I basically have 2 questions:
Background Info.:
I had two hair jobs. 1 for 2000 grafts 1 yr ago, 1 for 1000 grafts 2 days ago, totalling 3,000 grafts on what I think originally was a Norwood 4 or 5 hair loss. The doctor before my 2nd procedure of 1000 grafts suggested (against my wishes of top front left & top front right and top front 20 percent of my head on my 2nd treatment of only 1000 grafts). He suggested instead that I have those 1000 grafts done further away from the hair line towards the middle top. His reasoning was that the hair would grow from his suggested aread and reach the front.
As u know, people are more concerned with the front of any cosmetic surgery or work. Like when u bleach ur teeth for more whiteness, you want the dentist to 1st bleach the top teeth cos that's what most people see, the top set of teeth. Im not sure if the doc suggest this because so that I'd be less than pleased and go back for more grafts sooner or if he did so because based on his experience, it'd be more bang for my buck??? I'm also wondering if it's unethical for him to have chose the former, not the latter. I hope that he placed those grafts in the middle top of my head for more bang for my buck--since I'm on a tight budget.
So here are the 2 questions:
question #1: You think the hair transplant doc (hair job doc for sake of brevity) planted 1000 grafts in the mid top part of my hair to strategically maximize the amount of grafts which would grow and cover the gaps in the all-important front left & front right and front center of the hair which as I mentioned, is the most visible part than the crown, obviously).???
or he did it so that I'd be less than pleased and eager to have more grafts done by him and done sooner? (again, I'm hoping he's bound by some ethics and he chose the 1st one above since I really want to see a big improvement in the all-important, more visible front part of the head).
question #2:
I also banged the top of my head against an olympic barbell resting on a bench press stand in my room. I did so cos im on post op medicine 2 days after this 2nd procedure & groggy/clumsy as a result of same.
btw---no fresh wet blood occured, but it was a hard enough bump to hurt for 15 minutes. Did I damage any grafts? It shouldn't be a problem, if there was no wet blood oozing from the area into which grafts were transplanted, right? Thanks for any help. I really appreciate the time and help you took in reading this for a fellow person losing their hair who needs added confidence, especially with being such a temporary "loser" with the oppposite sex.
BACKGROUND INFO. ON ATTACHED PHOTOS:
(the photos of me inside with the bronze type lighting facing head on into the camera is the one before ANY grafts were done)
The 2nd photo of me is a profile pic from the side ten (10) months after my 2000 graft procedure.
As with a lot of HT graft patients, applying gel and hair spray make the grafts and the hair more visible.