Cryingoutloud

As I said in another thread, I think the slow grower thing only applies in very rare instances. I genuinely believe that it's wheeled out in cases where, putting it bluntly, a surgeon has botched the procedure and he tells the patient to wait a full 18 months for the final result. The fact that this practice is now echoed almost uniformly by the surgeons, their reps, the moderators and the cheerleaders is further reason to take it with a drum of salt. As I said elsewhere, I had a very disappointing result from a procedure with a highly-revered and respected surgeon recommended by this forum. I had waited 8 months before I saw sparse, weak growth and went back to the doctor for an explanation. He suggested I was a "SLOW GROWER" and asked me to give it the full 12 months which I duly did. At 12 months, I took it back to the surgeon who told me to wait the full 18 months after which, if I wasn't happy, he would give me another 500 grafts free of charge. I waited the 18 months like an idiot and then declined because I simply didn't think he could get me to where I wanted to be. I got a refund and went to another coalition surgeon. I half expected to wait another 8 months for growth to start so imagine my amazement when - just like the guys with the killer results on this forum - my growth started in month 4 and it's still going strong 6 months post op. I thought, "Wait a minute; didn't my first surgeon say I was a slow grower? Oh yeah, of course; that was pure, unadulterated bullshit because here I am growing like champ". I concede that the slow grower DOES exist but the SMART patient will be getting the ball rolling on a refund as soon as he's 6 months post op with crap growth. I realise that refunds are a very contentious issue but considering the surgeons and their reps are happy to be perceived as knocking results outta the park 98% of the time, they ought to open the till and sort people out in the paltry 2% of cases they'd have us believe are failures.

Simply outstanding work. The guy's hairstyling makes it all the more classy.

Shock loss isn't going to be an issue 10 months post op. If transplanted hair is falling out, it's because it's been harvested from a non-safe zone. If non-transplanted hair is falling out, it's because you stopped taking your meds.

I still wanna know the rationale behind asking the patient to wait 2 years. If my doctor had told me that I might have to wait 2 years for my final result, I'd have refused the anaesthetic, retrieved my deposit and walked out of the clinic. I find that this "slow grower" excuse is far too easily rolled out on this forum. It's there to give surgeons breathing room so that cock ups can eventually come good. Hopefully This patient isn't a slow grower - he's a NO grower. He's got a donkey-class result from a premier league surgeon and that ALONE should entitle the guy to a 100% refund and an opportunity to take his problem to another doctor. He shouldn't be expected to prolong his anguish and disappointment waiting two years for a result that simply isn't going to materialise. The guy's 9 months post op and that's more than enough for an indication of a final result in my view. As someone who "trusted the surgeon" only to realise - after 18 long months - that the guy had just been bullshitting me, I know how Alliswell feels. I told my original surgeon he'd lost my confidence, got my refund, chose a different doctor and guess what? Yep, that's right . . . my growth started at the typical 3.5 to 4.5 month mark that most others experience and not the 7 or 8 month mark I'd had to endure with my first procedure. I'm 6 months post op now and growth is BANG ON TARGET. Hell, it's even started thickening . . . so 90% of the time, the slow grower thing is a crock of s**t.

I'm still baffled by this "wait 2 years". That's an awfully long time to wait for a result. What does your surgeon base that on? Trust me, bro . . . get the ball rolling on that refund and DON'T be embarrassed or ashamed for one second. If you haven't got any significant growth after NINE MONTHS, you ain't gonna miraculously start growing in month 12 or 13. You didn't bad mouth Dr. Gabel so I can't imagine why he's upset; as far as I could tell, you just expressed your deep and understandable disappointment and frustration with what looks like a donkey of a result. Get your money Get another surgeon Get sorted

No, KO. They cut out the skin and pulled the scalp down towards the eyes, then stitched her up. She looks weird now. Her high forehead really suited her facial features but I'd imagine she's probably regretting the surgery now

I find that more often than not, there is predictable move to rally around the surgeon with the time-honoured line, "Dr. X will stand behind his results. Give it 18 months, you're most likely a slow grower" or "Did you follow the post-op instructions to the letter? Did you smoke? Did you stand on one leg facing east while chanting Hare Krishna each full moon?" It's as if the surgeon can do no wrong. If it's a great result, the surgeon gets the praise for his artistry and attention to detail; if it's a donkey, it's "patient physiology" or error. No quibble refunds need to become far more widespread when there are failures as dramatic and irrefutable as this one. At least allow the guy try to get some joy elsewhere because he's the one who has to suffer

Move on.

I'm not giving the name of my first surgeon. The 2nd was Dr Patrick Mwamba.

