Melvin- Admin

Has he responded? I'm interested to see what he has to say, there's this guy named adamo a rahal patient at 6 months he has zero growth but then at a year his growth was good, so stay optimistic could be just slow growth mixed with shock loss, by 10 months re-evaluate. Also, I don't think the avodart and fin is working for you anymore, try RU58841 have you done the dermaroller and minoxidil?

In LA there's dr. Umar he's expensive as hell though, dr. Mohebi, I went to Dr. Behnam for my first surgery, it was okay not bad, but I think I would've been better going somewhere they specialize in FUE, Dr. Diep in Los gatos, good work but expensive, and I wasn't too satisfied with the level of service. Best places for FUE quality and price wise is turkey.

From hearing the name I'd assume mechanical follicular unit extraction, makes me think of something like artas.

How many grafts did you get? Body hair or scalp? Where were the grafts placed? Looks like the hairline is thick just everything behind the hairline. It could be shock loss, was your hair loss stabilized before the orocedure? I'm going to Dr. Dogonay this the first time I've seen anything remotely bad. Although it's still only 6 months, my fear is that perhaps you didn't get enough grafts, and maybe the shock loss was hair that was already on its way out, usually that hair doesn't grow back. Best to check with the doctor get his thoughts.

A couple of things, Norwood 5-6 is described as the hairloss pattern, a person doesn't have to be completely bald to be considered a Norwood 5-6 because the pattern is visible, this patient was clearly a Norwood 5, I would go so far as to say he was heading towards Norwood 6, as for dying his hair, not sure if that's true, patients pre-op photos were taken with high flash, the light combined with thinning hair can make hair appear lighter. Obviously anyone who knows anything about hair restoration knows that growing ones hair out increases the visual effect of density, that's what some call illusion of density, patient submitted the photos himself, to see the proper finish I'd say submit photos under similar lighting. Patient had hair but it was clearly miniaturized I was also a diffuse thinner like him same age, the hair does not grow its shrinking. Therefore, I highly doubt patient could have simply just "grown out his hair" all in all looks like a successful hair transplant finasteride seemed to improve the result as well.

Lifetime grafts is a difficult subject, because theoretically there are no lifetime grafts, in advanced cases of MPB even the donor area that is universally resistant to DHT thins, therefore the transplanted grafts thin and fall out, at the sametime not all men will become Norwood 6, therefore technically hair harvested outside the "universal zone" would not fall out. Checking the donor area for minitaurization is the best things physician could do and review family history.

According to the chart on pubmed transection rate for FUT is between 1-2% for FUE between 5-10%, so one could say an inexperienced FUE physician could be having 10% transection where a quality physician could be yielding 5% transaction, a difference of 3-4%. Personally, I think it depends on the skill of the physician you choose, like Dr. Bhattti said if the results were that poor he wouldn't be consistently getting good yield and growth.

True FUE has a high learning curve, physicians say they would make twice as much doing FUE, but if their results are not good than they'll lose business that's why a lot of physicians stick with FUT, similar to plastic surgeons performing open rhinoplasty as opposed to closed rhinoplasty, I see it like the switch from microgafts to follicular units, a natural progression, although I do think there will always be a place for FUT, with advances in instrumentation the transection rates will decrease. Dr. Bhatti, what are your thoughts on subdermal scarring is it really impacting the yield as much as some say? They say growth may be almost 0% what are your thoughts?

Absolutely, I agree Dr. Bloxham that is fair, it's been a very interesting discussion, and although we may not agree on hair restoration philosophy, i'm glad we can see where we're coming from;)

I'd rather risk low growth or no growth than having a widened strip scar, when the scalp is no longer elastic the wound will be very difficult to close, this will dramatically increase the chance of shock loss to te donor region, sometimes the hair grows back and sometimes it doesn't, so like I said previously you're exchanging one problem (being bald) for any even bigger problem becoming disfigured. Here is what could occur It's like getting on propecia to stop hairloss but then becoming impotent for the rest of your life, you basically solved one problem but created another far worse problem. That's my opinion others may disagree and I respect that.

Looking at your donor area I don't see anything to be alarmed about, if you look at alot of people including women, you'll generally see that the sides are less dense than the back of the scalp, it definitely does not look depleted in anyway, if it really bothers you a lot though, you could do a BHT to the sides to add some density, you wouldn't need much either.

