Enhancer

A longtime employee of my dad's company, had a minor welding accident, and was able to get a hair transplant to the damaged areas of his head.

I've known this man since I was a kid, and have seen him go from perfect hairline to receding pretty bad in the last 20 years. Therefore the surgery put hair where there was none prior to his accident, and he looked better than he did before.

Didn't think much about it much until I started losing my hair, and now I find it suspicious that this guy happened to have an accident that seemed to exclusively damage only the areas where he had naturally lost his hair.

Great news for the 3% of people who get sides from these medications.

But any news for the 30% of people that medications don't even work for?

What rate of hair loss is acceptable for a hair transplant?

Say if someone late 30s was on finasteride for 4 years, and they lost 0.8cm in the temples and 0.2cm at the hairline center, and maybe 15% density in the entire NW6 area (though this is more subjective, seems to vary by season, still no scalp visible when hair is dry).

Would it still be ok to get transplant (ignoring all other factors)?

Just a different point of view here:

-You, being a high NW, will never get away from having to use concealers in the back.  The back will never be "fixed".  And as we all know when it comes to concealers, a little hair can go a long way.  Don't overkill the crown.

-Due to your hair style, long and slicked back, the hair in the hairline and midscalp also acts as coverage in the back. 2x bang for your buck.

-My philosophy is to isolate problems.  I would rather have one problem area to take care of than two separate less severe problems.

-There are more options for the crown.  Concealers and even a partial system can work in the crown.  There are no current suitable options for the hairline except transplants.

Having the same style and density as you I would cover the crown in the minimum density needed for concealers to work, and put everything else in the hairline.

I see some transplant results ~6-12 months out where the patient has lost a substantial amount of hair behind the transplanted area, too much in one year for the usual excuse "natural progression of baldness". It is obviously permanently shocked hair from surgery. It is my understanding that finasteride is supposed to decrease the chances of this permanent shock.

My question is - if you are taking finasteride/dutasteride and its not doing a very good job at stopping hair loss, only slowing it down somewhat, does it still offer some shockloss protection? 

Why do clinics insist on shaving the entire head, when I only need the area between NW1 and NW2 done.  Shaving the back for FUE is fine, I usually keep the back and sides short anyway (I have the peaky blinders thing going on).

I used to be terrified of going bald just because of the unknown.  But after shaving my head to see what I would look like, my worst case scenario is now "sucks but whatever" instead of "end of the world ugly."  I find my experienced is echoed by a lot of men - being shaved bald doesn't make them look better, but they find they don't look as bad as they thought they would.  Either way it takes the stress off knowing what I would look like bald.

It's the USA's border restrictions you should check.  You shouldn't care about Ontario's rules - no one can stop you from leaving the country, and if you are Canadian you are allowed to re-enter Canada at any time (although you will have to quarantine for 14 days).

There would be no financial incentive for any company to pursue more studies and FDA approval of RU, its a pretty big investment for a drug that's off patent.  RU has been used by many people on other forums for many years. The good news - none of them are dropping dead.  The bad news - its not any more of an effective treatment in stopping hair loss than what we already have with finasteride.

Yes over the years I have experimented and became educated about proper hair drying, products, sprays, etc. and I can say that my hair may appear better than when I first realized I was balding. 

This is dangerous though, I became so used to my hair fullness that I thought the finasteride was working. When I tried to style my hair with the same product and style that I used 3 years ago, I immediately cancelled my hair transplant.  I would hate to think of where I would be five years from now if I had a transplant after tricking myself into thinking my hair loss stabilized.

I have been thinking about that a lot lately.  I think - a dense hair transplant in the front by a good surgeon and a system in the back is the only way to 100% guarantee a full head of hair.

Can you imagine going bald in the 70s/80s... Couldn't shave your head, hair transplants looked bad. Our meds might be unreliable, but imagine having absolutely no meds at all.

1 hour ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

What about his uncles? Or your uncles? 

To add to the suspense, those are the only men in my family, other than my uncle (mom's brother) who is adopted.

I actually searched to get an accurate comparison at the same age:

Me - NW2 at 35

Dad - NW1 at 35.  NW2.5 currently (55)

Mom's dad - NW3 at 35.  NW5 currently (75)

Dad's dad - The wildcard, died at 33 and cannot determine hair status as his hair was always buzzed

I think we forgot that we are talking about the future here.  Which is more likely to happen first?

1. Hair systems don't fall off easily (arguably this is already the case, don't know what happened to @gillenator), maintenance becomes easier, less social stigma

2. Hair transplants no longer capped by the donor supply

ONE of those things WILL happen before the other, and that's what will determine which direction the hair transplant industry will go.

