Curious25

You still on half a 2.5mg oral Minox pill daily ?

You look right where you are meant to be at 3 months, if not slightly ahead - as there are definite signs of early growth. By the end of this month I think you’ll be able to see how your new hair will be sitting and framing your face,

Hmmm I understand why there was reluctance to address what your primary concern is - because the risk/reward just isn’t there, perhaps some angles aren’t absolutely perfect, but complaining about the contrast in texture between your donor hair and native scalp hair up top isn’t something that can be resolved, because your donor hair is all surgeons have got to work with. I agree your left temple is too feminine looking - this is a fairly easy fix, and your hairline when pulled back looks slightly pluggy, and could do with some softening - so addressing the left temple with a new masculine design, along with softening the hairline is a pretty straight forward procedure for any surgeon worth his salt, and can be done in the one job. The softening may also lessen the contrast you consider to be apparent between your transplanted and native grafts, as there will be a higher concentration of thinner hairs in that region . . . So potentially 3 birds with one stone for you there, and no need to remove any transplanted grafts either!

What a great transformation - holding up nicely after 4 years as well! Good for you man!

@JDEE0

How’s month 5 looking ?

Looking good for 4 months - See you at month 6 with your new luscious mane!

It’s more to do with controlling variables as opposed to techs vs docs. An experienced tech & doc team that have a track record of producing good results is fine, as long as you can guatentee it is the same technicians who will be working on your case that day, a long with the same doctor involvement. An experienced doctor who does ‘all the work’, and has a track record of producing good results - based upon the knowledge we have as the general public, is a more assured way of being able to control this variable - because how many technicians names do people know of from any of the top clinics? None - because they are often the unsung heroes, and it’s the doctors name who takes credit for the work. So you are relying on the fact that the technicians on your particular surgery will be the same ones that played the tech roles in producing the good results. Now this is fine, for the majority of the time, in most top clinics, as they tend to have smaller turn over in tech staff, and less overall numbers of techs on their payroll in general. However - when clinics branch out, start to increase their volume of patients, and grow quicker than they can maintain quality control - this is when it becomes an issue. We saw it happen to Asmed, we see it happen with Cinik, from the vastly varying degrees of success his patients have, and I wonder whether techs have been the issue with the poor results from Dr Arshad recently. Basically, you are counting on the clinics word that they are using their regular techs or experienced techs with you - when in reality you have no way in properly being able to verify this. So, as far as being able to accurately ascertain a clinics success ratio - it is far easier to do so, when the Dr who you have heard of and physically know of, plays a large proportion of the role, as this is what you will be getting. This isn’t to say tech clinics aren’t as good - it’s to point out that it’s one more variable out of your control/knowledge.

It’s not so much about age, but about risk mitigation. If you have a 28y/o NW6 and a 50y/o NW6 who has been like that since he was 28, with equal donors etc - restoring one with a mega session will be higher risk than restoring one with 3 surgeries of smaller graft numbers. Mega sessions risk losing a large majority of your irreplaceable grafts, if something goes wrong. If something goes wrong in a smaller sized surgery, you risk losing a smaller cross section of irreplaceable grafts.

Post pictures of your donor, as none of us have seen those yet.

Personally, I would choose this option, yes.

If you’re going to spend $30k , on just surgery alone without taking into consideration the travel and accomodation costs - I would probably opt to break my restoration up into smaller surgeries . . . For instance 3x 2000 graft sessions vía FUE (I’m presuming it’s FUE you want, hence selecting Eugenix) and address, the hairline/frontal third . . Address the vertex . . Then address the crown, for an example of how such a strategy would look. This is a much safer option in terms of preserving your finite donor supply, and provides both doctor and patient much more of a clearer picture in terms of executing the overall restoration. If you select a good surgeon to do this, it will probably cost more than $30k, however it will allow you to save a bit more in between sessions. I appreciate the desire to go ahead and try get a full head of hair in one go, as you are only 28 - however with all those years ahead of you, it’s a marathon, not a sprint . . And it reduces any form of risk associated with surgery greatly. I can also tell you, that 5000 grafts isn’t going to give you a ‘full looking head of hair’, so if that’s your goal, you’ll be requiring a second surgery anyway. Just my two cents 😊

Looks great , good for you!

