LondonHTseeker

Except you're paying for Dr Feller's setup as whole, which includes his expertise in training everyone, including Dr Bloxham and all the techs, and supervising it to his satisfied standard. That's where the premium is, if Dr Bloxham is often doing much of the surgery.

How do we know to what extent informed consent is given? We don't. It's obvious Dr Feller's recommendation stands zero chance of being questioned by Bill. Sooner or later, probably sooner, this thread will be closed and it will be business as usual. It seems that these days Dr Bloxham does much, if not most, of the surgery, often unsupervised except for being checked up on at intervals by Dr Feller. As they are both being so vague about it and Bill is prepared to accept such vagueness, we can only speculate based on what has been said. If Dr Bloxham is successfully carrying out HT surgery in this way, it seems HT surgery is different to other areas of cosmetic surgery which require many years of hands on experience to become proficient; this actually makes sense when you look at the successful operations that are performed by FUE techs.

As expected, Bill bends over and takes it like a man. (Ban me, I don't care.) Obviously, I don't trust Dr Feller's words but I'm not blind to his talent as an HT surgeon. Some of what he says regarding having Dr Bloxham as his partner makes sense. But I don't buy the whole Dr Ethical spiel and in my opinion anyone who does is gullible.

Of course, all Dr Feller has to do for some forum users to bow in deference when questions about him arise is knock off one of his lengthy posts announcing his own superlative professionalism, employing his usual emphatic confidence. It's clear Dr Feller has a well trained team, with the technicians doing the legwork involving graft dissections and placements. When I had my 3 operations at his clinic the staff were pleasant and efficient. Dr Bloxham has been a partner at the clinic for around half a year, after undergoing a period of some two years training with Dr Feller (although it seems this wasn't a full-time training position). We now learn that Dr Bloxham shares operating duties with Dr Feller: they both make the recipient incisions to the extent that some patients will receive mostly Dr Bloxham's work, and the patient has no say in it. This has emerged after a thread was started recently by a disgruntled Feller & Bloxham patient. The poster made an ill-judged reference to violence (in my opinion, it wasn't an actual threat and was simply a poor expression of his anger) then deleted his opening post, claiming he was discussing it with Dr Feller. So the thread became undermined and was promptly closed by Bill, with the poster banned. The banning was understandable after the (albeit likely empty) 'threat'. Nonetheless, as a result of the thread, interesting questions were raised which have culminated in Dr Feller's most recent post. It's possible that Dr Feller somehow persuaded the patient to delete his opening post and then put pressure on Bill to lock the thread and ban him. I doubt Dr Feller would give him a refund, that's definitely not his style. The patient claimed that he was about to post the consent form he had signed. Unfortunately, this now won't happen but it would have been interesting to see if it supported his claims at all. He claimed that mid-operation he had asked Dr Bloxham to stop working on him and for Dr Feller to be the sole surgeon - after apparently being taken by surprise at Dr Bloxham's involvement; but that Dr Feller refused and left the room, with Dr Bloxham proceeding unsupervised by Dr Feller. In Dr Feller's above post he claims that no patient has ever objected to Dr Bloxham's involvement or requested that Dr Feller do the work. If that's the case, why would the patient lie about it on here? We'll never know. As there have been no other complaints, it appears their partnership is so far a success. It should be noted, however, that after having already made a financial commitment for medical treatment, patients often don't like to make a fuss if they can avoid doing so. It's possible that some may have been taken by surprise at the extent of Dr Bloxham's involvement in their surgery and chosen to overlook it in the hope that their result turns out. Dr Feller asserts his partnership with Dr Bloxham has been wholly transparent from the outset. In my opinion, that is patently untrue. It's only now - after considerable persistence - that we start to learn the arrangement regarding their sharing of surgical duties. As to how much their patients have been informed of it up to this point is conjecture. And it's still unclear to what extent Dr Bloxham's surgical work is supervised by Dr Feller as he goes along. Clearly, I'm not one of those here who automatically takes Dr Feller at his word. My experiences with him have informed that position, and he has done nothing to quell my suspicions. In fact, my allegations and concerns regarding my treatment have been flatly ignored by him. That is certainly not what I call transparency. But I don't let it bother me because my HT result is ultimately pretty good, after a doctor in Turkey stuffed some more grafts in my hairline. The reality is that Dr Bloxham is currently a recommended surgeon by-proxy. We don't know how his results will turn out because they haven't yet had time to grow. No matter how vigorous Dr Feller's denials regarding his partnership with Dr Bloxham ever being a disingenuous one, the surprise of users here at only now having begun to learn the truth suggests otherwise.

Exactly. These are intriguing questions and Blake's original response to this thread insulted our collective intelligence.

