CuriousJungleGeorge

In my opinion, "written guarantees" of yield don't mean a damn: good luck demonstrating a certain percentage of transplanted hairs did not grow. Sure, surgeons sometimes claim they'll "toss in, free," during a subsequent procedure, however many follicles did not come in, but not only would you be unable to make any such computation, the only way you even theoretically could cash in on the offer would be by paying for a new surgery, just with the slim hope of getting a handful of free implants.

I wonder, with Aderans's research, as hairs would be transplanted to see if they grow, would it be a serious concern whether the surgeons be competent at properly implanting grafts (i.e., at proper orientations)? Guinea-pigging yourself for a study like this might seem like a good idea, but if you do grow hair that's aimed the wrong way, you'd probably need to undergo a (paid) revision.

Just voted in an old thread. Awesomeness.

First, you have no proof Arjun Rampal underwent hair-transplant surgery. I say this not as some blinded, raving fan, but it's important to note this after you quite unequivocally state he has. Second (on to you), I don't know it would be wise to get a hair-transplant simply to lower your hairline. This isn't because it's "silly of you to want to" (any cosmetic procedure could be called silly by a third party), but because you might go on to lose a significant amount of hair, which could then become difficult or impossible to replace. If you're unlikely to lose hair (i.e., you've not started to; your gene-pool does not indicate baldness; etc.) (and, even then, it's a gamble), you might consider it, but if your notion has stricken you largely because, as you look in the mirror, you find yourself with less hair than you had not very long ago, having performed a procedure to restore a "juvenile" hairline may not work for even a short while (by the time the transplant grows in, you might find you've lost too much behind the work to have likeable results — and thus it may continue, ad infinitum).

Hi. This question is from interest, not from desire to research "my options": I've noticed certain surgeons design (with eye-liner) quite rounded hairlines, whereas others use a very jagged pattern; yet, often, the results from either yields perfectly natural results. So, is this simply because those who draw smooth lines don't actually transplant grafts in that pattern, or is something else going on? Thanks.

One wishes this sort of possibility were raised by physicians during initial consultations. A lot is said about fine scars and the "gold standard" of follicular-unit transplantation, but things like bad direction and nappiness tend to be completely forgone from the conversation.

Do you believe it was poor work done by Dr. Epstein that resulted in bad growth, or that the outcome was simply from ill luck? Also, do others feel, in a case such as Time to Do Something's, the physician should have offered a refund (even if only partial)?

If the results of a procedure are not good, is it the physician's responsibility to remedy them at no additional cost to the patient; or is the patient expected to understand and accept there are no sure things in this kind of treatment, and that further work will have to be paid for? (This thread is not composed out of frustration with any doctor; I simply wish to read what the general sentiment is around the topic.)

Speaking of shoe-polish, is it really much inferior to other "painting" products?

Both products seem to be about the same, is this right? Also, does one need the bottle for the fibers to work? That is, will the product work if you pour the fibers from a small bag or something, rather than from the original bottle? Would static electricity (e.g., as generated by pulling a sweater over the head) dislodge all the fibers? Thanks.

Any opinions? Is Nanogen better than Toppik?

Is this the sort of transplanted hair that would eventually fall out, or the kind resistant to thinning/loss?

It's hard for anyone to say, from that single photograph, whether you're balding or aren't. For one thing, no one knows how your head looked a few years ago ??” not everyone has a great deal of natural density. If you're concerned, you should speak to a doctor (your P.C.P. ought to be all right, for this), and, if it seems reasonable, try medication. Good luck.

I wasn't quoting you when I said "cover his ass" ??” just giving an example of a reason for which he may refrain from prescribing medication off-label. "Off-label" prescriptions have nothing to do with "generic medication" (not directly). Yes, doctors often do prescribe drugs off-label (i.e., for uses not approved by the F.D.A.), but whether or not to do so is a moral concern for one. As for this specific medicine's (finasteride's) being used cosmetically, I only mean to say, it isn't being prescribed for a life-supporting purpose, which may make a doctor less willing to prescribe it in the "off-label," arguably shady way. You did accuse him of something when you "wondered" "who" owns stock in a pharmaceutical company (Merck): the accusation implicit is he is persuaded from financial gain not to prescribe Proscar off-label. I don't feel your "audacity" (I don't see it as such) to question a doctor has "stirred anyone's pot"; simply, some of the things you said in your initial post have ended up feeling unjustifiably accusatory. Now, if you felt the doctor wasn't being up front with you about the sutures, fine; if he wasn't, he was wrong not to. Even if he was, it's wrong you were sent home without every suture's being removed (it's possible, but not really "OK"). If this was your main point, I agree, the thread indeed has digressed terribly.

To prescribe medication "off-label," for a physician, indeed is an "ethical issue"; you can drop it into the box of "medical ethics," if you must, but indubitable it falls into a philosophical category. Some doctors (i.e., some people) are more "practical," and may write for you a prescription such you can better afford a drug; others may feel it is wrong to steer from a more stringent path. Let's bear in mind, this is a cosmetic issue; we aren't talking about expensive meds. you need to stay alive. If Dr. Reese will not prescribe for you a drug off-label ??” to "cover his ass," to stay within his moral zone, for whatever reason ??” you can be annoyed, fine, but it's certainly odd of you to accuse him of immoral conduct (even in this more recent post, you imply he benefits financially from not prescribing generic finasteride in place of Propecia).