californian

I just checked it. In summary, 3223 grafts in the first session, 3101 grafts more after a year, 6324 grafts in a total of two sessions. (There was a third session but results aren’t posted yet) I agree you. This is one of the most transparent and honest presentations in this overall network. I don’t know if there is a better one though. The age of the patient is given The photos are posted clearly after each surgery There are no manipulations on the pictures Donor areas are shown clearly with different types of hair cuts Now, assume I am devil’s advocate, in fact I am. The density of the hair is not very good although 6324 grafts are implanted after 2 surgeries. (Very honest though) The hair line is very high and forehead is very wide (very normal to make implantation area smaller). The hair combed to front to cover forehead but it was combed back, the bald areas would be clear. Besides, the hair density in the front line is not very clear. The fact that no one else is cheering, applauding or saying wow, incredible or other cheerful comments proves that I am right on these comments. Since, the doctor is a paying member of this web site, no one attacked him either.. Don’t get me wrong, however, any coalition member physician of this network who is using FUT technique would get much better results with a single FUT session. You need proof? http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/171968-raymond-konior-md-4-320-fut-grafts-august-2013-a.html (It’s patient’s own presentation, we should assume it’s honest. The only drawback is he doesn’t shave the hair in the scar area. I guess the scar looks very bad..)

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/176878-does-dr-lorenzo-post-most-honest-results-2.html KO, look at the picture I attached. Although, no hair was transplanted to the area I marked, the density seems to have got better as much as the transplanted areas. No need to mention the difference in the hair color, hair length, and the lightness of pre and post pictures. I don’t want to create conspiracy theories but if doctors present their results with such intransparency, (just recently a doctor, who was insistent on posting pre pictures with wet hair, admitted his mistake) how are we gonna decide on which technique or result is better? or what is real or fake? What are we going to compare with what? BISMARCK, thanks, your comments reveal that you have a very extensive knowledge on the topic, all of them are valid information. Can you say FUE or FUT is better, taking everything into consideration you have learned and experienced so far?

When it comes the posting surgery results, I think both words are applicable here and can be used.. How can someone post transparent results if he is not honest? Transparent is an adjective for the results, honest is an adjective for the doctor, and also can be used for the results. But you got the point. Does this physician present the results honestly? Or, are this physician's presentations transparent or honest? FUE2014, can you provide us a link where we can see most transparent/honest results of the doctor. Lorenzo or someone else, let's see the transparent results of this honest doctor..

Matt, sorry, but we can’t make any comparisons with this picture. Hair is longer (and no need to mention obscurity of the pic and the distance the picture was taken) If, the examples I gave had their hair a couple of millimeters longer, their scars would be invisible like yours. We already know that. I guess, we can’t get a better example from patient photos. But we can get it from doctors. However, FUT doctors somehow do not show FUT scar transparently and honestly. What about having your hair cut like the way it is in the picture I uploaded here, so that we can use it for comparison ? I hope your scar is not bad, better than the one i uploaded here. Let’s see.

BISMARCK, yeah I am using a Google Translator. Google Translator doesn’t show the words that start with a capital letter such as Lorenzo, Hassan, Wong, Konior, Ferudini, Rahal, Bisanga. That’s why I am not writing their names. Ok, let’s start from the very beginning. It seems, the number of people who prefer FUE technique increase at an unprecedented rate. Is the "after FUT scar” the reason behind this trend? Do people think that FUE is “scar”less? What are advantages and disadvantages of these methods over each other. At the end of the day, are they equally successful or is one of them superior to the other? My point was comparing both techniques from the beginning. I think we should do it in many aspects which are: 1. The quality of scar and people’s preferences accordingly (After one session) 2. The comfort of the patient during the procedure 3. The lifetime of grafts in both procedures 4. The appearance of the result in terms of naturalness 5. The appearance of the result in terms of coverage and density 6. The effects of the first session to the second session 7. Your suggestions that don’t occur to me right now When we are making the comparison, we will assume the best results (theoretically). First, I started with the quality of scars.. I put here the best 2 scars that I have found. If anyone of you can find a better one, i will change it and we can vote afterwards. I will count the people’s preferences and announce the results from here. And I will continue doing the same for the other factors. It’s OK if we don’t reach to a conclusion. The point is discussing stuff with respect and fair play. I will declare my preference anyway. For my examples, I will go with FUT. I hope you can be this straight-forward. Can you? For now, 2 people voted for FUT (me and promitiv). No one voted for FUE.

