AJ_HT

Kudos to your imagination, my friend. You asked me thrice about what I want, and I said I don't know. You kept asking me, and the only other option I could think of was asking if clinics give refunds. Even after that, I've CONSTANTLY mentioned that a refund is out of the picture. And yet, there are multiple people like yourself who think I'm fishing for a refund. I came here looking for support, not toxicity. It's strange how you don't seem to care about the NDA you asked Melvin about multiple times, but are now talking about me asking for a refund. Unfortunately, some people are putting words in my mouth, and completely ignoring the fact that I've said multiple times, that A REFUND IS OUT OF THE QUESTION. I'd like to end the discussion on this post. I don't really care what anybody thinks. People who are logical will understand what this is about. The remaining can let their imagination run wild. I still maintain that I've not had a good experience with Eugenix, and that's what this post was about. In any case, I will update the forum what happens going forward.

It's strange you say this. Because I was not even looking for a resolution when I originally posted this thread. If you've read my posts, I've constantly mentioned that the post was written as a review about the clinic and my experience. Since multiple people mentioned that I should reach out to the clinic and find a mid-way, I did that to check if any other resolution is possible. Someone here suggested minox, multivitamins and PRP may help thicken the hair, and that's the kind of "alternative" that could be possible. I'm surprised at how suspicious people could be.

This is helpful. I'm already taking finasteride. I'll try if minoxodil and multivitamins can do the trick. Can you tell me how many months it took for the hair to thicken?

Thank you for your detailed response. I'd like to point out certain aspects here, which should be known. Unfortunately, this wasn't done. Except the hairline, nothing else was demarcated in the first procedure, which was the root cause of the problem (which I've mentioned in my first post itself). I would honestly recommend that you as a clinic and others as patients, both ensure that the entire area is demarcated and zones are marked, and if possible, with the approx number of grafts that will be implanted in each area/zone, so that the patient knows what he's in for. This didn't happen in my case. This is incorrect. I didn't ask for an immediate implantation after 8 months. I wanted to meet Dr Sethi on priority, who said that since he is in Mumbai anyway, he will do the touch-up tomorrow itself. As seen in the pictures, the density in mid-scalp was not lesser. It was almost nil. The document also mentioned that I shall refrain myself from posting pictures anywhere. I'm adding this specifically because I don't want to be misunderstood on the forum. These are pictures clicked in my house with normal lights above my head. Not with a flash camera. I have also posted pictures in normal sunlight, which show my scalp. So the scalp being visible is not because of any flashlight. It's how it looks in any light. This is exactly the problem. Incorrect expectations being set with regards to density. It would help to put things in writing for all patients during the in-person consult, so that things are clear from the very beginning. We're actually back to square one, because in my mind, the procedure was not a success. But like I said, what's done is done. I've mailed Dr Sethi and looking to engage with him. Will update the community here on what I decide. Thank you everyone who was supportive here regarding my case. I guess there's nothing more to be said here. I will update you folks about the progress, although opting for another touch-up is an option that seems extremely unlikely.

This is outrageous! I haven't even asked for a refund. Please don't put words in my mouth. If you read my posts, I've constantly maintained that I know that a refund is not something any clinic will give, so it's out of the question. I've asked them to provide other options, as suggested by forum members here, because another touch-up is not something I want. And if they have no other option, then that's that. Man, I'm really beginning to get a lot of questions in my head now. Why would you say things to incite hostility here? I think I'm done responding to your comments. If it's someone who doesn't want to look at both sides of the story, I'm not interested in answering any more questions

About the hairline, since there are questions - are you guys really trying to say that I would know better than the doctors? They were the ones who suggested the grafts and drew the hairline. I did not ask them to lower it. I mean, isn't it obvious that when the doctor is suggesting x grafts, they'll draw a hairline in line with those x grafts? What's there to not get here? Why would I argue with the doc and ask them to raise it? And I'm getting a little tired of these questions and accusations now. I came here to write about my experience and for support, and while most folks like @JoeMan, @NARMAK,@Captain Haddock and many more have understood my plight (thank you!) I'd want to ignore the ones who haven't. Guess we just have to agree to disagree. @JoeMan rightly mentioned - some people instigate me with stupid questions, and then I have to reply. And then others say that this post has gone 7 pages long. Anyway, I've written to Dr Sethi a few hours back to see if there can be some resolution other than a touch-up. I'll post an update of what they say. In the meanwhile, some folks had reached out yesterday via DM. So if you have genuine questions about my experience, you may please post them here since my DMs aren't working. If you're going to write to criticise, I'll be ignoring it, because I think I've said enough.

