BurnieBurns

11 minutes ago, Rafael Manelli said:

When you say incisions do you mean the recipient sites or also the FUE excision sites? 

He would mean the recipient incisions. H&W do have techs do the FUE extractions.

9 minutes ago, Rafael Manelli said:

He got a pencil thin scar from Dr Konior. Hard to say his physiology is at fault. Reduced laxity cannot be an excuse either because Dr Wong would have examined his laxity. 

The wideness of the strip and the outcome of the scar were two seperate points. JT for example had one scar from Dr Wong that stretched then another that didn't 

Based on this posters sketchy history I wouldn't take what he says with too much weight yet. 

If they did have a tech to make the bigger amount of incisions, I'd be very surprised and disappointed.

If they left him high and dry after a result as bad as he puts it literally, I'd be the same.

To chime in about the strip scar taken too wide, there is no universal rule about a certain height making it more prone to stretching as everyones laxity is different. Even in the best hands, there is no guarantee you'll get a glorious 'pencil thin' one. This is the reality of surgery. In the pictures his hair is far too short and he would likely benefit from a scar revision. 

Keep in mind this is only his side of the story, but If it's enough to deter you from going with them that's totally fine, but I would NOT consider Turkey. Consult with a few other surgeons on the recommended list and see who you feel most comfortable with.

On 4/4/2023 at 4:35 AM, milito_22 said:

Hello everyone,

This is a 6 month update. Sent these pics to Doctor Wong as well. He said hair has started to grow in but it is still baby fine. Honestly, I am still skeptical any improvement will happen from now on. I can just wait and hope

 

There is definitely growth and hope isn’t lost yet but I understand the disappointment so far

The intention behind saline solution is to keep it clean and reduce scabbing. H&W (from my experience with them) give you a special shampoo to use daily which would do that job

I think if it's the appearance you're concern about at the end of the day it could afford to be 'softened' and removing the multi-haired grafts close to the edge. If there are no scars there now then laser will not cause the development of any new ones

They are reputable as you can possibly hope for. Turkey is hyped up as the place you want to go for hair transplants with little to no truth at all. This is intentionally done from advertising, social media, and PR. Out of the masses of clinics there, only about 2 - 3 doctors are worthwhile.

To make it clear there are NO GUARANTEES when it comes to surgery, and no surgeon alive has zero unhappy patients.  however, Hasson and Wong have achieved remarkably consistent top tier results for over two decades. You will be in one of the best hands in the world. I say that as a very satisfied patient from their clinic (with Dr Wong) after first having a very poor result from another local doctor.

4 minutes ago, IcyNeighborhood99 said:

Congrats man! Would you happen to have a post of your journey? I would love to see how yours looks since we both are diffuse thinners. 

Thanks! Planning to do one at 6 months 

Looks phenomenal from front on! Plenty of time for more growth in the mid scalp and crown. I’m assuming you’ve sent update pictures to Dr Hasson and I wouldn’t be worried if he isn’t 

8 minutes ago, IcyNeighborhood99 said:

Of course! No issues with you offering a different perspective

I was quoted for H&W, but the cost is a bit much. How was your experience? Was it worth it?

Cheers. I had a great experience with them, very professional, and happy with the result.

Yes, I couldn’t have afforded their FUE either.. With FUT I only had to pay $5 p graft for the first 2000 then $3 for the rest. I consulted with Eugenix as well and if I wanted FUE I probably would have gone with them

2 hours ago, BurnieBurns said:

I don’t see what’s that’s got to do with it. I had FUT. it should depend on te donor and extent of hair loss pattern, not whether your recipient in diffuse or not 

The decision of FUT or FUE is a personal one based on preferred hair style or donor characteristics e.g degree of retrograde alopecia. 
If you have your reasons for preferring FUE that’s fine, but it isn’t overall ‘better for diffuse thinners’. As for the amount of grafts needed, FUT before FUE will more often than not give you a larger lifetime supply of grafts.