"Blackmail"??!! Incredibly stupid thing to say. The guy's got a donkey of a result from surgery performed by a recommended surgeon. Dr. Gabel has almost certainly benefited from having his very good work showcased here so, I'm sorry but it's only fitting that his blunders appear here too. Why should the guy wait another year for the results of a second procedure with a doctor who screwed it up first time around? I found myself in a similar situation with a coalition doctor who made me wait 18 months before finally accepting - after much coercion on my part - that he'd botched the job and giving me a 50% refund which I put towards a second procedure that, after 6 months, is chugging along beautifully right now. I think the guy's entitled to a FULL refund. Good luck, bro

Yes indeed, the cheerleading is tedious in the extreme. The patient in this case didn't HAVE to show his full face, did he? He could just as easily have had his eyes, nose and mouth blurred out. I think the surgery has erred in publishing these pictures without the obligatory hairline shot. It's down to the surgery to provide honest, transparent results photos/videos of results. I shouldn't have to traipse back through pictures of the first procedure to see the hairline - the damn thing should be presented in THESE photos. I'm not saying H&W deliberately set out to deceive but all they had to do was comb the guy's hair back a bit to show the hairline. The fact they DIDN'T leads me to SUSPECT it probably looks like a dog's breakfast. It's entirely possible that it doesn't but a shot of the hairline would remove all doubt, wouldn't it? There are way too many groupies on this forum who are too eager to cut surgeons who ought to know better more slack than they deserve given how much they charge for their procedures. I fully accept that the guy looks better than he did and, clearly, he's happy with his result and that really is all that matters . . . TO HIM. However, the surgery is posting these pics as a showcase for their abilities on a public forum and as a HT patient myself, I'm saying the result looks 2nd rate because of the presentation. Lorenzo, Bisanga, Arocha, Feriduni wouldn't dream of putting up rubbish photos of a hairspray-reinforced comb over after a 7,000-plus graft procedure.

Yeah growth on one side was awful. I told the doc point blank - I believed his techs were to blame. Why else would yield on one side be far worse than the other after more than 12 months? Surgeon - recommended here - offered 500 grafts free via another strip procedure which I wasn't interested in going through again not to mention the fact that I'd completely lost confidence in his ability. I politely declined. I asked for and got a 50% refund which I put towards a 1200 FUE procedure with another surgeon

Popped grafts aren't always accompanied by bleeding as this photo shows. Typically, this happens when the graft hasn't been inserted deeply enough into the incision and basically dries out and dies. As patients are being particularly careful with recipient areas post op, the grafts will only come out when the area is being rubbed in accordance with instructions a week or so later. My first procedure was a bust because the incisions - made by the techs - weren't deep enough on one side. As a result, they dried out/died and I had a lot of these dead grafts when I started rubbing lightly to loosen scabs.

Absolutely GUTTED for Arekk and equally STUNNED that this is a Bisanga result. I've always dismissed the part the "X factor" played in poor results but, as a major fan of Bisanga's work, it seems I might have to change my view on it. What makes it even harder to believe is the fact that this was a strip procedure so concerns over the transection that can affect FUE extractions simply don't apply here. On the subject of the 1,000 FUE grafts Arekk's been offered by the clinic, if they're free, he should take 'em but I do have to ask what difference such a relatively small number of grafts is going to make on such a large area.

I don't understand why you're being deliberately obstinate. You know full well that I'm not criticizing the clarity, lighting or angles. My comments have been based entirely on what I can SEE or rather, what I can't. The patient's hairstyle IN THE PHOTOS does not lend itself to showcasing the result and the surgery knew it. You think they couldn't have supplied the guy with a tin of hairspray to reproduce his hairstyle after the comb through? Don't be so na?ve. How he chooses to wear his hair outside the surgery is his business but - in these photos which are obviously intended to make the case for using this surgery - I can't see the hairline - neither can you. If I was the patient, I would WANT to show my hairline - not a comb-forward and drag-across-the-face ski-slope, crispy hairstyle that invites the kind of doubt this does. Is it better than when he started out? Of course it is but is it "7,000+ grafts-by-a-top-surgeon" better? Hell no If they put up shots of the hairline accompanied by a comb-through video, my opinions can be altered but, until then, this is very much a 2nd rate result and presentation from H&W

As far as I can remember, I never suggested they were deliberately hiding something. I'm suggesting that the presentation is utterly 2nd rate. If a patient is going to come to the surgery for post op pics, one would imagine the doctor would want to comb the hair into a style that showed off the hairline, placement, density etc not take photos of a crossface comb over held together by hairspray.

Very drole but way off the mark. Those aren't comb overs. You can see the hairlines on both. Not so on the patient and the reason is because he has to comb his hair forward and then sweep it to the left while using styling aids like hairspray/gel to keep it in place. In and of itself, that is not an issue - a man can style his hair however he bloody well likes - but for the purposes of SHOWCASING THE RESULT OF A HAIR TRANSPLANT - it's highly ineffective. The surgery should've known better than to publish them

What reasons? None I can think of. He was at the surgeon's clinic and he was posing for photos. He could've posed for a video comb through unless of course he didn't have a can of his favourite hairspray to reproduce his hairstyle. The front looks crispy and brittle. I know that no procedure restores a full head of hair but 7000+ grafts?? :eek: In the hands of a surgeon like Lorenzo or Bisanga, 7000 grafts would have left the guy with a hell of a lot more options than a comb over. As for the hairstyle being "age appropriate", is a comb over appropriate on a 27 year old NW5? Given the choice, NO man styles his hair in a comb over; he only does so out of necessity. I realise my POV isn't in line with the consensus and it's unlikely to be popular but I've SEEN large cases like these from the likes of Feriduni, Bisanga, Feller etc and the results have demonstrated far more judicious use of the grafts and a better overall aesthetic.

