Melvin- Admin

I really hate seeing things like this happen, but Dr. Feller had brought this on himself. His marketing strategy was too aggressive it was clear from the start, when I called him out on it, he asked if I thought sethticles had monetary incentives, at which point I answered "if he's a physician practicing FUE of course he does" he then stated that sethticles represented an FUE clinic. At which point I said "yes of course he does any physicians or paid representatives of clinics have monetary incentives" he never corrected me he allowed me to assume exactly what he knew I would. This is how Dr. Bhatti became involved, he clarified that sethticles was not a paid representative just a happy patient, at which point he rightfully asked for an apology, then Dr. Feller played the word game, while he technically didn't say Seth was being paid, he said it in a way that anybody would assume he was being paid, why didn't he say Seth was a patient not a representative? Why did he not correct me when I said he had a monetary incentive if he was a paid representative? That's because that's what he wanted me to believe. That's why I do not feel bad that Dr. Bhatti has exposed him. All of this could've been avoided if he would've swallowed his pride for once and just apologized to Dr. Bhatti.

The more strip surgeries you get the higher chances of your scar stretching.

Dr. Feller already answered how he overcomes them, but these "3 detrimental forces" haven't been proven so until then were speaking theoretically.

I think it's more of connecting the dots, Dr. Feller also did ridicule Dr. Bhattis FUE technique publicly, I think it's fair game Dr. Bhatti calls it how he sees it.

What's interesting is that prior to Dr. Feller I had never even heard of the "3 detrimental factors" how can you expect someone to debate you on a subject that there are no studies on? To me it's like debating on religion, it's pointless because there is no definitive answer, I don't see how Dr. Feller could've expected Dr. Bhattis responses to be different, to be honest as much as I have wanted to give Dr. Feller the benefit of the doubt him and his partners constantly going out of their way to discredit FUE and advocate their own procedure as an alternative shows all the signs of marketing. Honestly Dr. Feller, anyone with common sense can see the pattern, how did Dr. Bloxham so quickly change his mind about FUE, countless threads of him complimenting FUE results, all of the sudden now he believes FUE gives poor results, ruins the donor area, and leads to unhappy patients, just a year ago he was singing a different tune. What makes sense and what I see is a young physician getting started in hair restoration, the learning curve in FUE is much longer, even Dr. Bhatti admitted that it took him years to master FUE whilst FUT he leaned in a few months. So as a business standpoint it benefits him to advocate FUT because it's a procedure he can learn and master quickly. Discrediting FUE as a business standpoint sets up the perfect narrative for MFUE which is nothing like FUE I might add, to come in as the perfect alternative for individuals scared of the strip scar, now they can enjoy both FUE type scarring with FUT yield. Sorry not buying what you're selling, if FUE was as bad as you say than FUE clinics would go out of business, instead each year more and more physicians practice FUE and more and more patients get FUE, the numbers have increased not decreased that says something about the procedure don't you think?

Send him a message on here, I did that for my consultation, they responded promptly, however, it's been 8 months so, to be fair you should reserve final judgement until 12 months. I think it's unfair to contact a clinic at 8 months to request any type of refund, Dr. Doganay has offered to do transplants for free to unhappy patients so I don't think you have anything to worry about. Can u update your thread?

I completely disagree with pup daddy, honestly even Norwood 7's are candidates so long as their goals are realistic, I'm of the train of thought that some hair is better than no hair, you should never just give up and shave your head unless that's what you want, you're not that young 27 is a descent age for hair restoration, it's not like your 19. You have ok density, it does look like you have some thinning of the nape but that's ok you don't usually get hair from there anyways. Critical planning is 100% necessary in your case. I've had two hair transplants one just last July. I'm 30 years old, so here's my suggestion, if your gonna choose FUE your gonna have to do it in sessions, meaning 2,000 grafts one surgery another 2,000 the next so on and so forth, this will decrease the transection rate which is basically when the graft is cut in half and therefore does not grow, now in terms of where you want to place your grafts, in my opinion don't lower your hairline, just thicken the hairline you currently have, reinforce your lateral humps, because they probably will drop, your headed to Norwood 6, 3 years ago my hair was like yours and my sides did drop. If you don't reinforce your lateral humps you'll be left with an island of hair not a good look, so most of your grafts should be distributed to your hairline, the mid scalp and lateral humps, I wouldn't use any scalp grafts in the crown honestly, that's where your beard grafts come in to play, use some beard grafts for the crown, you just need enough so that you can use toppik. You have to do your procedures not based on how bald you currently are but how bald you could become, this will ensure that your result withstands the test of time. PM me if you have any questions.

I'm so anxious for my result, why I chose Dr. Diep for my hairline.