As a diffuse thinner myself I recieved nearly 6k via FUT with Dr Wong. He told me if I opened for FUE I couldn’t have exceeded 3k without the donor looking very thin. This is all individual though and I’m not trying to dismiss your point, but rather show a different perspective for others reading. I’m sure you’d be in fantastic hands with Dr Bansal

2 hours ago, IcyNeighborhood99 said:

Sorry about that lol ! 

 

No, FUE is the best for diffuse thinning from what I researched. Unless you think otherwise?

I don’t see what’s that’s got to do with it. I had FUT. it should depend on te donor and extent of hair loss pattern, not whether your recipient in diffuse or not 

7 hours ago, honey21790 said:

dr wong is awsome in diffuse thinning

He's brilliant at it. I had zero shock loss after and wasn't even on finasteride at the time. H&W would be quite close to you and you'd probably get the best density from them, however they are all very solid options. Look carefully at their results and ideally speak to past patients. There can be nuances involved

10 hours ago, FUEtile said:

Have any of y’all used fluridil before?

Yes, it's weak but helps a little

4 hours ago, r0entgen said:

So I am trying to make sense on why so many people feel topical dutasteride will be more effective and have less side effects, but I cannot seem to understand it from a scientific standpoint. I am hoping someone can explain. 
 

So the thought behind the reason topical dutasteride will have less side effects is due to its high molecular weight (greater than 500 g/mol). So according to the 500 Dalton rule (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10839713/),dutasteride will not penetrate the corneal layer, which is the outer layer of the epidermis. This part makes sense as to why topical dutasteride won’t go systemic. 
 

The part I don’t understand is how does this make topical dutasteride effective when the hair follicle is in the dermal papilla layer (which is in the dermis—the layer deeper and under the epidermis)? If it cannot penetrate beyond the corneal layer, how is it able to have its effect on the follicle? 
 

 

 

The 500 Dalton Rule is NOT absolute. Conventional topical dutasteride WILL go systemic to a small degree (albeit less than finasteride). I along with many others have still had side effects from this.

For context Ketoconazole is 531.431 Daltons and is applied topically all the time.

Formulations like Xyon or Farmacia Parati are designed to enhance the penetration to the dermis level over a timed release and get stuck there resulting in incredibly low amount going systemic.

3 hours ago, Redmann said:

Hi all,
I've had a HT done 5 months ago - 2000 grafts in London. The results so far are not encouraging - most of all because of persistent redness in my recipient area that is not improving. I can live with having to wait 12-18 months for results, but this redness should have gone by now, or at least be getting better. So I'm considering getting PRP in my recipient area to help with the healing / redness.

Any thoughts on this? Would PRP help so long after the procedure? Or is 5 months too soon after the HT?

Many thanks for any words of wisdom!

 

If your skin is pale the redness can take several months to die down. 

Different doctors will say different advice but there's no set standard. Some even do it as part of the surgery

As an objective viewer I can say you definitely have more hair than pre-surgery. The notion that the result is 'done' at 6 months is an extreme generalisation that does not apply to everyone. Dr Wong would have several thousand patients in his time and will be one of the first to tell you if it's not progressing as it should.

For context, I'm just over 4 months and most of my transplanted hasn't grown in yet.

43 minutes ago, milito_22 said:

Wow great result! Congrats! I am at 5.5 month mark as well, and now I can say that my hair transplant has miserably failed

Could you start your own thread with some pictures?

No growth at 5.5 moths is extremely rare

8 hours ago, Rafael Manelli said:

The point is it's possible with the right patient. 

I do not believe doctor skill is the limiting factor, at least among top docs. 

Still is most definitely a factor unless you're only comparing a pool of elite surgeons. With some of them it's not that they 'can't' but more that they're averse to it

4 hours ago, FollicleFella said:

 

 

Hey everyone!! Sorry for the delay. Here is week 22, the 5.5 month mark

These photos are sliiiightly less bright/light heavy than the previous images but still gives a good idea, are near an open window/under an overhead, etc. Post wash, no product, fibers, or blow drying. A bit of bed head as I am just up from a nap however ha.

