Melvin - appreciate the good counters to my pictures. Of course, my problem is "the unknown" in that I have no idea what I'll see years ahead of me. My dad (and his brother and their dad) was Norwood 6 by the time he was 30, and all the women on my mom's side have lost tremendous amounts of hair by age 60. However, my mom's brothers had overabundant hair at age 60, and their dad wasn't more than a Norwood 4 in his 60s. I just worry that if I progress to Norwood 6 or 7 that I'll just ridiculous with only 2000-3000 grafts in the front. Perhaps that's an unreasonable fear - and perhaps, as some say, I won't care quite as much at that point of my life. I'm not the type to shave my head, I think it would look ridiculous, and I always feel that bald white guys are just that - it is their defining characteristic, regardless great eyes, lips, etc. Further, I now have a strip scar, so it really wouldn't be an option....adding FUE scars will only further that.
One doctor I had spoken to said this: "A man who starts his teen years with 10,000 hairs in the frontal region goes on the lose 80% of his hair because of male pattern baldness. At that point nature has left him with a thinning look that has 20% of his original density. If that man went on to bald completely ten years later and then visited me to have 2000 hairs planted to recreate the thinning look he had ten years earlier, would he look weird or unnatural, assuming I recreated exactly what nature had left him with at the 20% residual density level? Natural thinning looks natural. A restoration to a natural level of thinning will also look natural. This is true unless you think all thinning men look strange or unnatural with their normal balding process." However, I disagree with his assessment. There is an erosion process that happens, similar to sand on the beach getting washed away - except in the rare diffuse situations, hair recedes slowly from the start of the front, not evenly throughout the front. So, transplanted hairs that occur evenly throughout the front wouldn't look natural in your later years if all the native hairs fell out, right? In the case of Micky Dolenz (who now looks like Kelsey Grammer), to have a few thousand hairs throughout the front wouldn't look right - same for Nesmith. Am I not thinking correctly about this?
indymusician started following If you transplant now, what will the next 20+ years look like?
I'm 44 and had a HT 5 years ago for the vertex only, 1500 grafts via FUT. Today, my vertex looks about the same as it did 5 years ago, as apparently most of the native hairs that were there back then are gone now. But..where I had no frontal problems, I know have noticeable recession and thinning. I spend a LOT of time looking at pictures, specifically pictures of men in their '60s/'70s to identify patterns in hair loss. I think I've hit upon one of the key things that makes me apprehensive of doing a transplant to the front part of my scalp (whereas I was not so when I did the vertex a few years ago). I am a big fan of the 1960s group, The Monkees. Attached, you will see pictures of two of the members, Micky Dolenz and Mike Nesmith, across each of the past three decades. Around '94, they were in their early 50s. The second pics are from around 10 years ago (early 60s). And the final pics are from recent years. What concerns me is that while they had receding/thinning hairlines, they had hair until their 60s....and then, seemingly in a matter of years, all of the front and top hairs just vanished. Had they had transplants in their 40s to strengthen their hairlines, what would they look like today? I realize these are just two cases, but I've read often that hairloss can start being more predictable by your 40s. Mike and Micky seem to be counter to that thought. Even if these guys had transplanted, say, 5000 grafts back in their 40s or 50s, would it look worse today in their 70s versus if they had not done anything? So, effectively, my concern is that having already used 1,500 grafts for my vertex, if I do a 1,500 hair transplant today in the front and find myself 30 years later seeing all of the native front/top hairs fly away, I will not have enough grafts left to make myself look natural. Your thoughts? Does a well placed transplant of even 1,500 grafts (and possibly another 2,000 down the road) allow for things not to look "bad" should I lose ALL my native hairs on the front/top? Dolenz - 1995 (50 years old) Dolenz - 2004 (59 years old) Dolenz - 2018 (73 years old) Nesmith - 1997 (55 years old) Nesmith - 2004 (61 years old) Nesmith - 2017 (74 years old) .
Welcome to our Hair Restoration Social Community and enhanced discussion forum. Feel free to customize your profile by sharing your story, creating blogs, sharing your treatment regimen, presenting your hair restoration photos, and uploading videos. You can also join groups and interact with other members via public chat and instant message those you add to your friends.
Feel free to ask questions and interact with our members on our new and improved hair loss discussion forum.
If there's anything I can do to help or make things easier for you, don't hesitate to send me a private message or post on my wall.
All the Best,
David (TakingThePlunge) – Forum Co-Moderator and Editorial Assistant of the Hair Transplant Network, the Hair Loss Learning Center, the Hair Loss Q&A Blog, and the new Hair Restoration Social Network and Discussion Forum