Julius

After hours of research I am also leaning slightly towards fue even though the yield is lower than fut I am hoping for a similar density as what you want I am also in OZ I am a Norwood 2 or 3 max Have you met any Dr Bisanga or Keser patients? Both Bisanga and Keser are not recommended here If you had the money would Dr Feller be your number one or would you still have the same top three? I wouldn’t mind having a chat with you regarding ht if you want to PM me your number You may be interested in this thread about fue which I found particularly worrisome: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/135131-truth-about-fue-read-dr-armani-dr-rassman-my-experience-nasty-word.html

Do you think he would be happier if he did fue?

joe rogan: “One of the dumbest things I ever did was get hair transplants. Now I have a big stupid scar on the back of my head that looks like a smile”. “I think I'm still gonna shave my head someday because it looks like shit, but I'm not sure what I'm gonna do with the scar. I actually might get a Wanderlei Silva style tattoo back there”. “Propecia is bad too, it kills your dick. Rogaine sort of works to keep it a little, but it doesn't really grow shit back”. “Yeah, they took strips of meat from the back of my head and extracted the follicles and inserted them into the top of my head. It worked, sorta. I've got some hair up there now, but ultimately I would have been happier if I just shaved it.” I would have thought a celebrity like him would have gone to the best of the best Who did his ht? Why does his ht look so poor? Do you think his result is typical of hts?

A transection of a hair follicle means that a portion or even the entire hair follicle was cut along its body and could be damaged, which may jeopardize its viability. A complete transected hair follicle will not grow hair when it is implanted. With FUT, they have the strip out and under high powered microscopes they can see where to cut the grafts out, so transsection rate is very low. With FUE, they are basically cutting blindly and don't know anything until they pull the graft out of the head. One may argue that acceptable transection rate for a “successful” FUE is 10% or less, but this is not advertised and most patients (the consumers) do not have a clear understanding of this fact while traditional hair transplant surgery with the donor strip incision has a 2 to 5% transection rate. I also have naturally curly hair and this apparently increases transection so maybe fut is my only real option So to provide a synopsis fue means a higher rate of transection, lower yield and more overall scarring although it is less visible :confused:

PharmD’s 12 month result is very nice, well done SMG, hopefully you can post some more I have seen many fut patients go back time after time which also affects yield especially if they start on hair transplantation during the early stages Is fue more detrimental to vascularity than fut? I read this on SMG’s website can anybody explain it? Distortion from initial FUE makes subsequent FUE difficult Is it this; in most cases the skin becomes brittle making future FUE sessions that much more difficult each time. Of course the same exact thing happens around strip scars, but because the length of the edge of a strip scar is about 10 times less than the combined edges of FUE extraction sites, the effect is barely noticed. Even if this brittle conversion of the skin were 10 times greater after strip surgery, it would still be of no consequence since strip harvesting does not rely on skin resistance at all. However small fue sessions avoid technician fatigue and shock loss is less of an issue Dr Feller has said I probably wouldn't bother with a strip if the surgery were only 1000 grafts and I am pretty sure I have heard Spex say the same The B spot has said “if you’re younger, needing 2500-3000 grafts or less, then do an FUE session first” Fut has greater yield and to achieve a suitable look with fue I think in most cases it needs to be buzzed because the lack of density is not so evident with shorter hair But Bill has said hair coarseness, thickness and caliber doesn't change based on length. However, hair can sometimes appear thicker when shorter for a number of reasons. Shorter hair typically produces more volume and sometimes a fresh haircut can make hair look healthier and thicker because the dead ends were cut off. But my hair definitely appears thinner when buzzed because there's no overlapping effect. I know another poster that buzzes but angles his hair down so you cannot see the roots because he said transplanted hair looks thicker Another poster said If you have dark coarse hair on pale skin then the contrast between HT hair and miniaturizing native hair will stick out like a sore thumb I even know a poster on this forum who has seen fue work in person from the top docs and said he was not impressed and strangely that the best fue he saw was Armani citing that he has the most experience, and relating many of his failures to fues hit and miss nature and the doc’s lack of scruples This thread about fue I found particularly worrisome: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/135131-truth-about-fue-read-dr-armani-dr-rassman-my-experience-nasty-word.html Dr Paul Shapiro has said on average 2000 fue grafts of permanent zone once striped out which are outside of strip region The B spot has said that if fue is done correctly first it should not affect the total yield So why don’t more people go fue first then strip as it will not ultimately affect yield if taken from the permanent zone which cannot be taken by strip? Most can shave down to at least a number two with fue, but most can only shave down to a number four with fut, although there are exceptions to both. So is the ability on average to shave down just two combs less really worth it? I have seen bad hts from all the top docs and if it happened with fut or fue if I shave down to disguise it I will have an unsightly scar with both, the strip scar however is the worst looking of the two. So what should a Norwood 2- 3A with dark hair and fair skin do? If yield is ultimately not affected I think all ht candidates on the lower Norwoods should do fue first up to 2000 grafts then buzz it, but if it does not look good then they should either shave down to disguise the bad work if scarring is not too bad, or then go fut. Unless they have an unusual head shape and don’t look good buzzed then they should go straight for fut. Thoughts?

