TC17

How much does Dr. Umar charge Abedogg?

Of course this is just my opinion, but I do not like his hairlines at all.

I should have said seek a professional opinion, my bad. However, keep in mind that no doctor can predict the future, so just be cautious. Look at older men with extreme hair loss and try to imagine how they would look today if they had undergone a hair transplant 30 years ago. While being bald sucks, it is at least normal. Tread carefully my friend, and EDUCATE yourself. After you've done months, and months, and months of research, then you decide whether you feel comfortable in gambling or not. If it matters one bit, I'm also 26 and experiencing hair loss. I have a much lower hairline than you, but loss throughout the top of my head in the MPB area. I've probably been on this site for roughly 5 months, have met with two coalition doctors in person, and have been researching hair transplantation in depth for roughly a year. After all that, I am still scared to undergo a surgery because of the uncertainty inherent in the balding process. Just be careful.

In my opinion joe riley, even if you could afford a transplant, you shouldn't get one. Your hair loss is VERY extensive and you're very young. The combination of your level of hair loss and relative young age appear to me as a recipe for disaster down the road. I hate to tell you this, but I think you have to make peace with the fact that with today's technology you have no option other than to shave down.

I would NEVER shave my head for a surgery. The fact that Cooley, Alexander, Konior, both Shapiros, Reed, Ross, and many other great doctors do not require shaving has me convinced that it is not necessary if the session is of an appropriate size. I was playing around Dr. Meshkin's website today and I must say that I was impressed with what I saw. Unfortunately, you can't click on any of the photos, and there is only one before and one after, and no top down shots. Without better presentation I would never consider him for a surgery, but I was intrigued.

I am glad that someone feels the way I do. I could not agree with you more about the seeming lack of concern on this site about the possibility of progressing to a NW 6 or 7 level. Dr. Beehener and Dr. Mohmand have probably posted the most examples of work done on NW 7's, and while there is a marked improvement, I too would not want such a hairstyle. Both Dr. Beehner and Dr. Mohmand do the best they can with those patients, but such a look is not for me. What is most disconcerting to me is the fact that those patients are probably the future for many of us under the age of 35 who are experiencing hair loss. Sure, we see great results when a top physician transplants a 30 year old NW 5, but what happens when that 30 year old patient progresses to a NW 7 at age 50? Why is it that when a doctor works on a NW 7, he is almost always limited to the frontal forelock pattern, yet when a doctor works on a patient who may turn into a NW 7, such a pattern is not used? I look at patients like Drew35 who are in their mid 30's and already at a NW 6.5 pattern and just wonder what will happen in the next 10 or 15 years if further loss occurs? After all, Drew's hair loss is very aggressive for a 35 year old man, so wouldn't it stand to reason that he would be the type of patient who has a see through donor in his 50's? In my opinion, the term "safe zone" is a misnomer, as I see many men with donor thinning. (Drew, if you're reading this, please do not take offense to this. I am merely using you as an example of something that worries me because you are young.) The simple fact of the matter is that I believe a number of patients on this site will look rather odd as they age and continue to lose hair and "permanent" grafts, and also show a large, long, and very visible scar. Last, I believe I mentioned it before, but I also thought that Bill looked GREAT with a buzzed head. If not for his donor scar, I would tell him to rock that look all the time. If I could have a look similar to that, I'd be ecstatic. It looked so much thicker when it was buzzed down.

I also think that Dr. Feriduni does outstanding work. It's strange that so many of the top European doctors are located in Belgium.

I also just realized how many four hair grafts this guy has. I've never seen a patient with that many before.

I think it looks fabulous. However, I'm a bit confused on the write up. Is this the result after one surgery of 3120 grafts, or is this with the two surgeries that you mentioned in his transplant plan? Or, is he just going to have an additional surgery for another 2000 grafts?

I agree with PGP 100%. How old are you Michael C?

PGP who/what is HDC? Thana, I also liked Bisanga's work until that patient posted on here a few weeks ago who had that large gap between his existing hair and his transplanted hair. It was clear from the immediate post op photos that he did not transplant far back enough to cover the gap that already existed. It was very strange.

Maybe someone can direct me to the differences between these two photos? I suppose the fact that I can't tell that anything was done is a compliment to the naturalness of the work, but to me the before and after look identical, albeit one is one shorter hair.