Hey Guys, wondering if any of you guys could let me know where are some legit places to buy Azaelic Acid, looking to combine with my lipogaine, the combo work so well together sucks it had to be removed:(

Dr. Bloxham subdermal scarring is no different than the scalp losing elasticity, I believe the physician performs the fox test before performing the procedure. Similar to an FUT physician checking for elasticity of the scalp before the procedure, if the patient is fox 3 then the procedure is stopped and patient can have a strip procedure, no different than members scalp not being elastic and being able to do FUE instead. Here's a graph taken from pubmed that outlines the pros and cons ✘ Table 1 Comparison of FUT strip method and FUE Observation Strip FUE Pain after the procedure Minor None Percent of time the doctor operates on the patient 10–30% 80–90% Stitches required Yes No Extensive bleeding during or after the procedure May occur No Wearing hairstyle short in the donor area Not possible Possible Natural results Yes Yes Nerve damage, numbness, permanent pain[25] Possibly No Healing time: donor area 2-3 weeks Approx. 7 days Healing time: recipient area Approx. 14 days 10–14 days Transection rate (grafts damaged during extraction) Varies 1–2% 5–10% Recovery time needed before exercise is possible 2–3 weeks 1–2 weeks Amount of time after which patient may return to work The day after Usually the day after Visible scarring with short hair at back May be present Microscopic scars Reactions to suture materials Seen rarely Never a problem Shaving of head not needed needed Large areas possible difficult Cost cheaper expensive Fatigue not tiring tiring Patients can refer to this and see which one they'd like to choose. Link http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2956961/#!po=77.3256

I wonder why this video has a poor rating if FUT is more popular, I will say though that I agree with what Dr. Feller says in regards to both methods working together sidenote: (as long as the patients ok with the scar)

This is what I've been saying from the get go, people weigh pros and cons differently, but some of these physicians are so hell bent on their philosophy that they forget that the patients opinion matters the most. Because at the end of the day like Dr. Feller so eloquently said its our head not his. Some people don't care about the scar hey that's fantastic FUT is a great option, others on the other hand would rather be bald than have a huge scar, I guess this just doesn't register or resonate with them. FUT and FUE both have their place in today's hair restoration and I think it's fantastic we have the ability to choose. But at the end of the day is the patients choice.

If someone is considering physicians and he got good results with a particular physician what is wrong with recommending him:confused: Also mods, please create a new tread I'd love to see some of my concerns regarding "stripping out" addressed, no one has yet to address any of my legitimate concerns. I'd love to see the input Dr. Bhatti has as well.

I thought it was weird that you wouldn't have the physicians information on your profile why would anyone keep that a secret lol, it seems like the opposite of being an advocate thanks for the clarification Seth.

One could argue though that FUE is far more labor intensive and tedious. The learning curve is much higher for FUE, in regards to BHT I've yet to see a bad a scarring case that's been documented , FUT's expanding and widening after multiple strips are far more prevalent for the reasons I've stated previously. As I said before its all about personal preference, I'd rather have tiny dot scars exposed than a linear scar, I'm able to buzz my head with the scars barely visible to the untrained eye, if my transplant were to fail I'd buzz my head, don't think I'd ever bic my head did it once didn't look good, but buzzing my head doesn't look too bad so long as you have the hairline to frame the face, again my posts are not meant to disrespect anyone, they only serve as a voice both sides for anyone reading. I believe in providing the pros and cons of both procedures and letting the patient decide, but no one was providing the cons to FUT which there are cons so I decided to do so myself.

I never said you wouldn't find a better result for 1,800 grafts I said my results were comparable to FUT results taking in to account level of baldness. I am well aware that my hair restoration may fail, in fact I researched hair restoration far before I decided to have the transplant. No surgery is fail proof, you're only 7 years older than me so you're also still pretty young the same could be said about you. In my opinion FUE was the only logical choice for me due to the fact that I would rather live with FUE scars than FUT scars, worst case scenario I could have smp and BHT to fill out the rest. I've explored every option should my transplant fail. I must say your feedback felt more like a personal attack, at the end of the day if you (the patient) is happy with the result that is all that matters, Even if this transplants only give me hair for 20 more years that 20 years is worth it to me, when you go bald at 30 there is nothing your wouldn't give just to have more hair even if it means balding again when you get older which is not for certain either I might add. I may stay Norwood 6 no one knows only time will tell?

