FUEmylife

With respect Dr. Bhatti, please publish your results in a peer reviewed blinded study. If you did so, it would be groundbreaking. Showing a video of your surgery or individually selected patients does not constitute evidence.

The patient would know, but I mean the person examining the recipient site (not the donor) after healing was complete. Or a sham surgery could be incorporated. Easy study. Done time and time again with many other surgical procedures (ie. breast implants, cardiac stents vs bypass, etc.). Only reason it is not being done that I can think of is because of economic interest, but the question then is whose? I just can't reason my way through that doing something blindly or by 'feel' works as well as directly seeing it, and the complete absence of scentific data behind the claims of some of the forum junkies here really makes me pause. No matter how many times he tried, Ray Charles could never get a perfect shave. Also, Lorenzo seems to be the only one with consistently high yields, but his hairlines leave much to be desired. I might as well start rubbing RU58841 on my head and wearing a laser helmet.

Hello, I'm new here, though I have been researching hair loss for quite a long while. I have spent quite a bit of time looking for an actual BLINDED, peer-reviewed study comparing FUT and FUE that has come out since any of the newer techniques have been published. I want to see people evaluating hair loss recovery not knowing which type of surgery the patient received. This seems very easy to do. High resolution photos in person instead of low quality JPGs and movies on the internet. The funding needed would be minimal, as I am sure many patients would happily volunteer. Why hasn't this study been done? Honestly, with a good statistician and a few clinics offering the option to their patients to enroll, it seems like it would be quite simple. The only answer I can come up with is that the scientific community does not think it is an issue that needs to be addressed. Obviously, from the forums here, it seems like it would have quite a large audience. I have read through every article I could find on pubmed. The closest I got was an article quoted by Dr. Wesley, but it was very old. Have there been any more recent studies? If not, why not? Ulterior motives? It does seem that when you see a study on a drug, it is often a new drug that is under patent. But when you see a new study on a surgical procedure, there are certainly surgeons practicing the older procedure who have an ulterior motive to not want to have to learn a new procedure, particularly if they are older and at the end of the career. Yet medical science marches on. When they said they didn't have to crack your chest anymore to fix your coronary arteries, I am sure there were some surgeons that were unhappy. Yet it still moved forward, and lo and behold: David Letterman and Bill Clinton are somehow still alive. How come this study doesn't exist for FUE? Or if I am ignorant, someone please point me in the right direction. The internet has a way of humbling, and this seems like a remarkably well informd community. Please, someone tell me that I overlooked a study. Don't point me in the direction of some doctor's internet marketing. I want a blinded study. If it doesn't exist, then...FUE me and what the FUT.