@UnbaldEagle you had basically done the same thing I'm going to do - dense pack the front regardless of diffusing.  That might not be bad after all, the hairline is the place where concealers do not work as well.  Since my hair is always longer and swept back author shelby style, I am hoping the extra hair in the front will keep the back dense for a long time to come.  However I am well expecting for my luck to run out, hopefully not for another 10 years, which is why I would never get a FUT as a diffuse thinner, keeps the option of shaving open.

8 hours ago, UnbaldEagle said:

Hey man,

IF you genuinely believe you are balding in the NW7 area, there's not much to be done really. Treatment or not, you're just delaying the inevitable. Especially if you're diffuse. I'm 2 years younger than you and for the past 5-6 years I've nuked most, if not all DHT and testosterone out of my system. Getting a HT will buy you some more time before getting back to ground zero. 

Maybe buying more time is all I would need.  I am considering lately to just get the front hairline densed up, then throw a system in the back years down the road when the day comes.  I'm 36, on dutasteride, and no scalp can be seen when my hair is dry, if I wait until I'm full bald, I'll be waiting for a long time, and life is short.

This is my dilemma.  Only a NW2.5, which I would like a minor procedure to define, but I know I'm diffuse thinning in the NW7 area.  It doesn't look like it, but I can feel it.  I had a plan to start meds and observe for 3 years (no sense in getting a transplant if the loss has not stabilized) but now after 3 years I do not feel any more confident.

The loss has been slow, but will it speed up? Will the meds continue working?  Have they even been working to begin with? I'm 36 already, how long should I live with the insecurity?

These are questions no one can answer.

3 hours ago, UnbaldEagle said:

Even if hair systems reach the pinnacle of naturalness, I reckon there will always be an associated stigma, just like with breast augmentation, etc. Whereas hair transplants are natural, it's your own hair. 

By what I've seen, it already has reached that pinnacle.  Yes currently there is the stigma you guys talk about.  But I don't know - I didn't even know about hair systems 3 years ago, and now I know two guys who wear them proudly - one who I didn't even know was wearing until he brought it up, and he was even my housemate for a year.  I never thought I'd say this, but I think this stigma is breaking a little.  I don't know anyone who has got a hair transplant, though I do know a few bald guys with suspiciously linear scars on the back of their heads.

It's still in its infancy, if they can find a way to get those things to stay on your head for a good 6 months worry free, I think more people will opt for that rather than hair transplants.  Transplants have hit their peak, provided you go to the best doctors, but are still capped by that donor supply - conservative hairlines, non-native density, partial coverage, etc..  If hair transplants can break this donor cap (or we find an actually reliable way to stop the progression of baldness), then I think the industry will survive.

The hair transplant industry needs a technological shift very soon.  The general consensus is that results are just not up to par for the cost, and the procedure is terribly risky.  Hair systems have made an aggressive comeback in recent years, and if they have their technological shift first, hair transplants may be a procedure of that past or a very niche procedure for those with minimal hair loss.

Guy was a NW5 at 25 years old, which is astronomically rare and severe balding for his age.  So its not that HT is not a solution, he just wasn't eligible.  And even then, in that worst case scenario, he did manage to have the illusion of a full head of hair for a good 6-7 years there.

It might also be a mind trick?  The effects on one's appearance going from NW1 - NW2 - NW3 may be greater than say, going from NW4-NW5, which may make us believe it is slowing down.

But I don't know, I dug up a bunch of old pictures of my grandfather in the process of researching my own balding.  The guy was a pretty receeded NW3 by the age of 25 and I swear he just stayed that way until his 50s.  And no, there was no finasteride or transplants for him.  So I don't know what to believe either.

I have also been curious about this, it must be true to some extent since this fact is echoed a lot, even by some well known HT doctors.  As a man ages, testosterone and DHT lowers, and may be responsible for the slow down in hair loss.

I see the rationale.

-He may just eventually stop committing to the minoxidil after the surgery seeing as he's already tired of it

-Hairs grown by minoxidil holding on by a thread might just be permanently shocked out by surgery

-The gains by Minoxidil just might stop working, common as minoxidil is considered a very short term solution for a lot of people who finds it wears off in a year or two

In those cases, may as well rip the minoxidil bandaid off now and let the surgeon take care of it properly.

However this only applies if surgery was going to happen regardless. I would only do surgery if I was generally unhappy about the way I look, I wouldn't do it just because I don't want to apply minoxidil anymore.

I would tell my younger self a few years ago that balding takes a lot longer than we initially think.

When I first noticed my hair loss at 31, I could have sworn I was losing it so fast that I'd be horseshoe by end of the year.  I wasted a lot of energy worrying about it.  But here I am 4 years later, still losing hair, but to an observer I look the same as before.  knowing my rate of loss makes me sleep easier, knowing I'll appear to have a full head of hair for another 2-3 years (without transplant).