FTBPICKS, I sincerely apologize from you and all the folks in the forum for my last post to BUSA (and for almost all of my posts to him). I will neglect BUSA and will not read his posts anymore Now, I am asking for your permission and kindness to continue my posts. I think they will be useful for the real patients of this community. Will you let me ?

KO, my mate, here we talk about the quality of scar after FUE or FUT. The results are out of topic now. Please delete your last posts showing results, then we may continue. For all others: I read and appreciate all your comments and contributions. But at this stage, any comparison criteria other than scar quality(i.e: survival rates) are out of topic, we can discuss on them later. I assure you that the scars I brought here is one of the best examples of scars, approved by some physicians. Any better scar that you will provide will be replaced. Spanker or 1978Matt may be provide us much better scars for FUT. (But it must extend from one temple to another to compare with around 4000 grafts of FUE)

Does Dr Lorenzo post the most honest results? FUE 2014, please provide a link in this network that shows the most honest Doctor's most honest presentation..

Nobody knows mate, just if you damage hair follicle (totally or partially), follicle can not produce hairs. This is the reason why FUE surgeons discard damaged grafts during extraction process, ( and some grafts do not produce hair) It's the same during cutting process of FUT strips. More curliness, more damage, more discarded or unusable grafts. Yes you are totally right, it means infamous marketing tactics. To evaluate that, you should apply PRP one half of the donor areas, placebo to the other half and only after that you can compare. All the same to evaluate the effectiveness of PRP for better growth in transplanted areas. Just note for now: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/160493-prp-injections-dont-do-its-potentially-negligent-criminal-activity.html The conclusion here is correct, but the reasons, explanations are totally incorrect and they are misleading unfortunately. If you are really so curious and wanna find the facts all about PRP, here is a starting point for you. Here you will find the end, and beginning from the end, have a journey to the beginning point -Is PRP a gimmick or effective? Keratinocyte growth factor is required for hair de... [Genes Dev. 1996] - PubMed - NCBI "Keratinocyte growth factor is required for hair development but not for wound healing. We suggest that the redundancy in epidermal growth and wound healing is likely to stem from the vitality of these functions to the organism, a feature that is not a consideration for the hair follicle." ( I summarized the important points for you. If you need any assistance during your journey, I will be near you, just turn the lights on.)

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/176850-dr-hasson-8364-2-sessions-fut-8-months-post-op.html

BUSA, my best friend, here you are again. God bless you... I was afraid something bad happened to you. I am still waiting your answers to my questions here: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/176798-dr-koray-erdogan-2620-grafts-fue-2.html http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/176863-dr-koray-erdogan-3458-grafts-fue-repair.html Wow, good tactic to rescue yourself, I appreciate. But, what about loyalty? What about the comments from ROOTZ: "Most of the recommended clinics here (yes, the majority) regularly post biased results. The strategies typically involve using different hairstyles, lighting, and angles to amplify the perceived hairloss pre-op and then inflate the result post-op." What is your opinion about him? Does he also fabricate conspiracy theories like me? Is he an idiot like me? Please have a look my conspiracy theories for body hairs: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/176869-bht-option-young-hair-loss-suffers.html Although you labeled me to be an idiot, I value you for your comments and ideas. We are in the same ship, in fact. So I invite you here again to make your voting. http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/176801-fue-vs-fut-why-do-people-prefer-fue-over-fut-more-more.html I need your favor now, for some time please do not bash me and just listen. I am really bored of you and if you continue to your unfair and silly attitude against me, I wud avoid you like a plaque. Your IQ, your choice. Here I see a lot of honest and respectful folks who just want to understand the facts. Do them a favor also by drying up, follow Headon, a smart guy.

I am also confused. Were these photographs taken the same day after hair cut? Is the right one before the haircut?

Thanks Dr, honesty always wins, sooner or later, keep it coming. Peace time now, let's see the others.... No exceptions..

