Melvin- Admin

Here's an analogy of how I view this thread A ford car salesman makes an announcement that ford is the best automobile, said car salesman states ford has the best gas mileage thus you will be able to travel more miles for less money. Said car salesman explains that Chevy vehicles have much higher gas mileage therefore you will travel half the distance with the exact amount of money, he gives specific reasons why this occurs engine displacement etc. Chevy car salesman enters the announcement and explains that many of his Chevy vehicles are able to travel the same distance with comparable gas mileage. Ford car salesman attacks Chevy car salesmans vehicles and dealership. Spectators ask ford car salesman why Fords have a history of faulty paint that chip in the sun, spectators ask why there have been cases of fords denting heavily to the point of being totaled. Ford salesman dismisses spectators as peanuts in a peanut gallery, ford salesman states these questions are a distraction to the gas mileage. Ford salesman goes on to state he himself owns a ford and loves it, spectators ask why some Chevy dealers provide proof that Chevys have in fact traveled comparable distances with comparable gas mileage and with no paint or denting issues, Ford car salesman dismisses claims stating ford would get better gas mileage and that the paint can be covered with a tarp. Ford car salesman remains adamant that the gas mileage is the single most important aspect of a car, dents and paint issues don't matter cause they can be covered with tarps. Spectators ask if a Chevy can travel reasonably close distances with around the same money and the paint and body doesn't dent wouldn't it be a better vehicle? Ford car saleman gets angry states buy a Chevy see if I care it's your wallet not mine.

Dr. Bloxham I disagree with the last points you made, I believe you are referring to moth eaten FUE donor areas which are not the norm, as a matter of fact I don't believe that any FUE physician on this site has ever had a patient that had a moth eaten donor area, but you make it seem like it's quite normal which it's not, like Dr. Bhatti asked your partner to present actual cases of bad FUE scarring that aren't from a random Google image. The truth which is not as "sexy" is that the biggest differences between FUE and FUT done by reputable physicians is the linear scar and the yield. Granted there are some physicians on here who have had poor growth with FUE however there are also FUT physicians who have had patients scar expand and and stretch and patients have had less than desirable growth, so the truth which is not as sexy is that a failed FUE= no growth failed FUT= bad scar and low growth. Again if you can present cases of recommended or we'll known physicians who have left patients with moth eaten donor area I will take back what I said.

It's very unfortunate for this individual, I'm tempted to think perhaps he went to one of these supposed "hair regeneration" clinics that basically intentionally transect the follicle in order for it to grow back. With that being said, these cases exist with FUT as well, like magnum pi said its not the procedure itself rather the physician and the clinic, I could post countless repair jobs where FUT patients go to FUE physicians for repair, but that doesn't necessarily hold any bearing on the procedure itself. I agree with Dr. Bloxham, FUE is best done in sessions, this ensures you get better growth and your donor area will be a lot better.

Thanks man, I'm going to Dr. Doganay and I plan on getting 1,500 bears grafts and hopefully 1,000 scalp grafts, so pretty much what you got done, I'm interested to see what it looks like, can you show us your beard donor area as well?

5,000 grafts would make a big improvement, will you need more in the future probably, but don't you want hair in your 20's? If your hair starts to thin out in your 40's you'll be sad but it won't be as bad cause it's expected at that age know what I mean, SMP with no transplant is a terrible idea don't do it, if it's money your worried about go to Dr. Erdogan or Dr. Doganay, they're both reasonably priced, dr. Bhatti is doing grafts at under $2 usd. Shave your head and see how u like it, personally I tried it and I hated it, but it may suit you, currently your a Norwood 5 heading towards a 6 I know that may break your heart to read, but with 5,000 grafts you'll revert to a Norwood 2-3. Check out my pics bro I was even more bald than you at 28 years old. There's always hope man don't lose hope there's body hair worst comes to worst for the crown.

The balding gene comes from the mothers side is a MYTH, my uncles, great uncles, and grandpa have absolutely zero balding, but on my dads side my grandpa was a Norwood 4 when he died at 77. My dads a Norwood 2 at 58, I'm a Norwood 6 at 30, my great uncle on my dads side died Norwood 6. Hairloss can skip generations. I got screwed I have no living relatives that are bald:( oh well thank god for hair transplants.

In your opinion

Me and you think the same, coverage over density, you have great donor density I'm jealous, I've done close to 4,000 grafts and I think I got maybe 1,000 left max, but I got probably 2,000 beard hair. Let your hair grow to two inches you'll see a huge difference. Take a look at this video, look how thicker is hair looks in the beginning once he cuts his hair short u see the difference in density. (Link removed by moderator - We no longer host any discussion that reference this doctor)

Stinger you really got to let your hair grow, unless Dr. Bisanga used 50fu per cm your density will always look thinner than the rest of your hair. Judging from your pics I'm assuming he utilized around 35-40 fu per cm, which is conservative but your results will look 100x better with longer hair trust me. U can keep the sides short that will make it look even better. Your results look great so far you've come a long way.

:eek: so right now Dr. Bhatti is offering grafts for $1.35?