Dr. Feller or Norwood6guy, I agree with Raphael84 in that I think the front looks nice, but I do not like the pattern if this were a stand alone procedure. In fact, I have never seen a man with a balding pattern like that before. My question then is was a second surgery discussed and decided upon prior to this surgery? Norwood6guy, I'm happy that you're pleased with your result. Ultimately that is all that matters. You definitely look improved from the front, and I am sure with a second pass you will look even better.

If I may speak for PGP here, I believe his issue is not with Dr. Feller or PRP necessarily, but is instead with the high cost associated with what is an experimental procedure. I could be wrong, but I recall reading a post where PGP asked Dr. Feller why it was costing so much when his (PGP) dentist was using a form of PRP at a much lower cost. I've had a number of PRP treatments for my arm, and I must say that for my injuries it was a miracle worker. However, it must have been different from the form Dr. Feller is using because there is no way in hell that the team physicians would have spent that much money for a backup QB on a MAC team. I do agree with PGP that spending money on an unproven remedy is not the prudent thing to do. However, Dr. Feller has quite explicitly established that PRP is not for everyone (see Dakota), and that it is still in its infancy and that nobody should get his hopes up yet. I recognize that a number of patients will dismiss Dr. Feller's cautionary comments and look to PRP as something that it is not, but that's not his concern. I do believe that Dr. Feller does not always handle negative comments that well, but this is not one of those times. The fact that Dr. Feller told Dakota that he was not a candidate for PRP has not been given its proper due on this thread. If this was a cash grab on behalf of Dr. Feller he would have taken Dakota's money and when no results occurred, merely said that the treatment was experimental and nothing was guaranteed. The fact that he refused treatment evidences an honesty that should be applauded. My problem would not be with Dr. Feller and PRP, but would instead be with other physicians and PRP. Dr. Feller can scream from the rooftop that PRP is not effective for everyone, but I guarantee that some patients will refuse to accept that and will instead seek out a physician that will cater to them. If PRP proves to be effective, GREAT! I don't think anyone here would refuse a treatment that can regrow or keep hair. If it doesn't work, that's alright by me, because I won't be one of the people shelling out hundreds of dollars for an experimental treatment. Let's try to keep things civil, OK guys?

I also like the work of Dr. Beehner too. I appreciate that he has the balls to post numerous examples of patients who were NW 7's. If you can work your magic on a NW 7, you can certainly do the same on a NW 3.

Don't forget that as you age you will in all likelihood thin somewhat in the donor area. I do not know where the post is, but Dr. Paul Shapriro briefly explained as much just recently. I believe that the longer you can wait the better for a number of reasons. 1. better technologies may come out which will make transplantation better 2. your balding pattern will probably be easier to predict if you're older 3. YOUR DONOR AREA MAY THIN! this is not nearly talked about enough on here in my opinion, but just look over the few NW 6's who are in their 20's who have had surgeries on this site and compare them to the older men with similar balding patterns. it seems that the very bald older men have at most between 4,000 - 5,000, and that is only after multiple surgeries. however, the younger patients are getting those numbers in ONE surgery. granted, there are physiological differences between the patients that might explain the discrepancy, or it might just be that the older men have a density of 64 or 70 fu's/cm2, whereas the younger men in the early stages of their balding still have the average 80 or so. getting high graft numbers is merely a result of taking wider and longer strips, it's not magic. if your donor thins the wide and long strip is more likely to be visible, and god forbid you BALD into the donor area, then the scar will certainly be visible.

P.J., I think I get your point, but I'm not quite sure your analogy is accurate. A knife is far more crude than the 7mm-9mm extraction point used by the top clinics, and the traditional problems associated with extraction have been minimized as a result of refinements to FUE. I do understand your point though, and they are legitimate limitations with current FUE, but I am hopeful that with better tools comes better yields, and the eventual demise of strip. Dr. Feller wrote a very interesting and infromative article regarding stripping out and then going FUE to maximize graft count. I'll link to it at the end. I'm not crazy, and I do not want anyone to think that I'm advocating FUE over strip in all circumstances. Rather, as I stated above, I think FUE is better for younger patients, even those that anticipate extensive balding down the road, because of the flexibility associated with not having a strip scar. I don't think FUE is the future, but I do believe that it is closer to the future than strip surgery. I hope that we're at the tail end of the strip experience, and that within the next decade we've evolved the process so that harvesting 7,000 grafts by FUE is rather mundane. Don't forget, even 5 years ago it was uncommon for even the top physicians to perform 2,500 grafts from strip on a consistent basis, and now look where we are. Just because there are current limitations and roadblocks does not mean that there were always be. I just cannot fathom why anyone with a virgin scalp and an uncertain balding pattern would ever undergo strip. * this is the article written by Dr. Feller. Note his last sentence where he says that if he were to undergo a procedure he would go strip, but in ten years, who knows. I admire Dr. Feller's openness to discuss the limitations with FUE, but that last comment I take to be in line with my personal beliefs. If I have misinterpreted that, please feel free to correct me. http://www.regrowhair.com/hair...-fue-misconceptions/

