Namsak

Hello guys, Sorry, I guess I did not pay attention to the emails notifications. As for the analysis of the result, I can give my humble opinion. As a matter of fact, I wish I had more density, so I don't think I am delusional about that. Now, when it comes to explaining why I think there are at least two aspects: 1- Point of view: it's impressive how much the way pictures are taken and how light used can make the hair look so good, but also very bad. 2- "Objective" approach: The lack of density is real though. Can't get around that with well taken pictures. Now, my premise is that, if you consider doctors who perform well (which is assumed at HLC) they will pretty much do the same thing all the time, which makes me believe that the difference in results is more about either the point of view mentioned above, or, and more importantly, about the quality of hair and genetics. Actually probably about both. I believe that, generally speaking, the impact of the performance of the doctor on the results is overrated. Of course this could only be true if you stay within the scope of reasonably well reputed doctors and clinics.

Yeah I might want to talk to them and see their take on this. Thanks guys.

Thanks brother. I have been taking finasteride religiously for two years and will continue to do so. As for minoxidil, I am much less consistant probably because in my mind it's less effective, but I guess I should be more serious with it.

Thanks bud!

Sorry for the confusion, they actually are there, in page 3.

Hey wait, that's weird, they're not there. I'll reupload them.

So this is pretty much the first series of pictures. Those which I intentionally took so to emphasize what would be seen as a "bad result". (not combed, lighting, angle etc..)

You think so Melvin? Thanks. There is probably not much more than that to expect I presume.

yes I agree with the the need to be realistic, thanks man!

lol yup the difference is huge.

Thank you.

Thanks man, appreciate the advice.

Thank you Gatsby for following and being nice!

It's hard to know what to think. Some pictures suggest a weak result where the density is not good, and other pictures suggest as you guys said a big improvement from being bald. Now, at this price, are we only looking for a big improvement or for a solid result? When you go from bald, many different things can be labeled as big improvements. But on the other hand, I can't really think that the surgeons did anything different with me than they did with others, and this makes me think: during those months of research beforehand, may be I underestimated how much the result is dependent on your hair, and instead put all the focus on the surgeon/clinic? I don't know. See, I can go back and forth between being satisfied and not being satisfied, so it's complicated.

Hi friends. Here are some pictures one year after the surgery. All pictures have been taken within a 15 min window.

Thanks dude

yup

No concealers but I style with hair clay. Actually this too helps to give a better (more dense) look.

Although the improvement comes more from the forgiving light than actual growth I think, I can't complain.

Thanks man.

Hello guys. I hope everyone is well. Here is the 8 months update.

Yes, I hope so, thanks a lot brother.

Thanks guys, I appreciate the honesty more than anything. I agree with the lack of density and am aware of it. That's something I have a close eye on, but I just don't want to rush my judgment, as I know this whole thing demands patience. In order to convince myself to be patient, I attribute this to the light (although natural, I have pictures where the lack of density is not as noticeable) + the fact that I'm 7 months in, but in a couple of months, I'll won't be sticking my head in the sand.