JayLDD

From reading your posts I don't think it sounds as if you have done enough research in regards to patient results and before and after photos, which are of paramount importance. The first thing that should come into your mind is what YOU hope to achieve, and after this find a doctor who is both consistent, and in the case of a bad result treats their patient well. It matters what you prefer visually in terms of their results, not simply whether the doctor is respected, consistent and considered a good doctor. If you prefer the VISUAL result of Hasson + Wong (which it sounds like you do) and don't think they are any less consistent than Bernstein, I would be far more inclined to choose them over a surgeon who doesn't achieve the result you desire in one go. Even a small procedure can turn sour, what if the first pass turns out badly? Are you going to be fine going in for a third or fourth on those prices? I'm pretty sure even Bill mentioned in a post that he would have preferred to do a small group of larger surgeries rather than the 4 smaller ones he ended up with. Just as one should be wary of a doctor that promises the 100% certainty of perfect results with one pass, you should be wary of a doctor who says it will take multiple passes to achieve your goals. It's 2017, there are plenty of doctors doing high norwood FUT megasessions and achieving consistently good results. If a doctor recommends against a procedure that that other highly regarded doctors like Hasson + Wong offer and achieve good results in consistently it is probably because they lack the skills to perform it and tend to be stuck in their ways. On the issue of the "art" of the procedure, focus less on what a doctor tells you to think, and more on what you like the look of in terms of before and afters. Doctors are just that, doctors, not visual artists. Take their advice seriously, but at the same time think of YOUR goals, not theirs. Conservative is certainly easier, but not always better.

Aside from finance I've studied visual arts, so I take serious issue with this statement. Just look at the area of temple points, look between Lorenzo, Bisanga and Erdogan. Three surgeons that would be regarded on the top end, and three surgeons that claim their approach utilises cues from their ethnicity, bone structure and facial features and yet their approach is COMPLETELY different. We are talking very consistent approaches across almost every case for each surgeon regarding ratios of distance, pronouncement, density, curvature and a range of other features. Again, not even remotely similar between these doctors, and all three are considered masters. Some doctors consistently opt for a feathered look, pointed or curved, high or low hairlines. Rahal is obviously a great surgeon, but one of his trademarks is clearly the very straight hairline with a point coming through at the very center, a particular detail I personally dislike strongly, but one that that SCREAMS Rahal. Highly pointed and lengthy temple points with a harsh curve at the top and softer one at the bottom is a consistent feature of Lorenzo. This is another detail I dislike, as it isn't natural in the vast majority of European men, and lends itself most specifically to middle eastern men. The truth is among the cream of the crop surgeons you truly are selecting the aesthetic, which can be extremely different from doctor to doctor. For me I would pick Erdogan Hasson Feriduni

The OP brought up a 5 month result which anyone would say is far away from completion. Doom and gloom from someone under completely different circumstances is hardly aiding the conversation. It makes sense to keep a calm mind at that point.

Apparently it's fine to call me a "goddamn moron" on another thread because I didn't agree with your assertion that FUE is consistently less effective than FUT, but not ok to call out someone who complains of their result, posts photos in the worst framing possible but still have it look ok, and then bash FUE as a whole. Please just check yourself for hypocrisy for a moment. I'm not the one who made petty insults towards someone.

He's been asked by Bill to post clear pictures because the only ones he did post didn't show an aesthetically unattractive result. I don't care if you get FUE or FUT, do whatever you like. There are better ways to disagree with someone than to ask them to be banned.

I've seen your results and they aren't even bad. You're an attention seeker looking for sympathy. You also said you knew further hair would fall out posing an issue and yet didn't want to ever take finasteride, despite being recommended it. Now that this poses an issue, despite your own bad decisions you blame it on FUE. Well done.

I think that answer speaks for itself. I just encourage others to do as much research into the matter as they possibly can, both from a European and a North American standpoint in regards to both scientific literature as well as results posted by doctors and patients.

