that my HT result is much better on the virtue that my hair is finer and I had a good bit more native side hair. I would rate his HT as very skillful, but the overall lack of density combined with his coarse hair reveals it as a HT to those in the know. I am happy for him in some ways because I think he loooks much better, but OTH, he cant have much more donor left and theres really not much more he can do to improve his result. If he blasts the front with a second pass and neglects his "black hole" crown, the contrast between front and rear would be more pronounced and wouldnt hlep his case any. If he attempts to address the crown it would probably only achieve the ability to reduce the shine and put the thinnest of see thru coverage up there. I guess what I am saying is that until you have had a HT yourself, you cant accurately evaluate the elements of "density", resource allocation, or overall cleverness of the surgeon. Its quite apparent that with some poor decisions, a doctor could completely screw over a patient, (and this includes building up an area with too many grafts.) In that sense, while my HT is not perfect, I am very thankful that I can walk out in public without anyone staring or suspecting anything. Those NW 2 and 3s who we see getting their hairlines blasted with 70g/cm2 really doesnt take much skill at all.

They should already be gone! I was advised not to baby the grafts. The crusts can be worked loose in the shower starting day 10. I think they should all be gone by 2 weeks.

Looks good! Even if it all doesnt grow it will make a big improvement.

When I begain losing in early 20's, I had extreme anxiety about it. I remember the days in college eating ramen noodles and scraping together enough cash (and selling things) to buy $40 bottles of Rogaine, which didnt work. I think if anyone is prone to anxiety, hairloss is a wonderful outlet for that anxiety! I remember taking care of myself, eating well, working out religiously, dressing well, tanning salons (bad idea), and getting everything together to the point where meeting women was very easy. I suppose my "system" was based upon having everything "just right", and hairloss totally destroyed my approach to socializing with women. Of course this is how simplistic a 21 year old views the world. Over the past 15+ years the loss continued, I learned how to make the most of what i had until it was all gone. I was still anxious about it, but like a permanent wound that has healed over with scarring, being bald became a part of my personality. I guess I accepted, with depression rather than anxiety, my reduced social standing. The point is that I learned to cope to the point where it wasnt actively causing me stress, but I also wasnt going clubbing or doing any "youthful" social things. I had a HT about 7 months ago to restore the front 2/3rds and while I am not completely happy with the coverage and healing process, to be totally hoonest, I am happy with the decision because, while my result is not finished, I am no longer bald and I look better than I did before. I regognize that I will probably benefit from another 3000 grafts, but when I get another 3000, I should look quite good. That thought is encouraging! Quite frankly though, relative to other challenges in my life, the hair loss was somewhat minor. I view the HT as a way to make myslef more comfortable in my life so that I can take on bigger challenges. Given you age and loss pattern, I would say its a no brainer if you can afford it. I would like to add that given your position in entertainment, you are going to have to figure out a way to deal with downtime. The back and sides will be healed in short order and presentable within days if covered with hair. However, the recipient will likely be red for up to 3 months, and if you have any native hair which is shaved down, you will look differnt. IMO, you could take two appraoches. Go to H&W who are able to give you a "one and done" session of 4K+ grafts. Denser sessions have the appearance of growing faster and reduce chances of needing a follow up. However they shave your native hair to plant more densely. THe other approach would be to find a doctor who works within existing native hair. Epstein comes to mind. The liklihood of a follow up is higher, but your transition will be more gradual. Really depsnds on how much loss you have. If you are mostly bald, I would only consider a doc who routinely plants 4K because you will need EVERY ONE of those grafts with fine hair. If you have cosmetically significant native hair in the recipient, then consider the other approach.

Take it home and modify it. You might be able to release one of the seams to make it fit better.

My opinion is that you are on the edge of what would be considered a poor candidate. Given your age and degree of loss, you may progress to a NW7. Much would depend on the quality of your crown hair. That said, if you get a very mature hairline, you may be ok. It will certainly take 4000 grafts to cover the area that is now bald with the understanding that you will probably need more down the line. Check out H&W. They routinely do large sessions.

No, I'm not going to share my doctor or post any pictures. I want to retain complete anonymity. I dont want to bash my physician but I also want people researching this to realize its a complicated/imperfect procedure. [Please dont PM me for the Doctors name because I will not share.] I dont believe the doctor made any eggregious errors and most of the problems can probably be addressed in a follow up procedure. I also am only 7 months so the density and pronounced jaggies may resolve themselves. My point is that Hair Transplantation, when done by the best of the best, is an imperfect operation. The doctor is working with limited resources and makes judgement calls based on this and tries to account for variabilty in healing, yield, growth, etc. I think the root of the problems (i.e. being poorly connected on one side, and pronounced jaggies) may be attributed to low hairline yield with predominantly singles. The situation may improve. As far as the scar is concerned, the doctor is known to stand behind his work and I believe that after two procedures, a scar revision or FUE may be necessary to bring the width down. As it is, I cant go below about 1.5" on sides. Even at that lenght, the scar is detectable depending on how the hair is combed. Unfortuantely, even when combed well, I appear to have "hat head" with the outline of the scar faintly visible in the growth of the hair. I am working on styling around this and this may resolve itself in time. I think I look better than before, but I am doubtful that this growth represents 1/10th of my native hair. (About 9000 hairs moved) Also am very aware that the permanent side hairs account for about 50% of the result, and if I recede downwards significantly, I will be royally screwed. HT should be a very calculated decsion and despite the best efforts of top docs, all patients do not turn out as planned. I've got another 5 months to wait before I give final comments and maybe go public. No one in public, other than bald/balding guys have looked at my hair, so I dont think its detectable as a HT except by those in the know. OTH, I was a NW5+ and I will never be bald again! Even if the hair growth stops improving, I look better than I did altho it requires some careful styling. I think with a second procedure to fill in gaps, broaden the hairline a bit and connect better to the sides, and to fill in the crown, I will look good.