Jon2345

I had my list of questions in my other message but I think the two patients a day are completely justified if they are not mega sessions. The practice has been focusing on the megasessions for a while by getting a large staff. Dr Konior said they're the best in the world for a mega session. H&W are the only place I would trust to do two sessions a day. For example, I read a review by @RTC that Mwamba has been doing two sessions a day due to covid back log. He could be justified in doing that but I would need a lot more information for that if I were considering a procedure from him, as he has a much smaller staff. Though I do feel that the patient absolutely has the right to know if the clinic is doing 2 sessions a day, and the patient absolutely has a right two select a clinic based on that decision. That's why it was concerning op was told 1 patient a day. Luckily it seems that he was ok with it but this should not ever happen again. I would also like to state again that so far we only know that Dr. Hassan has been doing the more controversial points we have read about. As far as I am aware, Dr Wong is more traditional in those respects. This is not a H&W review thread, this is a Dr Hassan review.

Except for the false information given about 1 patient a day, and Dr Hassan barrelling through the patient's concern regarding the temples, I was mostly satisfied with Doug's explanation, but @shiba1985 and @Vann bring up good points. This is a surgical procedure with risk of complications. The Dr should definitely not be at home. I am also curious about what Dr Hassan might be so busy with that he doesn't do the final checkup. I understand he's busy, but I would like to learn more about the process. I don't think I've ever heard of a top doctor not doing a final checkup, and I think it's good for clinics to explain anything that's unique about their practice, because even if it's a justified practice, people may not realize that. I am having a hard time coming up with what could Dr Hassan would be busy with, and there are probably others like me. The clinic deserved a chance to explain potential misconceptions. @Kent These question should be asked and discussed, for the sake of Dr. Hassan's hard earned reputation. If these questions are not answered here, do you think others will simply not think of them? If this discussion doesn't take place, there might be people who are well suited for a procedure from Dr. Hassan, but may turn him away simply because they didn't fully understand Doug's response. At the very least, this is very unusual behavior for a top regarded doctor. Can you think any other top regarded doctor who wouldn't do a final checkup. But unusual doens't mean bad, and people may form misconceptions because of that. Finally, I might add that I don't believe the concerning points in this review or Doug's response are anything that Dr Wong does. In fact, in a recent review they mentioned Dr. Wong washed the patient's scabs himself. Something that could very easily been delegated to a tech.

One thing that hasn't been resolved is the false information given to @Nordster34 Also, @H & W Doug , if Dr Hassan does see an issue and he's at home, what is the process of fixing the issue? Does he drive all the back, or give some sort of instruction to the staff?

I don't see a direct picture of your hairline. But do you feel that grafts may need to be taken out and placed further back? I would consider also reaching out to Cooley, I consider him the king of repairs. And I also saw an amazing repair job of Gabel recently as well. Consult with those and the other people on your list. See how they would approach this.

I think Melvin or some other sr member in another thread said Bisinga is becoming a blonde expert

Man o boy, I would have to say this is uncharacteristic of Hassan. So much so that I may almost believe that the review is not quite accurate, but my instinct is that everything your are saying is true. And for that I may have to stop giving Hassan along my very top recommendations, due to that there are also a very solid number of other very solid doctors, and good communication and taking patient concern is something that should be a criteria for a top doc. I wonder what has gotten into Hassan. Maybe he let his artistic drive let him get the better of him. The pain during surgery is also a wtf. But no doubt, you'll come out looking like a rock star. Here's to an awesome year of transformations.

I appreciate you clearing things up Melvin. I disagree that it has zero to do with transparency, but I respect your viewpoint on that issue, and I strongly absolutely agree that if you don't want to make it any of our business, then it absolutely isn't any of our business. Content creators have full control over their work, period. I also thought you owned the forum. I don't see any other admins on here than you. I know this site was founded by another guy, but I just assumed they passed it down to you because of all your hard work and quality of content. Like Marko said, whoever owns this site is very lucky to have you. Who is the owner of the site ? Might be an obvious answer, my bet is on Pat.

Oh, too good to be true I guess. So is beard hair mostly for crown or restocking donor?