First, please forget everything you know about HT. Forget your biases about the techniques. Do not consider about camouflage of the scar when the hairs longer. Forget everything. You are all dummies like me. NOW, please reply my simple question; If you must prefer one of the scars over your head, which one you would prefer? Just look at the scar and prefer one. Even your relatives, friends can make preference, ask them... (given that they become a member of the network and vote) NOTE: Please do not make discussions, comments, avoid long posts at this stage. Just prefer one, just you can make a short comment on your reason. Please bring this topic to the attention of other members you know, then we can collect much more feedback, than the comparison will be significant.

There are many different aspects of FUT and FUE that we can compare. Let's concentrate on one issue at a time. Our starting point was stated by BISMARCK already: "Neither FUE nor FUT are perfect. Both have their drawbacks and benefits." (totally agree) As a scenario, we will consider Dr.BestFUT and Dr.BestFUE are the most experienced, talented and perfectionist performers of their techniques with their teams. They obtain consistently good results, but due to the many variables and characteristics of the patients, they may sometimes have insufficient results, even may get so-called failures. But we do not consider this here. The first topic is QUALITY of the SCAR, after one session of FUT or FUE. We know that the range for graft numbers for one session of FUE and FUT is about 3000-5000 grafts, with average 4000 grafts. (FUT scar should extent from one temple to another for 4000 grafts as shown in many cases) Here is very good examples of good FUE scar and FUT scar after about 4000 grafts. (FUT scar is a little low position than usual, but no need to consider this) If anyone else could provide better examples of scars, I will replace it. (Maybe 1978Matt can provide us better FUT scar of himself) Please look at the scars carefully, then decide.

Hi folks, as the creator of this thread, I thank you all for your contributions and comments. I agree on some points, however, I strongly disagree with some of you guys on your opinions about the biased pictures provided here until now. Here are more examples for biased pictures in the attachment. The FUE example comes from the old ages of FUE, (or bad technique), 1.0 to 1.2 mm punches was used, so the dots were noticeable. FUT scar is bad, because it is wide over back parts. Both methods have some bad examples, you can compare those if you want. But don't compare a good example of a technique with the bad example of another technique. That's not fair and it doesn't make any sense.

Ratha, You may have grade 6 (or maybe 7) hair loss and total baldness over the hair loss area which is more severe than the example you gave. I think a more logical plan for you would be as following: First decide on the technique, FUT or FUE, get away from any surgeon who will suggest you BHT in the first session. You are a candidate for at least 2 sessions of transplant regardless of the technique, regardless of the body hairs. Then have one session of hair transplant with only scalp hairs.. Then see your result about 9 months later. Then discuss with your surgeon, if you need more grafts from the beards in the 2nd session. Your surgeon if he/she is honest, will guide you through that. The donor areas potential and the result will determine and justify the use of body hairs then. Do not harm your neck area in the beginning. There is no candidate justifying body or beard hairs in the first session. You will always have a chance to use them, after understanding that you really need more. If you are so realistic and have low expectations, just one session of transplant with scalp hairs may give enough results for you. All you need is to find a good and honest surgeon. You can find many good surgeons but it is hard to find a honest one nowadays. You can again watch the advertorial video you brought here, considering this fact. Ask yourself, if he (as a physician) has so many capabilities much more than the other coalition (real) surgeons of this community, why is he still so bald??

Ratha, This case certainly approves my words. "HT surgeons generally use BH in patients who do not need BH, never use them for patients who really need them (for grade 7 or even more severe hair losses)" The man here has moderate, grade 5, partial hair loss (he has many original hairs over transplanted area) Pre-op pictures show the man with short haircut, post-ops long hair. It is unclear where beard hairs put and if they add something more. The top area is still uncovered. Any experienced FUT or FUE surgeon can obtain and transfer about 4000-5000 grafts just in one session and can obtain similar or even more coverage than this. In summary no need for the beards for more density in that case. So why using beards and 3 days of torturing surgery. We should know the pricing and then can decide if this economically benefits the patient or the physician? And ask, Does this justify to operate on very sensitive skin of neck, violating its virginity. ( Google it : "Primum non necere" )

The is not the correct section of the forum to start this thread. I think this should be under "Hair Transplant Experiences and Surgeon Reviews" or somewhere else. You should give us some starting points. Anyway, HD videos published by clinics should be considered totally advertorial and you can not trust their honesty much. I believe the honesty of the surgeons who never posts their videos much more (who don't advertise themselves). Much better to see the results from the real patients as long as they are real patients indeed. An exception to this would be, pictures from the clinics who share their patient's progress honestly, and show the pictures without using any photographic tricks.