Thanks for the replies I do think the central core needs to be denser or of the same density as the frontal hairline, though the crown can have less density as in nature, but the difference should not be stark. Any doctor want to chime in about why hairlines are regularly dense packed

We are told that density in the transition zone should not be too high so as to look natural and avoid the wall of hair transplant look but in practice it seems not the case

See what Dr Paul Shapiro from SMG wrote here: (promotional link removed) My concern is that the density that I plant at in the hairline then determines the density that needs to be planted later in a patient’s life as his hair loss progresses. What I am saying is that if I plant at densities of 60 FU/sq.cm., in the hairline then I am committed to plant at the same densities or higher behind the hairline. So if I plant a hairline at the density of 60 FU/sq.cm in a 25 to 30 year old male and he then progresses to a Norwood type 6 or 7 he may not have enough donor to plant at densities behind the hairline that will be cosmetically pleasing unless you stick to just the front 1/3 of the head. And that can look very unnatural. Because if one plants at densities of 60 FU/sq.cm, in the hairline you need to plant at the same densities at least in the central core area and the frontal temporal angles or one will have a very thick hairline with less density behind it. That is not a pattern we see very often in nature. You say: “ I have seen cases - where you can fade 60 from the hairline down to 50 or 40 as you get further back on the head without it looking unnatural in the least.” I have not seen these examples and the general consensus in the Hair Transplant community is that this is not a natural look. The general consensus is that the central core area should have more density then the hairline. The hairline has two separate zones the transitional and defined. Now the average transition zone is 10cm2 and the average defined zone is 30cm2 The transition zone, consisting of the first .5-1.5 cm of the hairline, Only 1 hair follicular units should be used in this area. Finer one hair grafts are separated and placed in the most anterior portion of this zone. "Defined zone" is a two to three cm wide area that sits directly behind the "transition zone”.Concentrating 2-3 hair follicular units this area accomplishes both goals nicely concentrating the 3 hair follicular units in the mid central portion of this zone (were the frontal tuft is usually located). To sum up at SMG it is said that a hairline density of 40 to 50 FU/sq.cm is mosty used, which increases as goes back towards the central core. But why do I often see the top clinics doing this: http://www.hairtransplantnetwork.com/blog/journal.asp?CopyID=6110&WebID=1497 Why is the transition zone planted at such a high density of 80 grafts per cm2 in this instance? Won’t this hair transplant appear unnatural especially if seen from above? Two posts ago I highlighted another Remembering that Dr. Sharon Keene showed that in 'normal' men without male pattern baldness, the average follicular unit hair density at the front hairline was 51 FU/cm2 with a range of 38-78. But as mattj said: Well, to create a softer hairline single hairs are usually placed at the very front, with the groups of 2 to 4 hairs used further back where the increased density is welcome. I don't think nature does this. You'll find follicular units containing the full range of hairs at any point on the scalp. http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/138357-natural-density-hairline-temple-region-rest-head.html So Are the zones just BS? And if they aren’t why are so many top clinics transplanting the hair in these zones at such high densities?

I have just started on 2.5mg once daily and have experienced some minor swelling around the lips I am going to break it up to 1.25mg twice daily and see how it goes I think any dose should be taken twice daily because of the SPEED of absorption affecting blood and tissue levels and thus the possibility of an adverse reaction.

Future_HT_Doc I agree it is red and could be because it is just a few months post op Mid thirties and a Norwood Class 3 having five sessions totaling 5,431 follicular unit grafts He is a musician and it is said that the approach was more aggressive than the norm I am still not sure if fue or fut was used?

I would go with a recommended doctor. As said before Feller is the best at documenting and has some good results and from what I have seen SMG also look good. Interestingly I heard from someone that has seen a number of fue patients that Armani was the best, but he also has more misses. He clarified it by saying this is because he is unscrupulous and because fue is so unpredictable. Another poster said at best it has 80% survival rate. I don’t know if it has much validity but I was once told by a forum member that a surgeon strictly practicing fue would be better at it than one that dabbles with it and fut.

Am I the only one who can clearly see contrast between transplanted hair and native? I can see no strip scar

Hairline Photos - Patient - NHI

Thoughts on this: http://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://www.baldingblog.com/photos/051013_short1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.baldingblog.com/2005/10/13/celebrity-hair-transplants/&usg=__r1cGnI49rKf6IapQ8YDVjo9Eqfc=&h=480&w=640&sz=80&hl=en&start=72&zoom=0&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=UM8dDE64LJ4u5M:&tbnh=103&tbnw=137&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmel%2Bgibson%2Bhair%2Btransplant%26start%3D60%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1T4TSHN_enAU322AU323%26ndsp%3D20%26tbs%3Disch:1

Here it is: (Sorry, we don't allow link backs to this website)

I found one from SMG and it looks great but it cuts out at six months Why do so many fue blogs seem to do this?

Thanks Spex It would be great to see some more SMG fue 12 month results

Tom60 have had a HT? And how does the transplanted hair look when buzzed? Anyone else who has had a ht find that the coarseness of HT hair is magnified when buzzed?

Problem is when you go grey. With fue into scar shaved, although results vary as hair does not grow well in the scar

Thanks scar5. What do others think about the coarseness of HT hair when buzzed?

There is a real dearth of fue 12 month results so I was hoping we could start posting as many as possible of such results from doctors recommended on this forum. Please post both successes and failures I’ll kick it off http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/137681-hairroot-dr-feller-fue-patient.html

Great post thank you Dr. Mohammad

The plasma half-life of the parent compound is 4.2 hours, but its biological effect is known to be much longer as its duration of action can be up to 24 hours (Gottlieb et al. 1972). The onset of action is 30 to 60 minutes, with a duration of twelve to eighteen hours. The drug has a plasma disappearance half-life of 4.2 hours despite a duration of action of approximately 24 hours

Thanks again Spex

I was told thick hair follicles are good for ht But I know the contrast between dark hair and light skin is not