I don't think a cure for baldness will ever occur unless it's donor regeneration, which would still mean the grafts would need to be implanted, but to answer your hypothetical question, why wouldn't the follicles grow where there isn't a follicle? Meaning someone with a hair transplant would just have a denser head of hair. But in all honesty, there will never be a cure flat out. There is too much money involved think about how much money merck makers of finasteride make or rogaine, not to mention all of the hair restoration surgeons whose livelihood depends on men going bald, do you think all of these people with vested interest in hair loss would allow a cure to be sold? If you search back to threads from 2005, people back then said the same thing, that we our 5 years away from a cure, well it's 10 years and there is no cure in sight and there never will be, I think donor regeneration will occur, but that's not a cure technically. You would be surprised how many things have probably been cured but pharmacy companies will never allow the cures to come to light.

It all adds up, I've been saying this since the beginning, it seems almost tactical how his partners and him have all teamed up to discredit FUE whilst presenting their "new procedure" what's even more alarming is how previously when Blake was a mod he would congratulate members on their results and tell them they did good by picking a recommended FUE physician, now the 180 turn. In a month span there have been several threads created by Dr.. Lindsey, Dr. Feller and Dr. Bloxham all of which either present a poor case of FUE which they state "buyer beware" and threads of "good FUT scars" it's clear cut marketing, when I asked why is it that you don't see FUE physicians slamming FUT, their reply is always "because they know FUT is superior" however why don't I see countless threads employing scare tactics regarding the scar? Repair threads never seem to bash FUT even if the scar is bad and the growth is poor. The reason why is because FUE is in fact becoming increasingly popular amongst young men, just take a look at the question section of this forum, more than half of the questions are about FUE or FUE physicians, like it or not this will only increase in time.

Have you every thought of using toppik for the crown? I don't think you should let the crown keep you from enjoying your hair transplant and maximizing the result. My crown is just as bald as yours, what I do is I fade my hair up high in to the bald spot, so that the hair blends in to the balding area, this lessens the contrast. Either way your crown is bald, even if you shave your head no guard, you can still see that the crown is bald so it's not like you're truly concealing the crown by keeping the hair short.

It's very common, especially in guys that our young and very bald, you want to conserve your good donor hair for the hairline, lateral humps, and misacalp, you an use beard hair for the crown just for coverage. I suggest getting your procedure done in a span of two days, it's not good to do more than 2,500 grafts FUE a day. Search Dr. Doganay beard transplant results, there's a repair guy who had over 2,000 grafts to his crown. When you mix beard and scalp grafts the results come out pretty good, a lot of guys on here mainly FUT doctors do not recommend doing body hair until your scalp hair has been depleted, but honestly it's not good to deplete your donor area before your even 30.

Exactly my point, I bet once you grow your hair you might actually like it, the problem with hair transplants is that they do not create real density, a non balding head has around 100 fu per cm, so if you were to transplant 50 fu per cm you wouldn't be able to see much of a difference, but with guys like me and you high Norwood cases this is not possible because we need a lot of coverage therefore surgeons are conservative and use like 35 fu per cm, when the hair is short it will look sparse compared to the donor area that is still probably 75-80 fu per cm. that's why it's best to grow your hair longer on the top and keep the hair short on the sides this will keep the contrast at a minimum whilst giving you the look of having more hair. Grow it out bro then post pics trust me you won't regret it.

Little to no facts have been presented, everything thus far has been opinion scientifically speaking, there hasn't been any recent studies comparing FUT vs FUE yield, there have been studies conducted by FUE physicians that show 96 out of 100 grafts grew, but there haven't been any third party studies with no monetary incentive, a lot of you guys blindly follow physicians words without even questioning things. For example FUT lifetime grafts vs FUE lifetime grafts, this subject is ridiculously flawed because we are presuming that everybody has the same safe donor area, which is FALSE my safe donor zone is not the same as the next guys therefore how could we say that just because grafts were extracted from patient A "universal" area that he will have more lifetime grafts to patient b. We are not taking in to account the different variables that exist, for example lets say patient A was to be a Norwood 7 the most extreme case, not only will the supposed lifetime grafts thin, but the donor area will to exposing a big scar so much for "lifetime" grafts, now let's examine patient B let's say he's a 50 year old gentleman Norwood 3 destined to die Norwood 4 and grafts are extracted slightly higher than the universal zone, those grafts will not fall out because the grafts were extracted from his PERSONAL safe zone, key word. It's not a cookie cutter procedure a one size fits all, cmon guys use some critical thinking, I want a plan designed specifically for me and my hairloss not a general plan for everybody, because people react differently to the male pattern balding gene, that's why some men never bald more than a Norwood 3 and some men bald to a Norwood 7 and beyond.

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.