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.

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.