I agree with this in particular and the majority of the rest of your comment. There is a case by case decision that should be made based on what a doctor doing consistent work decides through analysis, and also what the patient hopes to achieve. "MAJOR top docs in the USA and Canada telling me they are following the research on FUE " I find this quote is particularly interesting and it does point back to the continental differences in literature and results. Why such a major shift in opinion across the sea? It all comes down to the fact that American doctors cannot utilise techs during the extractions and that labour is so much more expensive in America, effectively making it incredibly hard to compete. Of course on the one hand this means that you have infinitely more FUE chop shops in Europe, however you also have a select group with far more experience with the procedure than American doctors will ever hope to achieve. The low prices push up demand and the increased supply means more competition and refinement for certain clinics to stand out. This doesn't occur nearly as much in the states as it is simply impossible to perform FUE at such low prices. This is basic economics to a point. Competition improves products and services.

"graft that has been compressed, twisted, and literally RIPPED from the skin" This reminds me of a quote from Trump in a debate regarding abortion. It's effective fear mongering, but hardly a good scientific explanation as to whether these grafts will have an equivalent yield to an FUT graft. "The acceptance of FUE has been anything but scientific. " Can hardly believe you make this claim about "science" a paragraph lower than capitalising the term "ripped" to make FUE sound more barbaric. "The proof is in the pudding. When photos of "successful" FUE procedures are presented as "evidence" that FUE works as well as FUT I say on it's face this claim is misleading. If you show only people who won at Casinos and ignore those who lost their shirts one would come to the conclusion that most people win in Vegas. But of course it isn't true." There is no doubt this is true and that FUE produces lower quality grafts, however there are clearly doctors such as Erdogan, Feriduni, Lupanzula and Keser that are not doing this on a random basis. They are doing it time, after time after time. Erdogan in particular has more results than the vast majority of FUT surgeons. I'm not saying this to advertise for them I agree they don't need it, I'm just using this to make a point. And again, Keser has performed an experiment with a small square of grafts on a patient and achieved 100% yield on a patient at 70 FU/cm squared

If that's the way you feel, then that's fine. In a previous post he was making posts towards me at least equally malicious, so I wouldn't say the tone is uncalled for. Also on this point, body hair transplantation is a form of FUE, so clearly his post was nonsensical in regards to terminology. This was more of a jab than anything else. I do agree however that he is no longer a candidate for FUE.

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/181277-warning-if-considering-dr-james-boland-colorado-surgical-center-read.html Is Dr. James Boland who performed this trainwreck better qualified than us to talk about hair transplantation simply because of his title? You send yourself down a dark, and ugly rabbit hole when you deny logic and reason and instead embrace titles and give certain individuals an infallible status. Facts and evidence matters, not the word of one who calls themselves a God on a subject. And what about the other doctors who clearly are qualified by your definition and have the opposite stance on the FUE FUT debate? Are they both right somehow? Don't be a sheep, look at the results and data for yourself. Reason and evidence over those who claim they don't need it because they have a "qualification" any day of the week.

DSLR imagery in harsh lighting from over 20 angles with wet and dry hair is hardly "subjective". Many put out comb through videos as well. This is an cosmetic surgery after all, it's all very good to lie (lets be honest) about yields, however when the patient is pleased and the HD imagery and comb throughs look fantastic, the tiny % yield difference doesn't mean a whole lot. When FUE is achieving full coverage on norwood 6s with below average donors (there was a result from Lupanzula with around 5600 grafts in the past few days as such) then questions have to be raised about the necessity of FUT, whether or not it is easier and the yield is higher. Also to say that most of the prominent FUE clinics don't put out graft counts is just a blatant lie as well. You know as well as I do we aren't talking about Turkish chop shops. You also ignore my emphasis on PATIENT POSTED RESULTS. Certain clinics like ASMED have hundreds of these posted from day 1. How do you explain that not a single one of these is a poor result? The "subdermal scarring" argument is interesting however I've only heard it spoken about by American physicians, not European doctors and never heard of a patient complaining because they were inhibited from further surgery or a poor looking donor area due to this phenomenon. It's the same fear mongering that some FUE flag wavers claim against FUT when it comes to pain or scarring. Dr. Vories for example has studied this and claims no difference in transection rate in secondary FUE procedures. He did find however that the the transection rate for FUE is higher around the scar areas after and FUT surgery. I also certainly agree that the Italian and Spanish hair texture and thickness is a factor as to why some of these European surgeons "appear" to be hitting so many home runs. The primary issue I take with Feller is that you act as if successful megasessions and success with multiple FUE surgeries after another are not the norm. Unfortunately in 2017, they actually are the norm, whether or not it is still more common to see this with FUT. When some I ask to see some bad or low yield results of certain FUE surgeons and I can't get a single one from anyone despite the fact that these surgeons have more results online posted by both the patient and doctor than Dr. Feller, it certainly raises questions. That's all it comes down to, a tiny bit of research and you'd see that these great, and consistent large scale European FUE results are not all that rare. The key I'd emphasise in this matter is that the best results are performed with a manual punch and lateral slit incisions. To say that these are anomalies in the larger FUE landscape is certainly true, however there are certain doctors that are clearly breaking the trend.