Let me tell you where I'm coming from. I chose a bad clinic the first time - that was on me. But the second time, I made sure I went to a reputed and recommended clinic and also had a touch-up with them, which also didn't turn out to give the desired density (Now you may say that my expectations weren't realistic or anything else, but that's a topic which I'm sure neither you nor I want to get back to) Now, 2 surgeries with a reputed clinic not giving results as per your expectation isn't something that will make you want to go to the same place again for a third procedure. So till 2 days ago, I wasn't sure if I would want to go back. However, I wrote this review just so that folks know what to expect. And if you read my original post, I also wrote about what I didn't do, and recommended others to do. That was the idea of writing this review. I wanted to end it there. This turned into an argument when, Melvin spoke to them and they blamed me for having unrealistic expectations. I'm sure you've read all of that. Now tell me, after all this blame game, would you trust and go back to the same clinic for a third session? I don't think so. All I'm doing here, is defending my stance. I don't enjoy writing posts on forums when I anyway have a lot of work to do. The only idea that I didn't entertain was going back to the clinic for another session. Someone suggested hair fibres, and I anyway use them. I may also consider another procedure with another clinic if and when I'm ready for it mentally and financially, which is what many people have suggested. Apart from that, I don't see anything else that I can do. I'm still open to suggestions on how to improve the situation that doesn't involve having a second touch-up with Eugenix. Like I said, this post turned 6 pages long because of the blame game, not because I'm cribbing about what went wrong. Said this because you don't call someone's review bullshit when they're trying to put something they have experienced. I'm more than happy to have a discussion that's not an argument or name-calling.

Wow. So you're saying posting about my experience on the forum is "bullshit"? Why then do they have a "patient experiences and reviews" section here? I honestly expected better from folks like you. But guess honest reviews don't mean much to some people. My intent of putting up this post was to make people aware of what can go wrong. And I've said it multiple times: 1) I don't want a touch-up, whether paid or free. I don't have the faith to go to the same place for another touch-up, when they should have got it right the first or at least the second time. How is that so difficult to understand? 2) And I'm pretty sure clinics don't do refunds, else I would have asked for it. So what's the third option here that you think can make me "happy"? Nothing. What's done is done. But people deserve to know. I say I'm not happy because I'm not happy. And I fail to understand why it's pissing people like you off. I also don't know what my first surgery has anything to do with this, unless you want to criticize me just because I put up an honest but negative review of a recommended clinic where you got your surgery done. I know you had a great experience with Eugenix, but I didn't. And I will call it like I see it. Having said that, I don't really care what you think of this, and will abstain from replying to your comments from hereon. But for the folks who are not smitten by the clinic and would want to thoroughly evaluate and see patient experiences, I think I did good by putting this up.

Something really strange is happening here now. I've shared the details of that document with Melvin via DM, assuming he will speak to the clinic. However, now, I am unable to message him, or anybody else, and it says that my messenger has been disabled! May be I'm being paranoid here, but why would this happen suddenly after I share some sensitive details with the moderator? Any way, now since there are so many questions on the document, I will talk about the story behind it. I had gone to Eugenix because I had seen a lot of videos and reviews, but more importantly, because I had seen the videos of a patient like me, who had undergone a failed transplant. He went to Eugenix and was very happy. I spoke to him at length and then decided to opt for Eugenix. Now, after 7 months, since I was not happy with my results, and Dr Priyadarshini just kept asking me to wait for the mid-scalp to get better, I reached out to this individual again and told him that I am not happy with the result, and that maybe he should not recommend all packages of Eugenix, because I have not been happy with the base package. Now, if I have gone to a clinic via someone's reference and am not happy with what they recommended, I don't see anything wrong in going back to that person and telling them that I'm unhappy. Because it was on his recommendation that I went to Eugenix in the first place. However, the fact that I reached out to him was probably not taken well by the clinic, and before my touch-up, I was asked to sign the document which said that I am happy with my first transplant, and will restrain myself from putting up any pictures on social media which could damage the reputation of Eugenix. I truly believe that irrespective of how the results are, we should be able to share anything (that is not confidential) on any platform, as long as it is true. Hence I did not sign that document because it seemed to restrict me to upload any pictures. I didn't even want to bring up the point about this document, until Melvin spoke about the consent form which I didn't sign. I had actually signed everything I was asked to sign, except this document. (Honestly, I didn't even know that anything like this is frowned upon and not encouraged by the community here) So why am I talking about this now? So that the members here know exactly what had happened, and there is no twisting of the facts. And because suddenly I'm being restricted on this forum to send any messages, for reasons I don't know. I know that Eugenix is a highly recommended clinic here, but I don't think I'm doing anything wrong or illegal by posting my honest review on this forum with pictures - something that this platform is meant for.