You can find the same tricks in these threads: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/176771-dr-koray-erdogan-2820-grafts-fue.html http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/176798-dr-koray-erdogan-2620-grafts-fue.html Even his patients use the same tricks somehow http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/176826-5013-fue-two-days-6-month-results-dr-koray-erdogan.html I think it is unfair to all respected coalition surgeons here, who post honestly.. I would ask him "how he can be so sure about the total graft capacity of donor areas (without removing the grafts)". If there is 7500 total capacity, with which punch? 0.7 mm, 0.8 mm or 0.9 mm? It can not be the same with either of them. But, surely there will be no answer as usual. I think Dr. Koray considers that we are all stupids.

In NW5 or even NW6 hair loss, donor areas are generally good and provide enough coverage. Can you show your donor areas? HT surgeons generally use BH in patients who do not need BH, never use them in patients who really need them (for grade 7 or even more severe hair losses). Transplanted body hairs survive, but never resemble head hairs and since they have high turnover rates, it does not add more to the transplanted donor area hairs. Never a surgeon showed any result in which any particular area over the head was restorated by body hairs only. Because, their appearance may be so unnatural and weird. Can you show one example of BHT with cosmetically good result (if so, it should be very rare exception). I will be glad to discuss and which tricks was used to show them good.

BUSA, I really did not know who DR. Doganay is. After you mentioned him here, I checked and saw that he is one of the competitors of Dr. Koray in Turkey. Here I am criticising Dr. Koray's presentations in Dr. Koray's thread like the others; that's OK. But promoting Doganay here is very unfair and I can not allow you to do this. We should respect the rights of the doctors keeping our rights to cricitise them in with of fairplay. This is a thread from Dr. Koray presenting the result of his clinic and you have no rights to promote one of his competitors, without having any base for this. MODERATORS!!!!!!!!!! Is this fair for BUSA to promote Dr. Doganay here? How can we be sure of that BUSA is not one of the internet marketing employee of Dr. Doganay? How can we be sure of his level of intellectuality? (if I am so idiot as he mentioned about me)

I do not know now who Dr. Maras is. Show me 1 or 2 threads from his/her or from his/her patients that proved BHT, then I will make some comments on them. No exceptions. Here is very accurate and smart comment from a wise man Car5. Here is reality for you to open your eyes, in pursuance of truth. You said there are thousand of examples for body hairs. Show me one.

OK, lets use your naming system about the sessions. The naming is not issue, in fact. First HT done in 2 (sometimes 3) sessions in 2-4 consecutive days. HT a year later, this is new HT. Just note; your naming is confusing, because HT for grade 5-7 hair losses is planned in 2-3 sessions beforehand, but the time between the sessions is generally (optimally) 8-12 months, not 2-4 days. And all senior members of this community named the 2nd sessions is a session that is done months later. I would say it is clear that all coalition members who use FUT performs HT (transfer 4000-5000 grafts) in 1 session in 1 day of surgery. All FUE surgeons also performs 4000-5000 grafts transfer in 1 session in one day. (considering just the donor areas over head used). So why Dr. Koray transfer 4000-5000 grafts in 2 sessions in 2-4 days. Is this favorable and useful for us -the patients? Please understand now what i am asking? And explain as if you are telling to a dummy. Me the idiot, you the smart one. And, the same question to Dr. Koray. Why 2 sessions in 2-4 days? Is this really useful for the patients? What provides more for the patients? What are the advantages for the patients? (Headon, also bring this up to his attention please)

That's it. Thanks a lot, dude. I was patiently waiting for someone to show up and say something, i.e question the morality of this marketing tactics. I totally agree with you. If this "Hair Restoration Network" is really created by and for patients, this should be reminded to physicians. That's why I am here, you and even BUSA should be here. ( or the name of the network would be "Network for Promoting HT Physicians" ) The question that should be asked: Why does this clinic still use these photography tricks in its representations? Then, we have to ask the same question the other physicians, as well. No one is privileged. NO EXCEPTIONS.