Honestly dudes, the update is late because I’ve been too happy/busy living life to think much about my hair. After these couple years of it dominating my thoughts/self esteem, feels pretty damn good I must say. I’m sure it won’t last forever, but best believe I’m going to enjoy this peace while it lasts. 

Worth noting I have trimmed the donor down several times over the past few months and probably will again here pretty soon as to maintain a favorable top/side ratio.

Incredible, it nearly looks like you haven't lost anything!

Hasson & Wong, Hattingen, Pitella, 

On 3/6/2023 at 11:22 PM, AgainstAllOdds said:

I am 30 years old - though not sure why that is relevant to the question at hand.
From my understanding, 30% discount for the training of new doctors aside, their standard procedure is done by doctors (not technicians), its a day procedure (2 if you're going for a big session), they also have a "natural results guarantee"  etc... seemingly indicating its not a mill? Or have I missed something? I will admit being a little green on the whole industry.

Additionally, they seem to have a lot of positive reviews. I was ideally trying to tease out specifics on Gro

This was part of the quote; 

• Theatre Fees
• Surgeon Consultation Fee (on day of procedure)
• Surgeon Operating Fee: Extraction and Implantation
• Gro Instruments
• Nurse/Medical team on the day of the procedure
• Aesthetic Fee
• Hypothermosol^TM – this ensures maximum survival rate of extracted hair follicles during the procedure
• Complementary WIFI & Netflix access during your procedure
• Complementary Lunch and refreshments provided to you on the day of your procedure

There are so many red flags in this post..  Paying by 'Hairs' is a huge one.

One follicle can have 1-5+ hairs in the same extraction.

the surgery being done by Doctors instead of technicians is nothing to brag about. There are doctors who can butcher you and there are technicians who are masters. As @Gatsby said, natural results guarantee is BS. Marketing hype and nothing more. Who decides what's natural? They would never claim that without a fine print that works in their favour. 

The way they've broken this down to make you seem like you're getting a lot is ridiculous. Theatre fees and Medical team should be a given. Surgery is Surgery. And complimentary Netflix and Wifi? This isn't a hotel booking.. In my years of research anywhere that hypes up luxuries or 'perks' on the day is only doing so compensate for an average (if you're lucky) result.

I don't intend to sound disrespectful. Your decision is up to you but I'm inclined to say all I can.. 30 is relatively young in the journey of hair loss, even with medication there are no guarantees you won't bald further and the only solution is a shrinking, finite resource. 

On 3/6/2023 at 10:50 PM, AgainstAllOdds said:

Appreciate the reply... Have you hear specifically anything about Gro, as to why you'd not suggest them? Who did you use in AU/NZ?

I've heard lots of good things about them (they also have a massive Insta presence with lots of their customers posting their stories), but almost zero bad - aside from maybe 3 trustpilot reviews.

I'm not strictly bound by location, particularly if another country offers it cheaper, since I use the saved cost on flights. But I'm also looking for specifics on why Gro would be a bad call.

I haven't dealt with Gro but most about them screams cash cow har clinic. Most of these places (Especially ones started by Corporate types/investors, not Surgeons themselves) are interested profit above all else. Instagram results should be taken very lightly, the image quality is terrible and they can get any old sap to leave a positive review by offering a discount, and written positive reviews is the easiest thing to fake nowadays. Many men who feel like they had a great result from these places aren't even aware how bad it is! They're just elated to have any hair again. 

On their website they have NO quality pictures let alone a proper exposed hairline. If the pictures are hiding that, it's probably bad otherwise why wouldn't they show it off. 

I get the appeal you have to just take this deal, but as someone who's been through the trenches along with others here, you are doing yourself a tremendous disservice by not consulting with multiple world renowned clinics before making your decision. I went to Canada for by repair surgery and I couldn't be more relieved. the travel is a breeze if you get all your ducks in a row.

For the love of all that is good do not go with them nor anyone in NZ or Australia. I'm based in NZ too and learned the hard way. 98% of this industry has little to no integrity behind their work and you cannot ever compromise on a HT. For the the best surgeon for your case and never let location or money be a barrier