I mean, I can see the difference in my hairfall when I shampoo or brush or comb my hair. While I used to see a LOT of strands before I started fin, I see hardly 3-4 strands now while I shampoo. Also, my crown (which was not transplanted) seems to have slightly improved in density. So I'm guessing it's working.

This guy seems to have one of the best density I've seen with transplants. If I even manage to get to 70% of this, I'd be over the moon. Unfortunately, I don't know if I will opt for another procedure. Counting the hair won't help actually, as I had some thin native hair as well as some transplanted hair from my earlier transplant. So I won't really be able to ascertain which are the latest transplanted ones.

Yes there's a difference. The beard hair is more coarse than scalp hair. But I had seen a video of Dr Arika herself, where she said that when beard hair is used, it is generally done in the mid-scalp and mixed with scalp hair. I also understand that doing it in the hairline doesn't show very well. But the point is, my midscalp has a mix of beard and scalp hair. If donor density was a problem, the scalp hair could all be used in the hairline rather than mid-scalp. I also think that Melvin and Gatsby have had their transplants done recently using majorly beard hair, if I'm not wrong. So for Eugenix, using beard hair should not have been a problem, had they needed to.

Like I said, I'm on finasteride since the first session with Eugenix (Dec 2020), and there is no hairfall now. So my hairloss isn't progressive.

That's the thing. They did use 300 grafts from my beard, which is where the argument that my donor density was low, doesn't make sense. If there was a problem with the donor density, my beard grafts were anyway there. How is this a case of he said she said? I had donor hair available in my beard, so the argument that only 2500 grafts could be extracted doesn't seem to fit in, especially when Eugenix is known to do beard hair transplants.

Guess I trusted that the frontal portion will grow well in 12 months, so didn't think of waiting it out.

Till yesterday, I was not sure of what I wanted. But after seeing how my case has been handled, I definitely don't want to go back for another free/complimentary touch-up. I don't know. Do clinics offer a refund in such cases?

I'm glad you posted this. As per your discussion with Eugenix, if the primary area was the frontal hairline (as claimed by them), why do we see Dr Priyadarshini in the chat here telling me that the mid-scalp will show improvement? If that was not the primary focus, the response should have been "that was not the primary focus". As simple as that. Secondly, I think this will probably be the last time I say this - my results in the front seemed good for 8 months. I thought there would be improvement till month 12 so I did not have a problem with it. My mid-scalp though, was extremely scanty, so I knew that no amount of time will magically improve the mid-scalp. Aren't we supposed to be patient and wait it out till month 12 at least, to see full density? What is expected of us as patients? Wait till 12 months or get paranoid in 8 months?

I'm a reasonable man, sir. And if I was told beforehand that due to donor unavailability I may not get good density, then I either wouldn't opt for the surgery, or if I did, wouldn't come and write such long posts here. So to answer your question, no, the expectations weren't set beforehand. I was told I'd get good density with 2500 grafts. And now after seeing the way it is being handled, I don't think I'd want to opt for another procedure with them even if they offer to correct it.

I was told that my frontal and midscalp would need 2500 grafts, which could be available from the scalp. I was also told that anything more than that would not be possible to harvest from the scalp, and may need grafts from the beard. And you've got it right @Egy. If more grafts were needed, they could have been harvested from my beard (I have a thick beard). But I was told that my requirement itself is of 2500 grafts. You may refer to the images I have attached in the earlier post in case you wish to verify the same.

I have not asked for another touch-up in any of my posts. In fact, I've said that even if I'm offered one, I'm not sure of taking it. Let me elaborate on the facts you have mentioned: 1. You had a previous poor surgery, which made you a difficult case from the start, for various reasons scarring, etc. - Okay (although this wasn't mentioned to me prior to surgery) 2. We haven't seen any pictures of your midscalp, which is still growing at 7 months - You keep saying I haven't shared this picture time and again, but how exactly is a picture of my mid-scalp relevant? The problem being discussed here is with my frontal region. Anyway, since you want it, I've attached the same below. 3. You agreed prior to your touch-up that you were happy with your hairline - I have repeatedly mentioned that it was month 8, and I was happy with the way it looked for MONTH 8 (assuming there would be more improvement till month 12). I didn't think even this would be an issue after 12-15 months. Not sure what I've not conveyed here. 4. You were told that your donor would not support more than 2500 grafts, which is in the text you shared. - And you seem to have ignored the rest of the text that said that I would need only 2500 grafts for my frontal and midscalp region? The donor would not support more than 2500 grafts - which is true. But as per the chat, I didn't NEED more than 2500 grafts for the front and mid-scalp. Why has that piece of information been left out? Melvin, I respect what you've done for the community on this platform. But by commenting on the donor availability and completely ignoring the fact that the doc clearly said I need 2500 grafts for my surgery, it doesn't seem like you're looking at both sides fairly in this situation. Anyway, here's a picture of my mid-scalp (but like I said, I don't know how that will help here)