Mav, Lifetime grafts do not change from FUT to FUE, because there is no universal donor zone, the safe donor area varies from individual to individual, a Norwood 7 guy thins everywhere on his head, a guy who will die Norwood 3 will not thin on the upper occipital region considered not safe. If an FUE surgeon reviews the patients family history, age, donor density, there is no reason why an FUE would have less grafts than an FUT. The only time this would occur is if the patient is extreme bald, in which case the same would be true with FUT. Universal donor zones are not universal.

I disagree a complete restoration for guys Norwood 6/7 is not common FUT or FUE. Most guys don't possess the donor capacity. When comparing H&W results to let's say Dr. Lorenzo's YouTube channel, I still think Dr. Lorenzo has a better overall aesthetic result because there is no linear scar. In my opinion cosmetically a good FUT result will never be on the same plane as a good FUE result, because they don't have freedom of hairstyles, I personally don't like hairstyles that involve having your hair on the side longer than a two guard. That's just my opinion though, hairstyles like Joe, Dr. Feller might be suitable for some guys but it's not a style I would ever want.

Any updates?

It's not a good cosmetic result as a standalone, but body hair mixed with scalp hair gives a natural good cosmetic result, but if your going to just use body hair it's not gonna look good, your head will basically look like a hairy knee cap, the problem with using just body hair is that the follicular units per centimeter is no where near that of the hair on the scalp, so it will never look natural, if you buzz your head I recommend using all of your donor hair available then using body hair to add density, and if need be transplant some body hair to the donor area to camoflauge the scars.

Those guys you mentioned though are not the norm they are actually the exception, I think Dr. Umar (FUE) doctor had posted even more amazing results, but then again you're talking 20,000 grafts body and scalp.

I can't really see the donor scars, do you have any better pics, the growth seems poor though for sure.

Honestly I don't see the Norwood 6 or 7 pattern, most men who go Norwood 6 or 7 are diffuse thinners where you could visibly see the pattern, I'd say you're a Norwood 3V, I personally recommend trying lipogaine and nizoral shampoo, you can try finasteride but be very careful, at 25 your sexual health is 1000000000x more important than hair. Also combining the dermaroller with lipogaine has shown some good improvement. I'd wait maybe 3 years once you've stabilized your hairloss before getting a procedure. You still have a lot of hair this is the stage you want to fight hairloss, you can still retain most of your hair if you start right now.

This man with a "bad" FUE scar still looks 100x better than your average FUT scar, try again Dr. Feller

No I haven't told anyone besides my family and close friends, too many things people don't understand about hair restoration that I don't wanna answer like the shock loss, the wait time etc. people are under the impression you walk out of a HT with a full head of hair which is just not true. I've been lucky no one has noticed they just noticed my hair was a lot shorter, right now they're prob thinking I'm going balder, it'll be interesting to see what ppl say once the shock loss grows back and the transplant grows in, if ppl ask I'll prob just say it's rogaine.

Hey guys, I'm one month post op all of my transplanted hair has shed, my hair is short and looking like it did before my first transplant, this is a bit different from my first HT because my first HT was a constant improvement, now I'm looking at maybe 5-6 months looking like crap before the shock loss and transplant grow in. What do you guys do to mask this? Hairs to short for toppik at the moment, should I just shave it until my hair starts growing in? Hoping some of you seasoned vets could chime in. Can't wear hats at work cause it's a corporate job. I'm just staying focused on how it'll look once it's all grown in and the shock loss has subsided it's keeping me going but need to do something about this look lol.

Slight recession he's what 23-24 so yea he's at the age, I doubt he'll go bald though, isn't he Native American they have the best genes when it comes to MPB.

Ok I have to ask the miserable results is this your opinion? Because you said the same thing about my results even though I'm thrilled with my results. Results can be subjective, there are a lot of variables that need to be considered, current hairloss, hair characteristics, goals need to be realistic with either procedure, your not gonna be a Norwood 6 and expect to end up a Norwood 2 with one procedure. I really hope you're not just blasting other guys results for sake of argument.

Well they're not "three detrimental factors" that affect follicles but they are certainly " three detrimental factors" that affect the overall results and certainly would affect my self confidence. The first is the hair growing in different directions in the scar line? How is this prevented? Why does it occur? Second is the unpredictability of the scar widening, is there a way a patient can tell whether their scar will widen or stretch? and the third is the waste of valuable grafts to the scar region that could be used on the scalp, obviously though if there is a way to predict whether the scar will stretch there'd be no need to use grafts to the scar. These three things have been the biggest reasons why I haven't chosen FUT I wear my hair short on the sides so the hair growing in different directions would be obvious with my hairstyle, the scar stretching is another thing i couldn't live with, and I wouldn't want to use my grafts in a scar, are you able to use body hair?

Wow you had some posters on here creating diagrams and graphs based off of a percentage you came up with based off of looks. You bring up a good point about comparing both procedures, but when I tried to bring up 3 detrimental factors in FUT it was swept aside as a mere distraction, I think in order to compare both procedures we need to review the good and bad from both procedures do you agree Dr. Feller?

Well I put it in quotations for a reason it hasn't been proven. If it was proven I wouldn't use quotations. But nevertheless you bring up a point I'd like to have addressed, when you do scar repair and you do FUE do you take out more grafts than necessary? It would seem unnecessary with the amount of grafts needed. What you say makes some sense although again not proven in mega sessions, but how about small sessions of 1,000 or less grafts? For example the result you posted was impressive did you utilize more grafts than necessary?