GoliGoliGoli

10 hours ago, 4chanhue said:

It is illogical to think that nuking one of main male hormones would not have any significant short term or long term side effects for sizable number of population.

Merck and Kevin Mann know what androgens you need. Forget 100 million years of conserved evolution maintaining your DHT levels. DHT is like the male nipple! 

All kidding aside, I do believe that large numbers of men are able to take it without too many serious side effects. It's surprising but does seem to be the case. Why that is I'm not sure, but it certainly isn't because DHT is a "trash hormone". 

You are not a great candidate I'm afraid and that's actually a bit of an understatement =/

That doesn't mean you can't get a major aesthetic improvement from HT's though. Just be ready for the fact that future loss may leave you with an unnatural look that requires additional surgeries. So you need enough time, money, and donor supply to be able to do so. A lot of guys continue losing even on fin/dut it seems so just be prepared for the possibility if you're set on going through with it. 

Of course Patrick Dempsey's hairline is going to look natural on Patrick Dempsey. That doesn't mean Patrick Dempseys hairline is going to look natural on a guy who has MPB...

I really like that you kept the NW2 hairline. I think it suits you well and you're actually better off with that look than if you had gone NW1 (much less NW0 or something). This will age really well. 

2 hours ago, 100Rings said:

Especially when all follicles on the head are genetically identical. It is ASSUMED that "safe zone" follicales are DHT "immune" simply because they don't miniaturize. There is no hard evidence proving dht immunity theory true. In fact, it is quite the opposite actually.. mechanical stress of the scalp and skull expansion theory are by far the most logical answer given the evidence.

What exactly do you mean by all follicles of the head are genetically identical? That doesn't ring true. Are you just saying no gene or cluster of genes has been found that would make the safe zone hairs different? If so I'd say absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. 

If you don't mind please elaborate on your mechanical stress/skull expansion thoughts. 

2 minutes ago, WhamHair said:

Thank you so much for this. I don't even mind if the entire crown is not covered. Even if half can be covered, I'd consider that a massive win at this point. I have taken it for granted that I will require multiple transplants - 2 at a bare minimum and that is OK. As for the 3/4 hair graft density, that is something the hair surgeon should be able to assess during a consultation right?

Yea they'll be able to assess that during consult. 

It sounds like you've got proper expectations which is really the main thing. If you're fine with a sparse crown that will actually be good because it will help alleviate any concerns of you developing a "bullseye" pattern as your loss continues. Basically further loss will just cause a diffuse look across the whole area, not a super dense bullseye  surrounded by a "moat" of baldness. 

On 9/3/2023 at 11:16 AM, Turkhair said:

It doesn’t explain why hairs taken from safe zone survive till death when transplanted to supposedly “tense muscular areas” like the temples. 

If you think hairs taken from the safe zone always survive till death... You've got some research to do. 

Edit: Ok @100Rings beat me to making the same point. 

22 hours ago, HappyMan2021 said:

the US has bad healthcare in general and a lower life expectancy than many European countries. 

there is no reason you should inherently assume the US has the best hair transplant docs, unless there is some blind 'USA #1' attitude going on

 

US has the best healthcare in the world if you are able to afford it, and is by far the leader in health care technology and innovation (Largely as a result of the privatized nature of the system). This is not a "USA #1" attitude, just the facts. 

That doesn't mean its population has good health outcomes though. But you're conflating two different topics. 

I got crown work exclusively for my first and so far only HT. I am also not on finasteride.

If you're going to go the non-fin route, I think it's fine as long as you have a very strong donor and enough money to spend on future HT's. The thing about crown work though is that unless you have a ton of 3/4 hair grafts density will probably be fairly sparse so you need to go into it with proper expectations of what can be achieved in a single session. You also have quite a large spot to cover (Probably like 3 or 4 times the spot I had to cover). You're a fairly difficult case I think it's fair to say. 

Two good videos below on the topic. 

43 minutes ago, TorontoMan said:

No one is ever going to do another double blinded placebo study on fin, it’s off patent and generics are insanely cheap, so no one cares. It really is on the individual to weigh up the trade offs and try it for themselves 

That may be true but it's largely irrelevant to my original point

11 minutes ago, LeveledUp said:

Meh don’t see a problem with investigating claims 

Yep

Regardless of anyone's opinion on Finasteride, there is nothing wrong with doing more research into the drugs and its side effects. If everyone is confident that side effects are as low as Merck claims/claimed, then more research will bear this out. I'm willing to change my opinion on it given enough evidence. 