No matter what the clinic or anybody else says, I wasn't told anything about scarring or it being a risky procedure. Nor was there an issue with the donor area because as my chat shows, Dr Priyadarshini said that approx 2000-2500 grafts were needed for my frontal and mid-scalp region, which were available from my scalp donor. (Only my crown wasn't getting covered because it required more grafts which were not available). These are the facts.

Why would the clinic quote that I need only 2500 grafts in the first place, if I actually needed more? I'm actually surprised that a clinic can be believed to not make a simple mistake in terms of calculation, but there are so many questions directed towards me. Like I said, it's one thing to say that I need 4000 grafts but only 2500 are available and hence we can only do the frontal portion. But it's another thing to say that 2500 grafts are what I need. It was also told that out of the 2500, we could use beard grafts if needed. The point being - a total of 2500 grafts were needed, of which we may need some grafts from the beard. With all due respect, why would you want to nitpick on this point and extrapolate it with my expectations? So what if I asked this question? Is it wrong in any way? I just asked a question, didn't insist on my crown being covered, just like I didn't insist on lowering my hairline, or anything else. But it's very evident from the chat, of what I was quoted in terms of number of grafts. And instead of seeing the chat where I was quoted 2500 grafts for the frontal and midscalp region, it's surprising that you're picking on the fact that I asked about my crown. Am I missing something here? 🤔

It wasn't an NDA. But the document had a clause which said that I am happy with my first surgery, and going forward, will not threaten Eugenix for any deficiency in service, and will refrain from posting any pictures, videos, tweet or message on any social media that could damage their reputation. It was a loosely worded statement and hence I didn't sign it.

Like I said, after having 2 procedures there and still unhappy, I'm not sure if I want to opt for a third procedure with them. Also, I have the numbers of the Eugenix counselling and follow up team saved in my phone. Haven't got a call from them in the last 3 months. But irrespective, even if I did, after their stance yesterday that Melvin posted about, I highly doubt I will have faith for another procedure. I feel the clinic could have paid more attention to the case and set realistic expectations before the surgery, if they felt the donor or the earlier scarring was an issue. Nothing of that sort was told to me before I went ahead with the procedure. Also, the calculations for number of grafts seemed off, because I have a thick beard which could be used for extraction if the donor was insufficient, but I was told that 2500 grafts only would be needed. We did end up using about 300 grafts from the beard, but the total requirement that was told to me was 2500. So there is definitely something amiss.

That's exactly my point. If they say that the scalp donor area was insufficient, why take only 300 grafts from the beard? They could have taken more, had the requirement been more. But they quoted a REQUIREMENT of 2500 grafts. It's one thing to say that we need 4000 grafts to cover your head but we can extract only 2500 from your scalp. It's another thing to say that we need only 2500 grafts for your head. I was told the latter. Your doubts are legitimate. There was no conversation which said that since only 2500 grafts can be extracted, so I can't expect great density. I was told that I NEED 2500 grafts which can more or less be extracted from the donor. Like I said earlier, there's a difference between saying I need 4000 grafts but only 2500 can be extracted, and saying that I need 2500 grafts. I was told the latter. But isn't it a good clinic's responsibility to tell the patient that scarring can make it difficult to achieve good results? And if we assume that this is because of scarring and previous scalp damage, how will a touch-up help in any way? Especially when this will be the third surgery in the frontal region? @Melvin- Moderator how do you assume that the reality was a compromised donor, and not miscalculation? You've heard both sides of the story, but it's unfortunate that you say that the clinic is right in their claim, and I'm wrong. I have posted another comment with relevant pictures. Hope you have a look at it and come to a conclusion. I can post images of the donor, but like someone rightly mentioned, we can't comment on the donor availability by looking at pictures. Doctors can't even give an assurance before shaving the donor, and understandably so. So I highly doubt pictures will help. Happy to share them though, if needed. Thankfully you understand how it feels.