Those are the exact points I brought up earlier. I find it weird that you describe it as being hung up since I have defended his right to not to disclose it in nearly all of my posts. Actually to me it feels like you are dying on a very strange hill. People are adamant in a definition of 'salary' that has no basis in reality. This is so strange. But we are at a point where I have to link to the dictionary definition of what a salary means. "A salary is a form of periodic payment from an employer to an employee," https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salary The phrase doesn't apply to here. Melvin is not an employee of the doctors. The doctors don't have any right to control what Melvin does. None. I feel like people are trying to defend Melvin but at the same time inadvertently making it seem that he a bona fide conflict of interest by claiming that he gets paid a salary by the doctors, which means he has to listen to what the doctors say. But your other points are basically what I have been arguing for. The grants, sponsorships, or whatever term you want to use allow Melvin to make very useful content to the community. The rest of your comment is just so strange to me. I nearly ever single one of my posts I have defended Melvin's right not to disclose that information. You are basically using the same argument I did with 'Don't like it, don't use'. It seems people are conflating terms of 'salary', 'transparency', and 'conflict of interest'. I made a single imploration regarding disclosure for transparency. If Melvin is going to do it, that's his right. I never made another comment towards Melvin. The rest of the comments are just me clarifying people's misinterpretations, and me actually having to defend Melvin because when people say he gets paid a salary by the doctors, it means that he is an employee of the doctors and they have control over his content. That's false, Melvin is in complete control of his content, and any implication otherwise is a weird hill to die on. Like the other guy said earlier, this thread has gone off the rails.

Yeah, that's sort of my point, it's not accurate to think of a grant as a salary. Again, at this point the argument is about semantics. It seems you're really stuck on the money Melvin makes from the sponsors of this website, which is part time and not his main job, as a 'salary'. The forum sponsors are not Melvin's boss. It's a bizarre definition to be honest. As is you not defining it as a potential conflict of interest. Again, another semantics issue, which is doubly bizarre to me considering you're stuck on the salary argument. If you define the money Melvin is getting from the sponsors as a 'salary', then that means the forum sponsors are his boss. That would make the money not a potential conflict of interest, it's a bona fide conflict of interest. But it's not a bona fide conflict of interest. They forum sponsors don't pay Melvin a 'salary'. The forum sponsors aren't Melvin's boss. They don't tell him what to do. Melvin does his work independently. The sponsors can support his work by sponsoring him, but they have no right to have a say in how Melvin conducts this website. They pay Melvin but Melvin asserts his rights to be independent. It's why I brought up the grant analogy. I'm confused at to how you thought I asked for the salary of an employee of Robinhood. I think you may have misunderstood that situation. I brought it up as an analogy to this situation regarding conflict of interests but if you're not familiar with that whole robinhood situation, then you can ignore it as it's only purpose was clarity, and it sounds like it's just causing more confusion. I agree with you on the 3rd paragraph, and it sounds like we agree on Melvin's rights regarding disclosure. Melvin is making money from the sponsors, but he asserts his right to be independent. This whole conversation has gotten way off topic. I appreciate everyone filling me in on how this site works.

People disclose conflicts of interest all the time. Unless I am mistaken, this isn't Melvin's main job, info of his salary from his main job doesn't benefit anybody. Some research groups get grants from institutions if they're studying that institutions' products. By your logic they would be 'disclosing their salary' if they mentioned what the grant was. Another analogy is Robinhood's relationship with Citadel during the whole game stop stuff. Would some people have appreciated if they gave more detailed on their relationship? Sure. Do they have a right to keep that information private, yes. Honestly, the grant is a stronger analogy. Melvin is getting paid by the sponsors, but Melvin also asserts his right to independence. But there interest of transparency in the site's own goals to disclose that information. I can give more examples of conflicts of interest. But at the end of the day, I defend his right to keep the information private. This is private operation. Melvin isn't a congressperson nor is hairrestorationnetwork a federal agency. He has the right to keep anything he wants private. And as I mentioned before, this is doubly so for a service that he's giving away for free. Like I mentioned before, if a grant I took was a conflict of interest in a service I offered, I would disclose it, but only because of my own goals for the service, not because you had a right to it. I feel that I am just arguing semantics at this point, since as far as I can tell, every person here is in agreement that Melvin has a right to keep anything he wants private.

Eugenics did a very impressive job with Melvin's, and what's more impressive is I believe it was done using beard hair.

So why did you say this? I can also accuse you of having an agenda for stirring of a beef that was already squashed and ended amicably. But that benefits nobody, so instead lets talk it out. If this is actually a real concern? If so lets talk it out. If you have a critique about any of my criticism, please go ahead and state it. We can talk it out. The discussion would benefit the OP and others. ad hominem benefits nobody.

Do you use a service that I offer? And if you actually read the rest of my comment, I defend the right to withhold any information he wants regarding his operations. That being said, if I offered a service you use and if there was something that could be potentially a conflict of interest, I would absolutely tell you. I have the right to withhold that information from you, but I would tell you.

I'll have to look at the video, but I do know you gave a fair and honest assessment of Mwamba, it wasn't a fanboy praise. Actually, one detail, the way you brought up Mwamba was doing two procedures a day. It was fairly balanced, but by the same criteria you put me under, would also be considered 'subtly criticized'. Yeah, lets go back to cussing hairmills. screw em