I wasn't aware he was a physician advocate, Dr. Feller I did not mean to disrespect you, but when I read something that I think is wrong I voice my opinion and anyone on this forum is free to disagree with me, they are free to look up my profile, they are free to attack my results and wish that I bald to a Norwood 7, they are absolutely free to do all these things, I'm fine with it this is a public forum, and when you put yourself out there you leave yourself open, whether it be your opinion, results, or philosophy regarding hair restoration, my goal was not to offend you or Dr. Bloxham, my goal was to have two sides of the story, let the patients weigh the pros and cons and make an educated decision themselves that is it. Again I apologize if offended you or Dr. Bloxham that was not my intent, my aim is to help fellow hair loss sufferers.

I never said you can't do both, in simply comparing both procedure side by side, like I said if you are okay with a linear scar than by all means go with FUT, I am not pro-FUE or anti-FUT I'm pro patient decision, I don't agree when either sides bash each other because they both have their pros and cons. As I previously stated not everyone will weigh their pros and cons the same way smp fades and you have to keep getting touch ups, the only thing you can do about the scar is FUE and the yield is poor.

Why you would want to "rub salt in the wounds" is beyond me, I am a Norwood 6 the grafts were extracted with in the permanent zone above my nape, the physician was well aware of my permanent zone as he had asked me to grow my sides out for the procedure he measured my donor density for miniaturization as well, can the donor area thin, sure it could but it could also thin for FUT which would reveal a far more ugly scar. For 1,800 grafts at the level of baldness I have id beg to differ I think it was a good result, at the end of the day I'm the patient as long as I'm happy with my results that's all that matters, I don't t compare myself to others because there are different variables like donor density and hair characteristics that play a role in hair restoration. Furthermore, I already have a surgery scheduled to address the lateral jumps, and yes I will be using body hair for my crown. What you said can apply to anyone know one knows how far hairloss will progress the best we can do is measure donor density and try to slow down the process by medication. So the same applies to you too.

Absolutely! Patients should do research on their own because physicians like representatives for physicians have monetary incentives bottom line.

Is he a physician practicing FUE? If he is than yes I'd say he does.

If you believe either of them are saying these things for ethical reasons than God bless you, I on the other hand can see the blatant marketing of FUT in an attempt to sway laymans to the strip obviously for their financial interest. As I've previously said before, FUE does not only rely on scalp hair for harvest, I posted a result from Dr. U he had harvested 5,500 follicular units from the head and 15,000 from the body, the result was a Norwood 6 becoming a Norwood 1, this is not possible through conventional FUT, FUE is not limited to just scalp hair like FUT, and I don't have to be a medical professional to be well versed in hair restoration, I've been researching hair loss for over 10 years since I started balding. I encourage you to research the subject yourself, many of the things said have been gross exaggerations in regards to yield, again the single most important thing when having a procedure is finding a qualified doctor, sure you an go and have FUE by a FUT physician the yield will be poor because they are not FUE specialist, how many times do you see strip patients who have been butchered going to a FUE physician for repair, why not vice versa ever ask yourself this question, the only examples I have ever seen have been repairs from the 90's from the old black and decker FUE. So again I say everyone weighs the pros and cons differently, what may be a big deal to me may not be a big deal to you. The risk of of having a butchered head is soooo much worse than being bald for me, so the con far outweighs the pro, again their have been no studies conducted to quantify how much more effective FUT is than FUE, every surgeon only tells you what they feel is the correct amount, so the percentages they are giving you have not been quantified. Again, I repeat physicians have monetary incentives and motives, you need to research things yourself, everything I have said was said to me by hair restoration physicians that perform both procedures I'm not just making this up. After one strip your scalp loses elasticity, so just stripping out like they have said may not even be an option for some individuals, have they mentioned this? No they are only talking best case scenarios which are not the case in most situations. If the scalp is not elastic guess what the wound will be difficult to close, and when the wound is stretched you can bet it's going to widen and become disfigured, on top of that the donor hair may be shock lossed permanently, they fail to mention this as well.