You seem to have a lot of faith in medical regulating authorities. I certainly don't, and that's informed by plenty of experience with them due to past experiences. The fact is we just don't know how ethical the Feller/Bloxham setup is without actually reviewing their consent forms and getting sufficient feedback from patients regarding how much they were informed as to Dr Bloxham's involvement. They have been pretty secretive and sly on here about their setup. It took the recent post by "professor" for this issue to even be raised, after months of them posting videos on here as the Feller/Bloxham partnership. Even Bill is surprised by the extent of Blake's involvement! That is symptomatic of very slippery behaviour, in my opinion. Not that I'm surprised.

We don't want to see you dangle it though, in more ways than one. May as well just post it.

Correction: It was Lazarus that was shot days before his death, not the above Blackstar.

Apparently Dr B has taken the backdoor route to coalition membership. Recommendation by association. Interesting concept.

That's interesting. So in other words, as the doctors work together with the incisions it seems that some people will get mostly Dr Feller's work while others will get mostly Dr Bloxham's. Yet they are all paying the same price. Does that mean Dr Bloxham's lack of experience doesn't affect the result adversely at all versus Dr Feller's extensive experience? I mean, sure, in theory he is trained and supervised by Dr Feller, so the standard shouldn't slip. But it seems a curious set up. Why pay top dollar for a surgeon with so little experience to work on you? Does experience not matter as much in HT surgery as it does in other cosmetic surgery?

All the best moving forward and congrats on overcoming the health scare, Vox.

To be honest, esrec, you seem a bit gullible with the things you've said. You seem very keen to believe the 'official' version of events, even despite apparently being in receipt of conflicting evidence in the form of a PM from Dr Feller.

Well, since Dr Feller had no compunctions in asking for copies of private forum messages sent to me, it seems reasonable to disclose to the forum what he says in his message to you.

I remember when Dr Feller emailed me before my last operation with him a few years ago requesting I forward him the private forum messages Corvettester had sent to me. I told him I had already deleted them, but they are still sitting in my sent folder.

This is the best live version of Heroes I've seen from Bowie: His final video, shot days before his death, is pretty amazing: Unfortunately, in the end Bowie and Lemmy couldn't fight off disease from years of substance abuse. I read Bowie had 6 heart attacks over the last year. Meanwhile Keith Richards is still defying the odds. What a contrast with the manufactured pop products of today like Harry Styles and Bieber. There's no way those two will get to 69 with musical legacies even remotely rivalling that of Bowie's.

Perfect hairline till the end, which obviously was one of the less impressive things about who he was.

Very funny. It was 6 and 8 months, and I suspect I know what the reason was for the discrepancy. Go back and read my posts if you want the answer. My guess is that the consent form is in generalised terms. I doubt it's as specific as something like, "Dr Feller will be the doctor performing the surgery today." Without someone either enquiring about it with them as a prospective patient and posting the information here, and/or a past/current patient posting here to explain exactly what they were informed of and consented to, I guess we're not going to be any wiser any time soon.

What are you talking about...He ignored several of my questions, some of which you've just rephrased and asked again. All questions about the "prof" are obviously going to be ignored. Have fun pissing into the wind with that one.

The thread's opening questions are sincere. Just because I won't be having further surgery with Dr Feller it doesn't mean I have no right to be interested in his activities. As an ex-patient of his and user of this forum, I inevitably am interested in them and rightfully so. Until some detail is presented to the forum we have no idea how transparent the process is for their patients, which is the purpose of this thread: to shed light on what seems a curious and uncertain arrangement, as already detailed here by a patient and obfuscated around by Blake in the above post.

Boring is about right! However, it's also patently inaccurate to suggest that it's a transparent reply i.e. "open and honest". The severe lack of detail is essentially an obstructive non-answer to my opening post. :rolleyes:

Um, I don't hate him, I really don't. I'm ambivalent towards him but he's certainly not important enough in my life to waste time hating. In fact, overall he has improved my life with the HTs and my visits to his clinic were pleasant enough so it would be essentially churlish to resent him (despite some of the reservations I have). Let's focus on the opening questions so that this topic doesn't get deleted.

Interesting how no answers have materialised regarding my opening post. Transparency and accountability, eh?

OK, so the recent 'naughty' thread *wags finger oh so sternly* has raised a genuine and important question about the Feller/Boxham partnership. Dr Feller is an expensive HT doctor, we all know that. For that premium price the patient get his undoubted experience and leading track record with FUT results. But how does it work with the relative newcomer Dr Bloxham? Is the patient given the choice of doctor from the outset? If so, what is the difference in price between Dr Feller and Dr Bloxham? Or do they both cost the same? Is their work ever performed interchangeably? These are fair questions, surely.

I am indeed surprised that you aren't getting more out of it than that for recommending them but I accept your word as truth here. Thanks for clarifying. By the way, I recommended the GP I used here after he asked me to put in a good word for him because I had bought from him, which I was happy to do.

Well, in my opinion it's murky dealings. The fact is you are financially obligated to a GP who you recommend. At least now you've put a mention in your signature. Why not state in your signature who gives you the discounted medication (rather than just that you get it discounted)? How discounted is discounted? Or do you consider that private information? I've seen enough on this forum over the years for my cynicism to be justified, in my opinion.