shanti

I once had a consult with Michael May and if I'd let him do what he was suggesting my hairline would be an inch lower and I'd have a real problem now.

He wouldn't even show me pictures of the surgery as he said it "would put me off".

I ran away as quick as my 23 year old legs would carry me.

Just as a side note as I've always wondered and it seems an appropriate time to ask.....

I see that Armani can't be mentioned on HairlossHelp but is there a similar issue with a certain famous Australian Dr on here?

I ask because when I posted his name a few weeks back it was flagged as a "trigger" word and was referred to the moderators before being posted.

What happened with that doc here? Same as Armani on HLH?

I've probably had 1500+ overall. I've had 7 small sessions. Dr Coles are visible but he used bigger punches. Feller, Woods and even Jones's are smaller and even at grade 2 they are difficult to see.

In my opinion no one would notice. You have to know what you are looking for.

I shaved to grade 2 and I could see the scars but I doubt someone else would.

It's more like gaps from missing hairs rather than scars.

It's you that needs the luck

To be honest though, HT hair is hair. A good hairdresser will give you the same result (if not better) than a hairdresser that cuts HT hair on a regular basis. I may be wrong but I'd expect to get a better cut at a proper salon than I would going to a guy that works in a wig shop.

The only advantage I see is that you won't be as embarrassed going to a hairdresser that deals with HT's on a regular basis.

this is it....

http://www.shaunsofmarylebone.com

There's a place in London just off Baker St.

It's a smarter than average men's barbers that specialises mainly in expenive hairloss shampoos, toppix and hair systems.

I went there once and they sent me to the hack Dr May at the Wimpole Clinic. I ran away when he said he wanted to lower my hairline an inch!!!

But despite that they do have lots of HT patients in for a haircut and or a hair system blend in cut so there is no need to be embarrassed.

I went back once for my first cut after FUE in NYC and they were impressed. They'd never see FUE.

I'm reading a lot of posts recently of young guys wanting to fill in their temples and lower their hairlines.

Has it always been like this or has the internet provided a new means for the industry to reach out to a younger generation of potential customers?

In the 80's and 90's when we had plugs and poor dolls hair results requiring the repair we see today, were any of these guys in their early 20's or were they older. I seem to think older.

Information is being shared more readily and that's a good thing in many ways but it's also now very accessible to teens and guys too young to be considering transplants. Along with glossy photos, unrealistic expectations and "walk in the park" FUE, it's potentially creating a new 'type' of repair patient where we will be seeing great numbers of 40/50 year olds with frontal hairlines and nothing behind?

I was one of those guys who saw my hairline and temples disappearing infront of my eyes and I didn't like it. Who would? I was loosing my youth. So I had surgery at 28 (35 now). I kept my hairline high as a caution but I may still be in trouble down the line.

But at 20 I knew nothing of the industry. The internet wasn't really available apart from in a "new" cyber cafe 10 miles away and when you got there it had a painful 56kbit connection that wouldn't download a photo if you waited all day. Readily available broadband internet has changed that.

Sure the HT industry has improved massively in the last 20 years and plugs are pretty much a thing of the past and the technology and doctors are to be commended.....but we actually might have a bigger problem waiting round the corner that is going to look just as daft, and it's a problem that can't be fixed.

Yes but not necessarily a good idea. You can end up loosing more than you add.

Do you have any pictures of your hairloss? We'd be able to help you better... and how old are you?

Depends,

Your hair when you are 'less bald' can help add density and support the hair transplant, but that existing hair isn't necessarily always going to be there so it could make situations worse if you don't plan for the future.

A bald scalp can also receive a very good cosmetic improvement and some would say you are more likely to have a better long term result if your are more bald to begin with. Also no "shockloss".

Oh, No offence intended mate. Better English than my German for sure.

Seems like you need to spend a few months on this site and others and research. HT's are a huge commitment and there are many pitfalls.

My family and friends don't know but it isn't easy hiding it. Longer hair can help.

I hope he's not in England and that English isn't his first language.

I recently had 487 FUE with Dr Feller and only paid for 400, which works out at $8 a graft. Seems to be common practice with Dr Feller.

Yes, it is very uncommon and with HT hairs would look ridiculous. Planting low hairlines is a huge risk but I don't think even Armani had planted one as low and pointed as Zidane's. Not far off though I bet !!

always been restricted with the type of hairstyle i could do my whole life.

Akuma, a HT isn't for you. They aren't the magic bullet you think they are and because it just won't match your natural hair in both density and texture, it will restrict your hairstyle even more.

Seriously... forgetting about this idea will be the best decision of your life.

Recent

1996

1992

You won't find any proof. Trust me. It's been discussed many time on the hair forums over the years. He's always had that balding pattern. He's 'infamous' for it.

The photos below show his progression.

Also in the other photo below he was playing for Girondins de Bordeaux in 1992 the the other at Juventus in 1996. He doesn't have a strip scar, or any scarring for that matter and FUE wasn't really viable back then.

Plus the results are just too good for a HT.

Ronald,

Zidane hasn't had a hair transplant. He has an unusual balding pattern but it does happen in nature.

The difference is transplanted HT hairs won't look natural isolated if the area thins behind.

In fact referring to the Johnny Depp photo, you could even have it like his right side temple and not the left which in the photo looks more receded.

Even so it would still be a slight natural recession which would be better than totally rounded and closed off temples.

The 'temple points' are the triangles of hair on the side of the head. The 'temples' are the corners of the hairline which are typically the first section of the hairline to recede with MPB. Confusing I know.

Anyway, in my opinion, far too aggressive for now and especially for the future.

I think Sparky on here does a good job with photoshop, maybe he'll be kind enough to fill the lines in with hair.

Personally I wouldn't drop below your remaining native front section of hairline. I'd plant carefully just within this and use the native hairs to soften the transplanted hairline.

I also think the temples needs to be more recessed and while lower remain a mature hairline. They are very closed off here.

The temple points are very, very aggressive too.

In a nutshell.... each to their own but I'm a fan of strong but mature hairlines, especially in your case. It's dangerous (donor) and cosmetically unnecessary creating a teenage hairline for someone in their 30's with MPB.

Johnny Depp in the picture is a decent example of a strong but mature hairline. It'll be more flattering long term than your pencilled in hairline, which is straight across and then down and closed right off at the temples.

Very similar to my problem after my HT with Dr Jones a while back.

Maybe it's the way you've styled your hair but your left side doesn't appear to have the grafts standing as vertical from the scalp as the right side. The angle of the grafts on the left provides more coverage as they are sweeping backwards.

Will the hairs on the right side not do this or is this just your hairstyle?

Sorry, we misread your initial question.

Recovery in the 'recipient' is the same as the strip technique. The only difference between the two techniques relates to the donor site. Planting the grafts in the recipient is the same.