Where have the pics gone ?

Interesting - maybe @Raphael84 could shed some light? One of my friends has something similar on the back of his scalp (he's not had a hair transplant) - I'm not sure if its eczema, or perhaps a birth mark etc - but it looks very similar to what you have going on here. I'm presuming its definitely from the HT then, it wasn't like that before? Do you have the surgical pre ops shaved down?

You're asking how longs a piece of a string. For some people, 40 grafts per cm2 will prevent the see through effect, for others, perhaps not. Hair characteristics my friend.

That is definitely MPB - stick with Finasteride for a year, and re-evaluate what you want to do. May want to consider adding in Minoxidil also.

You've already answered your question here 😊

If it was ink from a pen, such as a felt tip, or even permanent marker pen, this should have gone from a normal skin shedding cycle, or at the very worst, been absorbed into the blood stream and kicked out by the body long ago. Weird

Thanks - I know I am 😉 And most of the seasoned posters on here will also agree. No vendetta or bad blood at all, I just feel for educational purposes . . it’s important to highlight these types of things to look out for, and it ultimately being in the best interest of prospective HT candidates who are just starting their research journey. It’s taken me years and years of being on these boards to understand hair transplant aesthetics, and a lot of what I’ve learned has been from experienced members. It’s a shame politics inevitably have to be at play, however with the business model that this forum is based upon, they can’t not, and without that, we wouldn’t have this great platform - but at least other members still have freedom of speech to highlight such ‘issues’ for lack of a better word, and people can make up their own mind and take what they want from it. Aesthetics are always going to be subjective, yes. But show that highlighted area of the hairline to any renown hairline artist, and they will critique it in an equal manner to what has already been said on this thread - so that should be the takeaway message for anyone in the midst of their research.

Thanks Melvin. For anyone who missed it, I highlighted this hairline on one of the clinic posted results from De Freitas today, as an example as to what myself and @Gasthoerer had previously mentioned on this topic, with regards to some of the cases presented by De Freitas exposing flaws in the patients hairlines, which aren’t natural looking. For newbies or others who aren’t quite as tuned in, if you zoom into this area, and study male hairlines in nature, you will see that this particular result has a mixture of multi’s and coarser hair too close to the frontal line, which leaves a slightly pluggy appearance - no where near the old school ‘plug’ look of yesteryear , however, certainly requiring a softening. And just to appease the diplomats, I don’t think either of us were knocking De Freitas as being a poor surgeon, more so , critiquing claims that he was number one in the world for hairlines - in which in my personal opinion, there are other surgeons who achieve more aesthetic hairline results. On the whole, his yield is seemingly good, and I enjoy watching the transformations his clinic presents. I’m also a huge fan of the work he did on @BjornBorg and think his results are fantastic. Perhaps it’s down to individuals hair characteristics, and we all know coarser hair provides a more difficult time for a surgeon when restoring a hairline - however it can be done, and this is where taking time on selective graft extractions proves to be the difference between good, and elite. I believe Dr Sethi is a big advocate of this, and places heavy emphasis on the need to be selective for the very frontal hairs and temple points.

Early grower - called it 😉 2 more months and you’ll be at where most are at 12, Happy for you !

Donor area is looking great. Why not try and give yourself a skin fade on the back and sides to give shape to your hair at this current length, and it might help alleviate some of your anxieties with regards to leaving the house without a beanie ?

The patchiness on the side of your donor is definitely a bit of a cause for concern, occipital doesn’t look too bad, despite the low dipping crown. Best bet is to get a trichoscopic examination with some top hair restoration surgeons, so they can see you in person and give you an accurate evaluation. Beard looks strong, which will certainly be a big help! 👍🏻

Depends on your case, but as far as your list of ‘top surgeons’ goes , I’d be scratching out your number 4. Never heard of number 3, so unable to comment there. 1 and 2 along with Dr Wong are not only the best in Canada, but amongst the best in the world.