I enjoy your Youtube videos and will continue to comment on them if I feel like it, nothing I say is offensive or backed up by malice or bad intention. I will concede that I cannot know the fail rate of these doctors however online a number of them have more results than you do both patient posted from day one and also the clinic and I would consider their level of aesthetically pleasing results to be as good as yours on results of equivalent graft numbers and surface area coverage. They are also consistently getting over 6000 FUE grafts on Norwood 6 pattern patients without an over harvested look. Dr. Keser has done small experiments achieving 100% graft yield on a small square of FUE grafts placed at a density of 70 units/square cm. I'm not trying to suppress the views of anyone, if anything I strongly emphasise that most of all patients should look at the results for themselves and find a doctor with a large archive of patient and doctor posted results over a large period of time. I take this far more seriously than uncited "fact based" comments by a Doctor wedded to FUT.

Because he knows he is wrong. If the results spoke for themselves he wouldn't have to cry like a baby every time the debate comes up.

For the record, Dr. Hasson didn't claim that he was an expert on FUE, however he did claim that Erdogan and Lorenzo were, noticeably not Dr. Feller and Dr. Rassman or any other American doctor. Also not sure why you expect to get a memo from Dr. Hasson on this Dr. Feller, the industry doesn't revolve around you, whether or not you think it does.

They provide a hat, but it's not exactly fashionable and the best approach in my opinion it to take things slow, get on the flight last if need be and let the people in the airport see it if they want. If anything the shock of some less subtle humans is a good source of amusement. Just watch out for yourself not to bump it.

I don't think this discussion can be resolved without Feller explaining how Doctors such as Erdogan, Ferudini and Lupanzula put out FUE results consistently better than his own. It's all well and good to cite made up numbers and arrogantly spout "Well I'm a doctor!" but so are the Europeans putting out better work than yours with FUE and for a cheaper price than your FUE. I'm not looking to be insulting or offensive, I think Feller has done great service to HT in the US as a practitioner of the art but also to educate patients and I very much enjoy his Youtube videos. The problem is that the appeal to authority fallacy is a bad argument to begin with, but when other doctors make conflicting claims AND have RESULTS to back up that FUE yields can be consistently just as good then you have a serious issue. And that is the serious elephant in the room. Why are there MORE Erdogan results on the internet (all FUE) and on average I would consider them to be more aesthetically pleasing, and even more consistent. I've seen bad Feller results, I haven't seen bad Erdogan results, and there are more of them. And it comes down to that, HT skill comes down to results and a natural, aesthetically pleasing result with minimal turmoil to the donor area. Without a doubt and I'm sure others here agree there are European FUE doctors doing a job just as good as Feller. And still, Feller is scared to mention these doctors by name. Much appreciated that H+W are prepared to come out to praise and learn from EUROPEAN masters, not mediocre long time US FUE surgeons like Feller and Rassman.

Classic clueless HLS2015 comment. Telling someone to use body hair BUT NOT FUE. Surely daddies favourite ivy league lawyer would know what mutually exclusive is? By the way I read your failed Rahal result and understand why you hate FUE now. Because you got FUE with an untrained tech using a MOTORISED EXTRACTION TOOL. Not all FUE is equal, and you made a bad choice by choosing a name over experience and method. Probably why you went to an Ivy league, and why they didn't even teach you first year logic properly. "Dw guys, if you all come out retarded and ever lose an argument JUST TELL THEM YOU WENT TO HARVARD!!!"

