Xanadu

4 minutes ago, Gatsby said:

I will be there from January 17th to January 27th.

I will also be there in January myself

On 11/2/2022 at 6:44 AM, Curious25 said:

I understand what you mean now, after updating your original post. 
 

So using 3000 as a generic number on a slick NW6, you are wondering about the difference between focusing all these 3000 grafts on the front vs. focusing 2300 grafts at the front, and maybe 700 across mid scalp and crown? 
 

I imagine this entirely boils down to patient and Dr goals. Maybe, if a small head size, the dr would be concerned about transplanting all 3000 in just the front section, and wished to spread out the recipient area to help lessen the risk of overwhelming the blood supply demands - however in general, from a yield perspective, it shouldn’t really make a difference. 

Yeah, it shouldn't right?

The one way where it might make a difference would be for the second procedure.

In the case of completely bald crown I am guessing it would be easier to place grafts without transsection on the ones already there. In other words they don't have to bob and weave between already exsiting hairs. On the other hand they don't know how many will take, and therefore cannot assess the final density as well.

In the case of having done both crown and midscalp with lower density first, the second procedure might be a bit more tricky (I'm not sure?) due to having to place in between the existing ones, but one has a clearer view of where the weaker spots are and can place there.

Does that sound about right?

2 hours ago, Gatsby said:

Good question @HelpfulFriend. Before I left Australia to have surgery at Eugenix I was very dubious that I was really a candidate for surgery. I was prepared to cancel the surgery then and there in person if they believed I didn't have enough scalp grafts. And I would have. This surgery is forever and no one should ever feel pressured into going ahead with it once you have traveled from overseas. I read this time and time again with patients who wish they had cancelled their surgery after being told a different story once in the chair.

Hi mate. Is there a way to easily find your own results from your profile? 

Maybe consider adding a link like many others have done.

Yes. If we look at 1.08 in the video - that's a nice look (without adding actual SMP). It it can later be cut like that I would prefer that over the final result. 

So it would be nice to see someone with lots of beard have that short after 1 year. Also it would be interesting to see if there is a different from let's say 18 months to 3 years in terms of the beard hairs being more similar to scalp hairs or not. In the video it is very obvious that there is a big difference.

I'm not sure. Borderline, but I'm leaning towards not needed it.

Sometimes I see results where I think the immidiate post-op looks better than the final result. Could one cut it so low that it almost looks like SMP (or slightly longer= and have it look good?

For example this one (final result looks less good because lots of beard grafts were used):

1 hour ago, Mike10 said:

There is a third option. Do nothing and consider shaving head down the route. 

True, but if we go beyond HT there there are many, like a hair piece, smp and so on.

Mostlikely you have two options. Either finasteride (and remember that we have many many in here taking it without problems despite the ones who experience problems shouting the loudest) or a continuous row of HTs to make up for progressing hair loss - until donor becomes too depleted.

21 hours ago, ApexB said:

@Melvin- Moderator I’m late to the party! Man, but so happy for you bro!  I’m a long time lurker and excited to start my own journey with Eugenix soon. Thank you for all your effort and contribution here. 🙌🏽

When is soon?

3 hours ago, Curious25 said:

You’ve had incredible results , and have gone to a seemingly top of his game Dr - but the fact still Remains, a mega session, or any session over 3000 grafts for that matter, is still classed as a higher risk approach to take, purely for the fact of the matter that if you are indeed patient X, and the grafts don’t take - you have lost a huge chunk of a finite resource. 

 

The theory is the same , regardless of whether graft numbers are the same or different between the sessions - the emphasis is placed on being conservative with the graft number in the initial surgery. 

Yes, but the mount is the same in the two approaches, so the amount you will have lost if they don't take is the same. So I don't see any of these being more conservative than the other - do you?

Maybe you could even claim that method 2 is more safe, because at least you will have tested the crown a bit and will have an idea whether it 'takes' or not?

2 hours ago, Curious25 said:

One of the main advantages with a more conservative initial intervention, is for analysis of how the patient takes to surgery, and what his growth rate was. 
 

Aside from that, Surgeries with a smaller number of grafts leads for a higher likelihood of achieving a high graft survival rate, less chance of trauma and transection to the donor, and a better look at the landscape for surgery number 2/3/4 that provides much more accurate planning when it comes to graft numbers/graft groupings/hair types/ areas of allocation etc. 

You just need to take a look at the results of guys on here who have had 1 HT vs. multiple HT’s to see the difference in quality that is able to be achieved. 

 

Yes, that's understandable if the graft numbers differ. But I am seeing cases with very similar graft numbers. The only difference is where they are put. Both are also a two-step approach.

Usually we have seen a two-step procedure (Type 1) with first the front (and perhaps midscalp), and then a separate procedure for the crown.

Recently, however, I have seen clinics do another kind (Type 2) of two-step procedure. First the front is packed well, the midscalp and crown with limited density, and then in a second procedure the midscalp and especially crown are filled in.

I am seeing examples where a similar amount of grafts are used in the first session (around 4000) and second session. Just how they are used is different.

...

I can think of a pro of Type 2 which is that the whole scalp is covered to some degree despite not good density. I guess that would make the period up until the second step a bit more enjoyable?

In terms of cons, I wondered if it was easier to start with a blank slate for crown, rather than have to pack in density? If so, then that might be the reason for Type 1?

1 hour ago, NARMAK said:

Personally i only know he used it because of that one interview where he candidly discussed it and seen nothing else but to let his hair go as an actor usually wouldn't be a good idea so if he did stop, he must have permanently stopped hair loss because his 2022 pictures via Google look smashing for the hair. So i think he's still on it. 

