kramer79

Why do you stress to not sleep on fibers?

I looked up your thread and it seems you had some shock loss along the scar. Can you post the most recent examples?

Do you have any pictures of your donor area? maybe some different angles of the front and side to have an overall better understanding. It's hard with the quality of pictures that have been uploaded to have a clear picture of how things went down in my opinion.

I don't think anyone will truly feel comfortable recommending a 'budget friendly' surgeon in Toronto simply because there seems to be no one who does consistently good work that we know of. I think you will only hear about HW and Rahal if we are talking Canada, period. The only person i can think of was a user who posted going to Dr. Aditya Gupta (Seager clinic) and seemed to get a pretty decent result. I remember the scar in his pictures looking really impressive. Again this is 1 result so take that into consideration. The doctor also seems to have a pretty questionable demeanor if you research him. Is saving some money and going to a better clinic or waiting to travel somewhere else an option? I think you will thank yourself if you are patient.

I am glad you mentioned this as it's extremely important to talk about how much FUE is done before going to FUT. Out of curiosity, have you ever let your hair grow longer (specifically donor) and if so, how does it look?

I guess you don't know for sure but perhaps you have an idea based on your family history and who you seem to be following as far as your hair loss progression. If your gut tells you that you are heading towards NW6+ then you probably should consider FUT. Honestly this is a personal choice, however knowing the facts gives you more power in making your decision. If I get FUE and end up with a depleted donor, is FUE as a method to blame? If I get FUT and I end up with a scar stretching, is FUT as a method to blame ? I think the only power we have when getting cosmetic surgery is minimizing the risk of complications by going to the top doctors of this particular field who will take in to account out unique situation and not give us a blanket approach on what method we should use.

Is there any clearer pictures/angles of his donor area at 10 months?

It depends on a variety of factors. Genetic predisposition to hair loss and to what degree? Use of medication long-term and ultimately expectations. After consulting with many of the doctors that everyone around here considers elite they always asked "Are you ok with having no crown coverage or a lightly covered crown at best?" Basically if you read between the lines, are you ok with having less hair available to move as your hair loss progresses or is having access to more coverage and density more important, but you must be ready to live with the scar? I think it's fair to be scared of the "what ifs" of having a scar but i guess it's probably wiser to focus more on the fact you are doing all of this to have more hair and you should probably reduce the probability of complications by going to a top doctor.

Really? Who are the surgeons and what reasons do they cite that disagrees with the notion that FUT/FUE combo doesn't maximize lifetime graft availability?

Nice work. Is there any clearer pictures/angles of his donor area at 10 months?

I agree totally with BeHappy's last 2 comments. The whole notion if my HT doesn't pan out or i need more in the future so i will get FUE so i can shave down if all doesn't go to plan is unstable. I get people think like that when they start their research and they are trying to learn but the key word is 'PLAN'. Plan on going to an ethical and top-notch doctor who has a master plan for you. Stay away from google reviews and yelp etc. Don't rush. If you are that committed to having hair by getting a HT, then give yourself a fighting chance to do so and you will most likely succeed if you are realistic and calculated in your approach. I mean seriously, people are willing to take a plane half way across the world to get more hair and you are telling me that these people will just shave down if it doesn't work out ? As BeHappy stated "don't start spending too much time and effort planning what to do in X situation or how to do it or else you will end up making certain that's the one that happens. Don't lose sight of your real goal."

Ya Dr. Wong comes off as a super ethical doctor with this very low key confidence. He seems to have less interest in what the 'market' asks for as if he knows where a patient is headed and suggests a harvesting method accordingly. Did he comment on your laxity being good?

Do you think they are noticeable because there are multiple scars? So after being in the pool it's noticeable to the general public?

What is the shortest you can go down in the donor region without the scars being detectable?

A journey that is a perfect example of proper donor management. How was your laxity before starting your HT journey and through the process of getting multiple FUTs ?

What was the survival rate? Did it make a decent aesthetic impact?

If they use FUT like you said for the front and mid scalp, then they can switch over to Scalp FUE and BHT like Melvin said for the crown. A mixture of FUE and BHT together would be ideal. Obviously this is really a case by case scenario as to the donor management since everyone's hair loss progression is different.

I agree with Melvin. Implanting between hairs takes a very experienced and confident doctor in order to avoid shock loss. I hear Dr. Wong is someone who is good in those situations and that he takes them on, hence why he has such a good reputation as a repair surgeon. Did Dr Wong mention how much of the 5000-6000 grafts would be FUT and how many FUT's you can do before switching to FUE ? I'm guessing he commented on your laxity...

