Eurofue

After reding this thread in the last 24 hours this is the impression I now get from Dr Feller

"FUE is brutal, nothing has changed in the last 14 years to overcome the 3 detrimental forces of torsion traction and compression only FUT can overcome these detrimental forces! Anyone else that says they can via FUE are liars! Only when these 3 detrimental forces are overcome in some way can FUE be viable, if only there was a way but sorry there isn't, the 3 detrimental forces are far to great for FUE as the technology hasn't changed since it first started, the procedure is exactly the same as it was when I made the first video "aren't I great" if only someone could create something to overcome the 3 detrimental forces of FUE they would be an instant millionaire!

OH wait what's that Dr Bloxham why on earth have you kept this from me, we were supposed to be partners I've just spent every minute of the last few weeks slating FUE on this thread entitled "FUT is more popular than FUE" as there are 3 detrimental forces that need to be overcome you see!!! And now you have invented such a device that gives FUT level yield from a modified FUE punch without the 3 detrimental forces that are encountered and can't be overcome by the standard FUE procedure!

Oh wow this is exiting if only I knew earlier I may have been able to do some work for the last few weeks the queue in the reception is massive with people waiting to have their head sliced open at the back. Let's hope my hand is not as shaky on the video that I posted earlier as people will be leaving looking like pumpkins at Halloween hehehehehehehehehe

Sharing information and opinions are great. We all have them and we all have our rights to share them. However, to state opinions as facts without any proof, and then to insult and attack those that disagree with the unproven facts BECAUSE they are unproven is another story altogether. As medical professionals, if we make statements of fact, we must prove them to be true. Dr. Feller has not done this and every time the scientific method is mentioned, which is the underlying basis for every high school level science paper, he simply ignores it. Why?

 

The answer is simple. He knows that this is his opinion and more so he knows he cannot prove his claims. Further, two weeks before this thread was started Dr. Blake opened a new thread:

 

"INTRODUCING: Modified FUE (mFUE)"

 

In this thread the "new" procedure known as "mFUE" miraculously gives "FUE type scarring with FUT type yield". But throughout this entire thread, that Dr. Feller has boasted has so many views to validate his claims, he has been villifying FUE scarring as being so absolutely horrendous that we are all fools with "learning disabilities" for not understanding the level of damage it is causing. How ironic, and convenient at the same time, that the very thing that he says is so detrimental about FUE is 1/2 of the strength of his new procedure called "mFUE"! What's unusual is that Dr. Feller did not make a single post in the thread "introducing" mFUE. The thread formation and all posts for 18 pages were left up to his partners Dr. Blake and Dr. Lindsey.

 

Dr. Feller was resigned to being the bulldog in this thread instead. The insults, the grandstanding, and the twisting of words all lead up to one very obvious strategy.

 

Attack and discredit FUE and those that specialize in it with UNSUBSTANTIATED claims that fly in the face of the scientific method while offering the solution to the problem at the same time.

DISPhair said " It's not like he (Dr. Feller) gets a royalty every time a FUT procedure is performed and thus would have an interest against FUE." That is because nothing about FUT is patented but...

 

"As far as presenting mFUE, while Dr. Bloxham made a presentation with some very broad strokes online, there are some aspects that we still can't discuss yet as it will interfere with the patent process.

 

Dr. Feller"

 

Two plus two equals four. It is my opinion, and the evidence supports my opinion, that this is a valiant but thin effort to develop business for mFUE. Claims about FUE and the three detrimental forces being so detrimental are not proven and all we have is discussion and any non-believers have "learning disabilities".

 

 

Kind regards,

 

Dr Tejinder Bhatti

Wow just read through some of that link! One of the things that made me laugh was how FUE scarring was quoted

Allowed us to achieve "Strip results with FUE-level scarring."

Am I missing something but hasn't DR Feller been slating the scarring of FUE throughout this thread?????

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

 

Hehe exactly what I was thinking if it's bad yes you would have to grow your hair longer. We take that risk but not the same risk "HOWEVER LOW THAT MAY BE" of it turning out extremely awful and you being absolutely gutted to the point I think my mental wellbeing maybe scarred for the rest of my life knowing I had that mess at the back of my head. That would definately leave me depressed about my life I'm pretty sure of it. Is it worth the risk in my mind NO WAY!

Incorrect.

I had one unsatisfactory FUT procedure over 23 years ago by a low end doctor who doesn't even perform HT anymore. Despite this I did not have a large or regrettable scar.

 

I also do not "slam" FUE. You are projecting. I perform both FUT and FUE. It is you and other FUE-only advocates who "slam" FUT every chance you get. Don't you ever tire of tearing things down instead of building them up? You are pure negativity on these threads. It's your view or no view, right?

 

In truth, most of the opposition to FUT is blind fear of the procedure itself, not the normal and easily concealable scar it leaves behind. In reality it is FUE scarring that causes more damage to the skin and the remaining donor follicles limiting overall available follicles in the future.

 

The formula for hair transplantation is simple: Do as much FUT as possible, then finish with FUE.

Wow you really don't listen to prospective patients!