Thanks for the update. Looks very much on course and Dr. Pong's got a stellar reputation

I can't believe what I'm hearing. People are talking as if there's only a cigarette paper between Lorenzo and Doganay in terms of results. It's laughable. First, Lorenzo does the work. You pay for a Lorenzo procedure and you GET a Lorenzo procedure. With Doganay, you pay for a Doganay procedure and you get a tech procedure . . . along with the two or three other patients receiving HTs at the same time as you. Second, I don't think I've ever SEEN a bad Lorenzo result. Many Lorenzo patients post their own results and they're all top notch. Lorenzo's own results presentation speaks for itself. His clear, transparent video comb-throughs of his hairlines are second to none. Bullshit-free Doganay's results are good but they're also undeniably inconsistent. It's a crap shoot. There are too many variables like will you get the A tech team or the B tech team. Some patients say they're knocked out and wake up to find techs extracting grafts and making incisions while the doctor's presumably having a long lunch. Look, don't get me wrong; the points raised above are most likely the reason why a Doganay procedure is so cheap. He turns 'em around fast and in bulk so if you're on a budget, he's much, much better than a hair mill. If, however, you can make the stretch financially, there is simply no comparison . . . Lorenzo simply obliterates all but one or two other surgeons.

A guy who starts off keeping people up to date with his progress until growth kicks in a month 4 or 5 will - IMO - typically stops if he has a disappointing result. Why?? OK here's why. Imagine you've spent a couple of months talking to the folks on here getting advice on which surgeon to use, told everyone the date of your surgery and written up long account of the day of your procedure including the succulence of the steak at your hotel (if you travelled for your op). You've provided post-op pics and everyone's cooing and wheeling out platitudes like "Oh Dr. X's work is SO clean and tidy" and "You're gonna have fantastic results, happy growing" or "your donor area healed soooooooo quickly". You then provide 1, 2, 3 and 4 month pics BUT in months 5 & 6, to your disappointment, growth is nowhere NEAR the level all the other outta-the-park results you saw on the forum had at that stage. Going from having a procedure by a rock star surgeon with everything going for you to questioning your after-care diligence, wondering if YOU are the 1 guy in 100 whose physiology "isn't compatible" with HT or if you're the classic "slow grower" can obliterate one's confidence. If a guy has gone through the process of keeping everyone informed about his progress and then suddenly stops, it's unlikely to be the fact that he's too busy enjoying his new hair to post photos - 9 times out of 10, that's BS. How long does it take to do a selfie and a close up???? Not saying it's impossible; just unlikely. People want others to know about their success especially if they've been on a journey. Nope. 90% of the time, it's because the result has been crap and they feel like idiots for doing $5-15,000 on it and being too cocky.

5,000 grafts should do away with the need for a comb over

I think it's a great result but as someone else said, you probably need more singles in the hairline. Dr. Diep does seem to like going crazy with the zigzag with the result that the hairline can look a little sparse - even when, as in your case - it's not at all. It would have been better if he'd placed those grafts used to build the zigzag side-by-side in a hairline a few mm higher up. That'd make it less see-through IMO

Um, surely the idea - as far as the clinic/surgeon is concerned - is to showcase the full aesthetic of the result including placement, density and yield. The patient can comb his hair however he likes but for the purposes of a results presentation, a detailed shot of the hairline is absolutely essential because, to me and any other observer, the pics of THIS hairline screams "COMB OVER" Frankly, I'm surprised people are excusing well-known clinics and surgeons' failure to provide transparent results documentation especially when doctors like Lorenzo and Arocha are providing video comb-throughs that provide observers with a transparent, no-BS view of the yield and the density. I'm astonished that I have to spell that out because if I was in the market for an HT and saw that presentation, I'd be thinking, "What's the clinic putting up a comb over as a result for?" Then I'd be looking at the competition

Can well understand NFG's concerns but I don't think I've ever seen a poor Cooley result. Certainly, I'm not inclined to BS people by saying nonsense like "6 months is still early days" when it so ISN'T. In your case, I found myself thinking, "What's this guy stressing for? He went to Cooley and he's only 4 months in. Surely he knows the score on when growth typically starts. Did he think he was Wolverine or something with accelerated healing and growth abilities?" You've nothing to worry about. If you get to 6 months and still have nothing, then you can start sweating