In my opinion, yes. Also...When someone gets their first HT, they are more than likely to address the frontal 1/3. If they use FUT to do this, they will probably have more of a permanent hairline/front than if they were using FUE in my opinion. I am talking about over time because we need to take in to account genetics, use of meds etc etc I think people who use FUT for their hairline are more often not experiencing this "hair transplant thins over time" as much as someone who used FUE to re-create and build a new hairline. Someone looks in the mirror, sees their hairline and then makes a conclusion if the HT thinned out or not.

Looks real good. Once the hairs mature and thicken up like you said, i am sure that will be the icing on the cake.

We aren't debating which one is superior. We are debating the Total Graft Availability of FUT + FUE, versus FUE alone. https://www.ishrs-htforum.org/content/htfi/29/5/local/front-matter.pdf https://www.instagram.com/tv/CK9jreCjv10/?igshid=efc2s4c8bmc9

From Dr. Shapiro's study (They mention it in the video interview as well). I was also told this by Dr.Wong after consulting with him as i have no bias to either procedure but emphasized i would like the ability to have more coverage and density over my lifetime.

"Our cover article by David Josephitis and Ron Shapiro is an ambitious and well-designed study taking place over two years in two patients who had two procedures, FUE and FUT, performed at the same time, twice. Their conclusions were that more grafts were obtained on the FUT side, residual donor density was greater on the FUT side, and FUT plus FUE yielded more grafts. When done properly, FUT is unarguably more efficient than FUE. That is important news! So why are some trying to relegate FUT to historical footnote status?" By the way I do believe there is essence in consulting with doctors who perform both methods without bias (economic, marketing etc etc) and put emphasis on patient needs, expectation and long term planning. In other words, ethics. I think that the truth shouldn't be blurred due to what the "market calls for". Just like someone is going to doubt the motives of Dr Feller for his 'aggressive' FUT stance and Dr. Cole for this 'aggressive' FUE stance, why not consider Dr. Wong and Dr. Konior's opinion who still perform both at high level (and most people on the boards consider legend status of the industry) I agree with not pushing for one procedure over another because of the type of procedure someone has gotten so they don't want to admit the opposite method maye be better etc. I think everyone should have the chance to make a decision based on facts and not marketing. For the record, I believe exclusive FUE is great for many cases but for access to max amount of grafts over someones lifetime, it simply isn't.

It seems preferable because of the 'taboo' mindset of an FUT scar. So in other words the FUE+BHT approach seems more tempting...believe me, i get it. However If i can have an extra 3000 grafts by combining FUT+FUE then personally I would rather have denser and more coverage all over (to each his own). If I can tap into BHT as well...well I guess then I am really increasing my potential for more hair. This whole notion of who will actually reach NW6/7 and who actually needs it, is pretty subjective. As i mentioned, too much FUE taps into potentially semi-permenant hair. So by sheer math if you lose some of those grafts as you age, you will be happy you have more hair in the bank. I've heard of hair-greed. I have never heard anyone turn down the potential to have more hair. Dr Shapiro said it perfectly: It's how much you can get over your lifetime that counts, not how much you get immediately.

The difference can be 2000-3000 extra grafts if one were to go FUT and then FUE (excluding beard hair grafts). The consensus after speaking with doctors who do both FUT and FUE is that the difference can be having a crown coverage and not having crown coverage. When doing purely FUE, you are limited to a lower amount of grafts because you have to go tall and wide on the donor region to avoid over harvesting and creating a depleting looking donor area. By doing this you are tapping into what can be 'semi-permanent' hairs that can look great in the short term but may miniaturize over the long term. I think there is benefit to watching the Dr Shapiro and Dr Josephitis interview from yesterday as they go over a lot of what you are talking about and they do a good job explaining it. Keeping an open mind and reading a bit in between the lines when watching the interview does help put things into perspective even more. By going FUT and then FUE, it allows someone to move more hair while still managing the donor area aesthetically. Even if someone doesn't progress to a NW7, the point is there are more grafts available which can be the difference in having more density in certain areas. Some people just want to have the fullest looking head of hair they can get and are willing to deal with a FUT scar for that. Now if having short hairstyles and buzzing down to the lowest guard possible is of great importance, than sure, FUE might be the way to go. Make sure that the FUE is done super efficiently because there is less mercy for screw ups with FUE as opposed to FUT, for the most part.