Yeah, it's pretty safe to assume he is on finasteride (or the even stronger blocker dustasteride).

10 hours ago, pkipling said:

The question of whether or not to take finasteride (Propecia) before a procedure gets brought up quite a bit, so here's a video of Dr. G explaining the benefits of doing so. 

TLDW: The main benefits of taking finasteride before a procedure is to help minimize the risk of shock loss. Shock loss occurs in 10-15% of patients, and studies have shown that taking finasteride 30 days before the procedure can cut that risk in half. And while taking finasteride is almost always recommended, it's not a necessity - and even if shock loss does occur without the finasteride, it typically resolves itself within a few months anyway. 

The general consensus around here seems to be to take it before a procedure - even if you don't want to stay on it long term. However, for those of you that are adamant about not taking medication, it's not going to be a big detriment. 

 

 

"It's not going to be a big detriment" - Really?

How are you going to hold on to your pre-existing hair (especially outside the 'safe' zones) then?

6, going on 7.

2 hours ago, Mike10 said:

Nah, I would not touch it. And Kutcher dropped Propecia 

The point is. Lots and lots of men are successfully taking propecia despite what the online forums should have you believe. 

On 10/19/2022 at 10:26 AM, Gatsby said:

And hopefully about 40 in January next year!! 🤣😉👍

Yeah hehe.

Are you going for a last touch up to the crown or stopping here and getting on the powder?

He did, but more importantly...we now know that Elon Musk is on finasteride...along with Aston Kutcher and millions of other men. Keep that in mind next time someone tries to scare you away from finasteride.

On 10/10/2022 at 12:23 AM, Gramatik said:

Firstly thank you for the presentation of your hair transplant. I wish you happy growing. However, I dont think you were good candidate for hair transplant as You are about to be norwood 7. The area that was covered was big and the density will be average in midscalp and crown, without considering the further hairloss progress...

The thinning is progressing towards down to the donor as you can see in the picture below. Anyway, good luck with your procedure and keep on getting finasteride!

 

 

I think it will be good, and a second session can be done with more body hair if needed.

54 minutes ago, botchedguy95 said:

I've never heard that beard grafts take longer to grow,  do you have a source for this claim? 8 months is already a very long time and as far as I've read beard hair is in the telogen phase for 3-4 months just like scalp hair, which means they should pop roughly when the scalp hair does

Very interest ng. Almost full beard. Yes, I belief Beard takes longer to grow and is longer in dormant phase so less are visible at any one time. But it's also usually thicker. This should be fine in another few months.

4 hours ago, Tony711 said:

Hey guys it’s been a while , been very busy, but I thought I stop by and post some pics updates.  
 

It’s been 8 months now since having the procedure done by Dr Sethi , but during all that time I was buzzing my hair to 1/2 thinking I can avoid the ugly duckling stage and the let the hair all grow out after I pass the ugly duckling stage ,but it seems that didn’t  work. And Dr Sethi said I just need to let it grow out and give it until Feb 2023. 
 

anyways since august 1st I have let the hair grow.  Today will be 3 months.  Hair is growing and I feel the mid scalp there are hair coming through. But the density not to excited about.  Hopefully, it will improve as I let it just grow.   So no more buzzing the hair. 
 

 

Why not keep buzzing? It looked more dense when you buzzed

9 hours ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

10 year challenge 27 vs. 37 

People can say what they want to, but hair matters. 

Until recently, I had never really considered hair much - neither in myself or in others. But yes, you are right. That's a remarkable transformation. 

Depends who you are. I have traveled around the world in my job for many years, so traveling would put no extra stress on me. But if it would stress you like you talk about then I can see it's an extra challenge. As most things in life - there is no one size fits all. It depends on you and how you feel about it.

10 minutes ago, BeHappy said:

 

1. I don't know if I'd say they tried to scam you, but the end result does turn out that way. Someone can be the nicest person and really care about you, but that doesn't make them good at their job. This is the same with anything. You could need work on your house and have a good friend tell you he'll do it cheap, but the work he does ends up being a total crap job that costs you a lot more and needs to be totally redone. Did your friend try to scam you? No, but being a good friend doesn't mean he is good at whatever job he tries to help you with. It could be that the Dr you went to has a great personality, but just isn't very good at hair transplants.

 

 

 

True. This is why I'm disappointed when I look at patient reviews on youtube and elsewhere, and then it's only post-operativively (or even before the operation) that the patient says "I reccomend everyone to come to this clinic".

Why? Why, do you recommend that? You have no clue if this will turn out well or not. At least wait until there are results. 

On 10/27/2022 at 3:24 PM, general-etwan said:

The 1/3 of face rule is the aesthetic ideal, but not everyone has equal bottom and middle thirds of the head so it’s not always advisable to go off of that.

Generally 7-10 cm above the point at the top of the nose level with the start of your eyebrows is what is designed. More towards 7 cm if hair loss isn’t advanced, and as long as that low of a hairline will still look normal. A higher one up to 10 cm will look fine on a larger head or an older patient. 

Hairline should absolutely be above the forehead muscle ending. 

As an example, mine ended up being 7.5 cm above my brow, which is lower in that range, even though I had advanced hair loss and thought I went with a more conservative hairline…because my head isn’t as large as some other people. 

This is correct. 8 or even 9cm could look unnatural on a very large head. Hence why 10cm is sometimes the correct choice.