But I have also heard very bad things about him as well. Plus, me seeing two patients of his in person is a microscopic sample size of his body of work, and I do not feel comfortable in putting him down on this post. For that reason I am going to edit my initial post and remove his name. It's nothing against him, it's just that I do not feel that I am in the position to toss out names like I did with my limited knowledge.

Also, I'm tapping out of this discussion. While it is an interesting topic, I just don't care enough to keep going.

Finding those doctors would be very difficult. Practically all doctors who perform transplants have great results on their websites, so I'm not sure I understand how we can find non recommended doctors.

His status of being HIV positive can not be reason AT ALL for legitimate refusal. Moreover if they include that reason even LITTLE bit, or mention it, imply it etc.they sabotage them selves. - I disagree with your assessment. Assuming for sake of argument that the doctor's assistant told the patient that they would not perform his surgery because he was HIV positive, that does not necessarily mean that the doctor would lose. For starters, the ADA grants employers the ability to not hire an otherwise qualified applicant who is HIV positive, if there is a "significant risk of substantial harm to the health or safety of the invididual or of others", and if the threat cannot be eliminated or reduced to acceptable levels by way of reasonable accomodations. You can easily analogize the employer/employee relationship to that of cosmetic surgeon/prospective patient. Your argument would then center on whether there is a significant risk, and whether it can be eliminated or lessened to such a degree as to fall under ADA protection. (personally, I think the risk is so low that it wouldn't meet that criteria, but I'm not a doctor) Second, the lawyers could argue that the statute in question was never intended to apply to elective procedures, and that hair transplants are not "treatment". Third, the always popular "slippery slope" argument can be made. If the plaintiff is allowed to proceed with this claim, the court would be substituting its judgment for that of the physician. That could open the floodgates compelling physicians to perform all types of procedures that are against their medical judgment, or risk suit. My personal opinion of this matter is that the risk can most likely be minimized to such a degree as to be practically nonexistent. Whether this would be actionable under ADA is a question that would have to be answered in the courts. I am struggling to understand how being HIV positive is a disability absent a substantial impairment to ones life. I'm no expert on ADA, but if I remember correctly, merely having a "disability" is not sufficient to get protection under the law. You must also show that the disability significantly impacts your life in a negative way.

I wouldn't be so sure to conclude that this is a slam dunk case for the patient. The Florida law in question is an extension of the federal American's with Disabilities Act of 1990. Refusing medical treatment solely on the basis of a patient's status as being HIV positive would be a violation, but doctors are given some wiggle room for professional discretion. Provided the physician in question could establish a legitimate, rational reason for refusing treatment (other than being HIV positive), the patient would be SOL. Remember, not every patient is a candidate for hair transplantation. So, compelling a physician to perform a surgery on an individual whom the physician does not believe to be a suitable candidate would be a violation of the 14th Amendment's protection against forced servitude. I don't see the plaintiff winning because I am sure that the doctor and his attorney are both intelligent enough to come up with a reason for refusing treatment, even if the real reason was the patient's status as being HIV positive.

Dr. Gabel is just nervous that the IPhone app is going to destroy the hair transplant business! lol

Do NOT do what wanthairs suggested! I can't go into too much detail over this for two reasons. 1. I'm not an attorney specializing in personal injury and therefor I do not possess the requisite knowledge to give you proper advice and, 2. I would prefer not to get busted for unlicensed practice of the law for giving legal advice, because in two years I would like to be able to sit for the bar exam. However, what I can tell you is that you should not be discussing your potential case on public forums. It will serve no purpose other than to potentially jeopardize your case. CALL AN ATTORNEY!

Contact a person injury attorney. Usually those type of attorneys do not charge anything for the initial consultation, and take cases on a contingent fee basis. You have nothing to lose by getting in touch with one, just make sure he's good and does not charge more than 33% of the settlement.