Yes we all understand that more grafts are available with FUT! We Get It. The 3 forces!!!!!!!!

We just don't care. People who would rather opt for FUE chose it for one factor alone. They don't want to risk the Linear scar turning out awful. Whatever chance of that actually happening be it 0.1% or even less. They want to be able to have shorter hair in the region of that scar so this has the best viable option to do that. Yes we understand that there is also chance of possible scarring with FUE but generally that option is easier to cover up than the linear scar if goes bad. From all that has been written and posted that's what I get from everything. Is this not the case at all?

He said not to bother taking it until I notice some thinning on top as I I should get a good coverage for my NW 2/3 with the 3000 grafts. I would rather delay the thinning happening if I'm honest.

Wondering if I should start taking fin now or wait until the hair takes before starting. Just don't want anything to mess up the hair growing. Thanks

Same with England?

Give it a couple of weeks to wash off all the scabs then take some more pics. It may not look so linear then it's just all the scabs are connected at the minute. It may not look so bad once washed off. Also some peoples real hairlines are all over the place so the pointy parts may not look to bad don't beat yourself up at the moment just keep regular updates so it can be seen how things are progressing

I would too like to find an online trusted pharmacy that sells fin and doesn't charge the earth for it. I was told that in Turkey they sell it over the counter in the pharmacies and you don't need a prescription for it and is inexpensive.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsepkchulm0

 

 

the truth is staring us all in the face.

pmsl.

Maybe he is trying to drum up some business for FUT

I was thinking the same what someone else has written about how much time he is on here seems like every half an hour to every hour between posts

And I was thinking also the same about the shakey hands that may be the reason for the poor FUE results on the whole and trying to discredit FUE to convince people that FUT is still needed since it seems as though FUE will be taking over and leaving FUT in its dust.

I agree with what is being said about the removal of the grafts and storing them. It doesn't look great big clumps of grafts having multiple grabs by the forceps.

I hope that isn't the norm for FUE. Maybe the pulling part may not be the problem. Not that I have any clue but just throwing it out there. Anyone tried to take a plaster off slowly it absolutely kills but when you pull quickly it doesn't seem to put the same stress as it comes out as the pain is much less. I will repeat, so I accept being shot down I have no clue about it I'm just wondering how Dr Bhatti can still get good results with what looks like a rather rough job of what's being done!

Lol so you drop a third for good luck hehe. Hit the edit button����

Emoji's don't work I tried to put in the thumbs up!

So how many doctors have 10 years of FUE experience?

Anyone on this thread?

Who said 10 years experience I was referring to what you said in a previous post about the technique being 10 years old

I'm guessing if people are getting better results with the same techniques from 10 years ago they fall into the category my mother always used to tell me "practice makes perfect"

If you are bankng on body hair to compensate for losing 50% of potential grafts, then you are gravely mistaken. The growth rate is not the same and I keep hearing that you that's it's basically like having pupes on your head. If body hear was really that viable, then having to ever buzz down when all else fails would be a non-factor for folks no?

I'm guessing you didn't fully read what I wrote. "The truth is that's it's not that poor a result"

What is the difference in yield generally 10% ?

I realise there can be failures so I'm not talking about those. Just a rule of thumb or mean value

So Dr Bhatti can paint the Mona Lisa but Dr Feller can only draw stick men in the world of FUE

people who are satisfied w 50% yield to avoid a scar better be sure that their hair loss will not progress beyond a NW2 or 3 , or better hope that their "fall back " clean head shaven look won't become hopelessly outdated in 10 years time.

I said "I WOULD BE HAPPY" with 50% compared to FUT the truth is that it's not that poor of a result and the use of body hair could surely make up the difference in yield between the both of them to be use as a filler. But all failing you haven't lost the backup of buzzing hair short. Some people I can see on here are happy to show their scar with short hair. I would definately not ever do that with a dirty great line sitting on the back it looks awful!

^which is the reason people are HAPPY to sacrifice grafts. We all know the success rate is not as good....we just don't care.

Slightly less hair transplant success rate vs scar........no brainier for most people.

Surely this debate is pointless? All this rant for rant people will get what THEY want anyway. I would still choose FUE even if the yield was 50% success compared to 98% for FUT. it's all about the scar and having to have your hair longer unless you want to see the line. Even if it failed you can still buzz it down. But let's be honest the 3 forces don't have massive problems as you do offer the procedure yourself Dr feller if it was that bad you just wouldn't do it. Plus you can use body hair as a filler so adding to the amount of grafts available to the top of the head. This is the way I look at it after reading masses and masses of these threads. My 2 pence. Although do carry on the rants are quite amusing

Did the doc not offer FUE? I think you would have been better off if you are looking to have real short haircuts on the back. One reason defo against the strip you had

Just realised pictures of personal things in background so removed them sorry

.....

Sorry for double posts but from my iPad it wouldn't let me add more than picture at a time

Hi these photos just taken. It looks to me like the doner should still have ok coverage. What do you think?

How much salt should I mix in the water? Do you think rock salt will dissolve ok? I'm guessing just a mild very light mist on the area and not to saturate it? Thanks for the reply.