pedromanchaca

Can we delete our posts? Happy to delete mine so it doesn't detract from the thread. Thanks

Which makes what you presented anecdotal evidence per the definition of anecdotal evidence already cited. Its not a claim that what you said is of no value, its simply that, by definition, it was anecdotal. "Anecdotal 'language' isn't a thing" And yet there's something called anecdotal evidence for which the definition has already been cited. I wonder what means would be used to communicate/present such evidence? ESP? Hand signals? Smoke signals?

Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes, i.e., evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony. Your original post. "Despite being 10 times less patient posted results of Nader, I'd peg 40%ish as being poor results or below average in comparison to many top surgeons represented here, for the others mentioned at around 10% or less." "I'd peg..." That's anecdotal language. To help you further understand that its anecdotal, a good test would be: Did you cite actual statistics/examples? Answer: No. Hence, "digression into anecdotal evidence". Glad I could help clear that up. As I mentioned in the other thread, you're far too easy to jack with which makes watching this circus of steam pouring out of your ears all the more entertaining, especially the aspect of your emotional woundedness/need being such that it drove you to show up in a different thread in an effort to vindicate yourself that you might palliate your emotional wound(s).

Should we dedicate a thread to work through some of your emotional wounding issues? I missed the part where I specifically said it was the result of a single procedure. You may want to give rereading that thread a shot and then you can decide if your error in judgment was a product of cognitive bias or dyslexia. Your cognitive bias and subsequent digression into anecdotal evidence was the principal reason I wasn't inclined to trust your judgment.

Nader's stock is dropping. I was impressed with Tom Forester's results, but his experience is a needle in a haystack of Nader results I've seen.

I've seen a lot of good results & read good things about Konior & Diep.

Says the man trying to get the last word in. I told you, you're too easy a target to jack with. If you'd practice some self-awareness you'd find yourself less bitter, less filled with vitriol.. And...You might get jacked with a little less. You, my diminutive, French/Australian friend, should be focused, heads-down, studying for the big spelling/grammar quiz next week. Here is the sentence under consideration: "Mine still had a long way to go but the areas weren't completely baron and still gave thin coverage." Question # 1 Is "baron" grammatically correct? Question # 2 What word choice might have been more appropriate? Bonus Re-write the sentence under consideration using the answer to Question # 2 I'll check back with you next week, say Friday, and we'll see how far you've gotten. Glad I could help.

Thanks for being emblem of what playing chess with a pigeon looks like.

And then.. "Not going to bother responding further" --> "One more point on this too" Clearly, a man of your word.

"You do realise he has had TWO procedures?" The whole point was to compare you and Forester pre-op, procedure 1 (Forester being in a worse situation hair-wise than you) & then post-op around/near a year down the road and its not even a debate who got better results. Not sure how you could possibly conclude I was talking about after 2 procedures given that your 2nd procedure hasn't even run its course. "If he can't even put up results on his own website....then there is a problem." This I don't dispute. The scheduling issue & his diligence to document his own work is problematic to say the least. "Nothing to say to this. Delusional. I didn't say this was 50% either, it is well below it." You said: "I had probably 50% at that stage." Point was your claim of 50%, even at 6 months (based on your pictures), is, to put it mildly, an overstatement. More evidence of your inability to follow or perhaps deeper, more fundamental issues that affect reading comprehension. Cheer up. I'm told Desitin does wonders for butthurt. I was tempted to avoid engaging this dialogue altogether given your demonstrated bitterness/anger in some of your other posts. At least you dispensed of all pretense and gave full expression to your vitriol/intolerance. Sadly, you make too easy of a target for others to toy with given your lack of self-awareness.

Not offended in the least. Attached is your pre-op from Procedure 1 & then Procedure 2, both wet for fair basis of comparison. Frankly, I don't see much improvement. What did you pay for that? You're saying you asked for an unnatural ("I told him what I wanted") result? With regard to your posting of Forester's video & your attendant criticism, why is it that you chose a video where his hair is wet/semi-wet as opposed to, say, this video, where it is not: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGBtUcmN-R4? Even in the video you picked, Forester says the thickness he achieved is as good as when he had "a full head of hair". If we take you, pre-op, put you next to Forester, pre-op, and then compare you both a year after your procedures, it would be a waste of time arguing who achieved better results because it is so obvious. As mentioned already, memzinla's results at 5 months look better than yours did at that same point with Erdogan. Now, with regard to your mention of all the other doctors in contrast to Nader, I ask you: 1. Do they post their failures/not-so-good results or just their successes? 2. Where are the examples of their failures/not-so-good results? 3. What is the ratio of their successes to failures/not-so-good results? I don't dispute that there isn't a large body of accessible FUE results from Nader, but some of the results I've seen are good work. To argue that what amounts to failure to run an office/operation well (Nader not posting FUE surgical results on a website as other operations are diligent to do) is proof of poor surgical skill/results is pure balderdash. "but the reality is he has virtually no meaningful growth at 5.5 judging from the last photo. I had probably 50% at that stage" Its obvious that's not the case when you put his pre-op side-by-side with his 5.5. With regard to your 50% claim, even your 6 month photos (except the ones where you combed your hair forward) don't bear that out. Sorry if that offends, but you just sound/seem dishonest.

Looking good amigo. I see improvement/thickening also between April and June. Thank you for the updates

I looked at your results after 5 months with Erdogan (1st procedure) & compared them to memzinla's and, frankly, his results look better than yours did at 5 months. And, as far as Tom Forrester goes, his results are close to the best anyone has seen, something which is testified to by the comments on his YT videos. Forrester's results are comparable to what I've seen from Lorenzo.

A graft is a follicular unit. http://www.charlesmedicalgroup.com/plastic-surgery/is-there-a-difference-between-a-follicular-unit-and-a-graft/ If you watch Tom Forrester's videos on YT he's talks in one of them about his discussion with Nader regarding his planned second transplant and that Nader mentioned putting grafts with single hair in the front area.

I keep looking at these Nader posts and the guy does great work. So clean. How are things progressing for you? Thanks for sharing your experience.