I'd have hoped that by the time someone is married with kids they would know the difference of "your" and "you're". Don't act like you're innocent, you've spent half this thread calling people insecure and lashing out at them. You call people insecure for addressing issues they have in their life because you want to drag them down to your level, and then you say doctors shouldn't operate on people in their 20s for no apparent reason, but I'm sure it's because you enjoy other people suffering. Personally I don't see how anyone can see the work "prick" as disgusting language, it's just another way of saying that you come across like an asshole. If you call half the thread insecure over opting for transplants that have made them feel better about themselves then yes, you are an asshole, or a prick or any other word that describes someone with unattractive personality traits. Again, transplants are about someone deciding they want to be the best version of themselves they can. It's like saying it doesn't matter if you wear a Prada suit or one you picked up from the second hand store, because "confidence is what matters". Sorry, but this is the real world and appearance matters. If you've looked at hair transplants for 3 years like you say you have you'd know transplants can be the difference between looking attractive or looking like a homeless bum.

I also tend to think for this surgery an FUE to better homogenise the donor zone rather than leaving the scar in direct view due to a thinned donor zone would have been a smarter choice, however still a fantastic result overall.

Unshaven FUE sucks and so do random clinics no one has heard of like the one you went to.

Good idea, let hair loss sufferers in their 20s suffer even when they've stabilized on fin, despite the fact that you also suggest that a cure is "just around the corner". There was a Feller result just posted from a guy who fixed his norwood 2 at 20 and it looks great a decade down the track. But again, you'd just rather people suffer. You're such a nonsensical prick.

+1 This is why people in their early twenties are often the BEST candidates for surgery if they have committed to and stabilised on finasteride. This guy gets to be in his twenties up until his late 30s. Much more bang for your buck doing it young.

Do you think that the higher level of regulation in the US or UK stops doctors from having "bad days"? Does regulation magically turn human beings into super hair transplant robots? Regulation does jack shit aside from making some areas less competitive than others. Those that are more competitive due to less regulation tend to have the best surgeons because of more experience, aside from a select few in the US and Canada. It's easy early on to focus on regulation and subconsciously race potentially, but the important thing is to look at results and technique.Also I should mention that on another forum I saw a 10/10 homerun result from him that had EXTREMELY minor issues in terms of even hairline density and he agreed to fix it. No American doctor would have agreed to this situation, which probably had 95% yield. Keser does the whole procedure himself, he uses a manual punch, takes things slow and his online results appear extremely consistent. I don't think I've seen a "bad" Keser result. Also I would say don't expect easy initial communication with high end foreign doctors, when they have 4-5 month waiting lists they don't typically have to bother with people on the fence, there are more than enough who are desperate for their choice. Makes it easier because they'll end up with customers unlikely to cancel or go elsewhere. In my experience with ASMED with Koray Erdogan they were fairly lazy on the pre-op organization and messaging but as soon as I had booked it improved drastically. Even a doctor using techs isn't anything to worry about, why wouldn't a doctor outsource certain parts of their procedure to someone who has had years and years of experience in day in day out? The main thing to look for is that the FUE is manual, that the forum results online are as consistent as possible, and that you like VISUALLY the results they are producing. Some people focus far too much on novelties like the doctor doing all the work, what actually matters is the results they are producing in terms of design, yield and management of the donor area. Both Keser and Erdogan in Turkey fit this criteria

+1 for Dr. Keser. He is the goat of hairline work in terms of yield, design and density. Even great dense packing FUT surgeons such as Rahal don't achieve the same density and I find Keser's designs more European and modern (just a visual feeling, if that makes any sense at all). Personally I opted for Erdogan over Keser as Keser only does 500-800 grafts per day and I wanted it all over and done with quickly in a single day at 3000 grafts. He charges 3.5 euros per graft I think. Why don't you get on finasteride just to stop your hairloss getting worse?