Jump to content

JayLDD

Members
  • Content Count

    1,080
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

JayLDD last won the day on February 27

JayLDD had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

153 Excellent

4 Followers

About JayLDD

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Basic Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Country
    Australia
  • State
    AL

Hair Loss Overview

  • Describe Your Hair Loss Pattern
    Receding Hairline (Genetic Baldness)
    Thinning or Bald Spot in the Crown/Vertex
  • How long have you been losing your hair?
    In the last 5 years
  • Norwood Level if Known
    Norwood III
  • What Best Describes Your Goals?
    Maintain and Regrow Hair
    Considering Surgical Hair Restoration

Hair Loss Treatments

  • Have you ever had a hair transplant?
    Yes
  • Hair Transplant Surgeon
    Dr. Koray Erdogan
  • Current Non-Surgical Treatment Regime
    Propecia (Finasteride)
    Laser Therapy or Comb
    Nizoral Shampoo

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Any lower would look absolutely ridiculous. This is a very balanced, however very aggressive and youthful hairline. Most men and even teenagers do not have hairlines this low and straight, particularly with the very well defined temple points you have. I also think that when the transplanted hairs begin to thicken up and get to a similar length to the rest of your hair you’ll notice a poof effect at the front of hair being pushed forward slightly making the forehead look even smaller. This doesn’t yet show in the photos and likely won’t be noticeable until the 6-7th month. Currently looks good and very normal for 4 months. But I have to reiterate, any lower would truly look ridiculous.
  2. I know he doesn't use microscopes, however it doesn't take a genius to know that there are plenty of surgeons who do use microscopes achieving results well below his standard, I don't think its the be all and end all. I've seen some of his results that have a few multigrafts but even a natural recessed hairline will show a few miniaturised multi-hair groupings, haven't seen a single one where it looked visibly unnatural and he often is dealing with difficult, thicker hairtypes that can look unnatural, but in his case do not. A few doubles is not worrying, a triple might be but even then naturalness is a scale that has to be fairly far off the rails for a member of the general public to notice. I've seen and know plenty of people who if I didn't know for sure would think their hairline looks "unnatural", variability is a thing. I have a few multis in my hairline but I can't see them unless I literally hold my head upto the mirror in bright lighting and stare right at it. I agree he should probably be using them, but I don't know how that would overall change his process or how much extra work it would be, but I suspect the improvement would be minimal in 95% of cases. I'd definitely be interested to see your case though. For his prices in Turkey he should be.
  3. Comparatively low? Who would you consider better FUE hairline surgeons than Pekiner or Keser? Or Erdogan for large FUE megasessions? There are few and far between, in terms of hairline surgeons arguably Hasson, also Konior and Freitas among a select few others. There are none that are definitively doing better work.
  4. "Why would scar tissue affect my first surgery? Do you even read what you write Mr 'I consider myself the most level headed member of this forum? (yeah, I did see that post. Guess what? If you have to say that to reassure yourself, you are anything but level headed)" That's not what I said, put your reading comprehension cap on. My point was clearly that you made a very direct link between scar tissue and potential growth without knowing conclusively whether or not this has anything to do with it. You made a direct link between ASMEDs work however, and what you consider a poor result. Both of these involve physiology and your individual body, on top of that Keser has a much slower and more meticulous approach than ASMED, if result in your second procedure is lacklustre in an area then I'm going to question how you're so sure in the second case it wasn't the doctor but in the first case it was.Yes, I do indeed consider myself level headed because I can accurately draw, or avoid drawing conclusions that the facts don't logically reflect, which is what you did and did in particular when making an attack. When you say "the results posted by ASMED patients here" again its a question of statistics. If in one year out of the last 7 or so the standards dropped (which they did) from the clinic with the most patient posted results on this website and on the international forum for example, when previously their results were among the most consistent in the world and still a majority world class in terms in terms of FUE megassession standards, yes I'm going to be suspicious of immediately drawing swift judgement on them. Considering they are undoubtedly the most successful FUE megasession clinic in the world, with the most patient posted results of any clinic, and previously were among the most consistent in the world that's hardly unreasonable. Again, do I think the consistency dropped sometime in late 2017-2018 if we look at results? Yes absolutely. At the same time, if every single result coming out of a different clinic with a fifth, or tenth or some tiny fraction of the amount of patient posted results of ASMED has 3-4 bad results in a year, statistically that is significantly more worrying. What type of work that I criticise are you even referring to? I regard highly the vast majority of surgeons that most knowledgeable posters here do. There are no clinics other than ASMED however where you had posters making 7-8 accounts on this website to make negative comments, post fake photos, refuse to post any photos, make things up on a regular basis, blackmail the clinic or just outright lie about their experience, or the expectations of a hair transplant. Consider also that your own second surgeon for example I've praised repeatedly, and for smaller sessions I would absolutely choose over ASMED. I've said this many times, and I've also recommended and praised surgeons like Freitas, Feriduni, HnW as well as Hattingen clinic. I talk like I know a lot because I do, I've looked at ten times the amount of results you have and considered results statistically, read ten times the amount of experiences medical data you have, and am ten times more honest. To be totally honest I couldn't care less whether someone I think is an angry little idiot thinks I know anything either. I never said "HnW learnt FUE from ASMED" , although most certainly their website from a 2017 post says this: "In Europe the work of Dr Jose Lorenzo and Dr Koray Erdogan has come closest to the quality of work that we like to produce. With their assistance we have trained already experienced technicians in their manual extraction techniques. For approximately 2 years we have been slowly increasing the number of FUE procedures that we perform ." On top of that Dr Wong is part of and attends World FUE institute workshops, of which Koray is the vice president. Hardly seems unjustified to suggest that ASMED had huge industry influence and success. You're right at 5 months you certainly might have a great result, honestly that's entirely too early to even start drawing conclusions.