This is the one area of balding research where you guys get mad when people put money into it! 

In my opinion, you can't really talk about "Is Eugenix worth it", you need to talk about "Is Dr X worth it" 

If you're getting Sethi/Bansal and you're a high Norwood Eugenix is probably worth it, but it sounds like you aren't high Norwood. For any of their other Dr's I'd need to see more of their reviews over time to form a proper opinion on their work. 

Do you have pics from a day or two post op? Or the day of the op? Would be nice to see 

What is Pekiner's approximate cost per graft? He is quite higher than the Gur's/Turan's right? 

13 minutes ago, Bhumik Shah MD said:

Google ranks down your website from search results if PRP for hair loss is mentioned. If you like a local clinic you can call them and ask. They may still provide the services but just not mentioning it on the website. 
 

That's very interesting - do you know why Google's algorithm does this? 

Right, but the fact that you're going to shed the transplanted hairs soon should have no bearing on whether you stop minoxidil or not. They're completely unrelated unless all you care about is the next 6 months.

As to whether min is doing anything for you, there's no way of knowing.

21 minutes ago, Savemyhairline said:

I just got a HT so I’m gonna be shedding soon anyway. Might have to JuSt ShAvE iT bRo for the next 6-9 months, and wear a hat everywhere (which I basically did for the last several years anyway). I work remotely at least 

The shedding of your transplanted hairs is completely different and completely unrelated to a shedding that would be induced by stop minoxidil. They're both called a shed but that's literally the extent of the similarity. 

Personally, I think the effects that minoxidil has on facial appearance are solely related to fluid retention. Basically, you apply topical min, it brings fluid up to your head and makes you look a bit puffy. I don't really believe the collagen depletion stuff or that it damages your skin. If I stop using topical for a few days I go back to my normal chiseled facial structure! 

6 hours ago, wh300 said:

. Regarding my consideration of a hair transplant, Dr. Zarev has actually indicated that if my donor area is sufficient to cover a Norwood 6 pattern of baldness, there's no inherent reason I couldn't proceed with the procedure at my age. 

The thing is even if there is no "inherent" reason you can't get a HT now, you really don't want to be in a position where you are forced to keep getting more HT's just to stay looking natural as your loss progresses. It's much better to look naturally balding than unnaturally badling. This is what I believe Gatsby means when he refers to "chasing a tiger by its tail", you don't want to be in a posistion where you are FORCED to get more HT's. What if you run out of money? What if you have a life event that means you can't keep going back for more HT's?

Personally I don't think people should really be getting HT's unless they need like 2000 grafts or more (Give or take). That's because HT's don't recreate full natural density, so you're better off waiting until you have some serious surface area to cover so that the result is a serious aesthetic improvement and not just some "meh" minor aesthetic improvement that 99% of people wont even notice. In your case you would need like... 400 grafts or something. It isn't at all worth it. Wait until you're 30 and make a decision then. 

Yes

1 minute ago, wayek said:

can't argue it works though right?! 

just because that happened to me doesn't mean it will happen to everyone who takes it  

 

Good points not gonna lie

3 hours ago, wayek said:

Yeah, I'm not here to scare anybody off the stuff (matter of fact I still support it!) just sharing my experience is all 

I gotta ask... How can you support a drug that very likely gave you Peyronie's...

2 hours ago, Recession1 said:

I don’t think that is an example of how it would look. That guy hasn’t had a transplant. 

Juding by the big strip scar on the back of his head I'd say he has. 

22 hours ago, mister_25 said:

 

1. A touch-up procedure with Hasson.
2. A second procedure with FUEGENIX
3. A second procedure with Ferreira
4. A second procedure with Bisanga
5. A second procedure with Pinto

 

 

 

If I were you I would opt for #1 if the work is free of charge. I know everyone says not to go back to a clinic whose result you weren't happy with the first time, but I think when you're talking about a clinic that is in the top 50 worldwide, the skill difference between that clinic and other clinics in the top 50 is fairly negligible. Maybe I'm wrong but I would just hate to see you pay more money to go to a different clinic to get the same results you could get from Hasson for free. 

17 hours ago, Evan42 said:

Did you get it checked out?  I had a large mass developing on my left testicle also in 2018.  It turned out to be testicular cancer.  Luckily this type of cancer can be cured if you don't wait too long.

I was just joking to make a point, but you're right it isn't a laughing matter. I still remember Tom Green's song from the early 2000's imploring people in a colorful way to screen themselves for testicular cancer. It's worth doing.