  5. Basically I think its worth just looking at a few different options. Keser does 500-750 grafts a day with extremely precise placement and good density and in terms of growth rates is likely among the best in the world, as are his hairline aesthetics. Obviously this is a much slower process and slightly more expensive, although to some might be more appealing, as well as the fact that he does extractions as well as incisions. For me I think Erdogan was by far the best choice for FUE and my situation looks semi-similar to yours, however I think in retrospect it would have been worth putting more consideration into FUT. Regarding the comments from US surgeons, imo they are largely disingenuous hacks without the same level of experience, or ability to do those graft numbers with high quality donor management. Partly this is because expenses and therefore cost of service are significantly higher in the US. To be honest Konior is the only US surgeon ($12 USD a graft however) that I would consider for FUE. Even in terms of FUT, Hasson/Wong I would place well above any US competition. I also would recommend consulting them because they hold less bias towards FUT/FUE like many American surgeons do. I haven't seen a single Erdogan case where there is a cosmetically significant difference to the donor after 3000 grafts unless shave with a 0 guard. Imo the majority of US surgeons will go out of business and deserve to, eventually raising the standards and leaving only the cream of the crop behind. There are certainly very talented FUT surgeons like Bloxham around but even he for example is very focused on FUT, both for legitimate but also financial reasons. I went through the same situation of having a specific window of time for recovery, imo that is huge reason to consider a surgeon like Erdogan that is going to utilise more grafts and make a bigger impact.
  6. What are your thoughts on the Matt Mcconaughey situation? I'm also not simply talking about the shaved V in the ER photo or the obvious wig that Melvin has shown, but across his entire career the hairline has appeared inconsistent. I don't think its irrational in the sense that I'm not concluding anything, simply suggesting that I think a hairpiece is plausible and someone in his position could easily manage a flawless looking hair system. There are no other actors I can think of where the hairline appears so drastically different over the years. The density, the texture of the hair themselves, the shape. You can say this is selection, but do you think its realistic that if Clooney was in a position where he even started to bald somewhere in the past 15 years, that he wouldn't have attempted a hairpiece? There are few actors in his position to begin with with and very few A listers ever tend to go bald. I don't see it as realistic as that they all somehow managed to keep their hair through genetic luck because statistically that doesn't make sense, finasteride and treatment is a possibility but a certain number won't be able to tolerate the drug. I don't think its a transplant and nor do I think he'd risk a transplant, but the fact is I've seen transplants that look as natural and dense as Clooney's hair. I don't think its deniable either that there are drastic and constant changes in the shape of his hairline, and not just for a few movie roles etc.
  7. Pretty convenient to blame scar tissue with a surgeon that is one of the most meticulous in the business, but with ASMED instead of blaming physiology, blaming it on the clinic.
  8. Imo the hairline changes too often to be natural. I've seen undetectable hairpieces before and considering the level Clooney is at I don't think its unrealistic that he wouldn't have someone to manage it. There are plenty of photos over the years where he is undeniably wearing a hairpiece, if he has worn one once its hardly conspiratorial to suggest that he would in general. Perhaps concealers and clever styling involved on occasion also. I don't see any evidence of a transplant, and the chance that someone of his stature would risk it is unlikely. Even a 0.5% chance of permanent redness, poor growth (which is probably closer to 10% even with a surgeon like Konior) wouldn't be acceptable to someone in his position. Also worth asking what the chance that he somehow lucked out and for a 58 year old has hair is in the top 1% (or better?) of hair genetics, while also having those looks and being an A list film star. Well, by definition its 1% and that hardly seems realistic.
  9. 3000 sounds very realistic, your individual hair don't look particularly thick and your forelock is virtually gone. With your donor that thin I likely wouldn't consider FUT, although tbh your donor doesn't look particularly strong and perhaps it would be better to opt for FUT and start leaving the donor slightly longer to maximise its long term potential. Its possible but not worth getting an FUE where you don't shave the top. A more difficult, slower, less precise and more expensive process. I'm also not a fan of conservative approaches that don't look good and leave you in the position of needing transplant after transplant to keep up, there are more consistent surgeons imo and those that are better at making every graft count, but for your level of loss I don't think that is optimal. I'd also look at Hasson/Wong as an example of surgeons that have many similar cases to yours with aesthetic results. I suspect their quote will be similar, potentially even larger. Keser in Turkey gets more aesthetic and refined results imo but your loss is slightly too large for him to be an optimal choice I feel.
  10. Totally feel the same way in my experience, you're a very good writer by the way. Its not even a huge number of grafts you had either, but the impact is drastic.
  11. Personally I think it would be good of them to do so even though I don't think your growth was poor. In saying that, I think with 1200-1500 grafts you will have a very, very strong result and look bag on the annoyance you have currently and think its silly, which it is even though I totally understand and emphathize with it. I felt similar to you after my first procedure emotionally I think but I booked the soonest procedure I could after the first and am incredibly happy I did. There's no point dwelling over an imperfect result when the amount of grafts to take it to a stunning one is quite small.
  12. Utterly clueless. Keep kidding yourself if you like, but 99% of transplants except insane dense packs in a tiny area are see-through under certain lights. If you think someone in the hairloss industry called "lasercap" is a 100% trustworthy source of info don't know what to tell you apart from that I have a few bridges to sell you.
  13. That's seriously impressive, how many kg did you drop?
×