desirehair

See my posts to pages 8 and 9 which will hopefully give you some clarification. This negative crap" as you call it is just what you say - "negative crap" which has no facts behind it, and no basis for being written. It is a lot of sensationalism. In fact I believe it shows a lack or attunement to the patients fears and also shows disrespect for doctors, technology as well as the patient. See pages 8 and 9 of this thread.

Pelo Read my answer on page 8 and 9 of this thread regarding Dr. Bassin

Pelo, You are misleading the public again with your comments involving Dr. Basin and the Neograft machine. Look at this amazing video (link below) on YouTube on the program Health Alert. They are interviewing Ron Doria, someone who works with Dr. Bassin. He had his own transplant done with a Neograft machine after losing hair in a car accident. Our experience is also that many of the doctors who own NeoGraft and many personnel who work in NeoGraft offices have their hair done with the NeoGraft machine. This would not happen if these people, who work with the machine did not think the Neograft hair transplant was the best choice. After all they have seen all kind of hair transplants. Watch this video and I think you owe Dr. Bassin, the Neograft machine, and the techs an apology for your negative comments about the doctor the NeoGraft and the techs. Obviously by looking at the video you can see that there is a happy patient who discusses Neograft. Furthermore, Ron Doria, the patient, also had a prior STRIP surgery. Listen to his comments on the next two links. In case this web site does not allow the video plug for the internet, the reader should go to the Dr. Bassin web site to the see the videos. You can also plug in Ron Doria hair transplant into google and several sites come up with this story. Also check out other testimonials on Dr. Basin's. See Kyle Cassandra's video testimonial. He is the producer of the Mel Robbins show. I am doing this bloggin, for which I have little time, to help the reader get a more correct view of what is going on in hair transplants in general and with NeoGraft. **outside link removed by moderator**

Pelo, Read my answer to Dr. Rahal. When you say in your post: "We've already begun to see the effects of this situation with patients receiving terrible/weak results" you are again misleading the reader. As I explained to Dr. Rahal, the NeoGraft machine has excellent, consistent, reproducible results. The best thing about the Neograft machine, is that it makes it easier for the doctor to get excellent results. But that does not remove the fact that if a doctor has some innate issues such as poor eyesight or hand and eye coordination that the machine can do the same excellent results as if the doctor did not have these issues. The same is true when doctors do hair transplants without NeoGraft. There are plenty of botched hair transplants done by docs who are poorly skilled which has nothing to do with NeoGraft. The Neograft machine is a machine not a person, as such it can repeat over and over again forever a great hair transplant. But the doctor must have a certain level of skill for that hair transplant to be the best it can be. In this respect the training the NeoGraft company does helps the doctor gain that skill. Furhtermore, the NeoGraft company is willing to help the doctor gain those skills as long as the doctor wants or needs more help in order for the doctor to develop good skills. I think it is time to stop denigrating the NeoGraft machine and tell the story the way it is. What you write about the Neograft machine does not make sense. The NeoGraft machine is the best thing to have happened in hair transplants in a long time. Ask the docs who are using it. They are very happy with the machine and recommending it to other doctors. Furthermore as I explained to Dr. Rahal in my post some patients have genetic or other physical conditions which do not allow for the hair transplant to turn out as well as hoped for. Again this is not the docs or the machines fault. When you knock a doctor's hair transplant you do not know if the less than hoped for appearance of that hair transplant had to do the lack of skills of the doctor or the patients issues. I think if you are a consumer hair site and want to guide your readers, this site needs to do better reporting in my opinion.

Dr. Rahal What evidence would you like NeoGraft to post? NeoGraft is a machine. It has been engineered to do excellent hair transplant extractions. Period. If a good operator is operating the machine the machine will do the great job it was built for. All the sites speak about the machine as though it is the doctor. It is not. If a poorly skilled doctor does the transplant with the NeoGraft machine the results will vary. What if the doctor has poor eyesight or poor hand/eye co-ordination? Then the outcome is not the fault of the machine. Even though the machine is automated and reduces the skill level the doctor or tech needs to have to work with the machine, lack of skill will still affect the outcome. Why knock a machine? When any company sells a machine to a doctor they are obligated to train the doctor on the machine. The company is not the "doctor police." Every doctor has a right to buy a machine. Why don't the doctors regulate their own doctors and weed out those doctors that are doing a poor job, due to some issue the doctor has? In the case of Neograft there is an added protection because the techs are involved in helping the doctor and if a tech does not do a good job NeoGraft will not recommend them. This makes using the techs a kind of protection for the patients. Think about that one.

Lorenzo Plug "NeoGraft" into the internet and you will find many of the doctors who have Neograft machines. The list is too long to write out. These top doctors, most of whom are board certified by their speciality, whether they are plastic surgeons, or dermatologists, many who are surgically qualified as well, will show up on the web. These are the doctors that some sites are calling "unqualified!" Again this is not correct information and I believe it is an attempt to "knock" the competition. The true fact is that NO DOCTOR can be qualified or experienced on a NeoGraft FUE procedure or the NeoGraft machine unless they have one, and are trained by the Neograft company how to use it. The hair doctors (most STRIP doctors) who are complaining about the Neograft doctors not being qualified are trying to mix up the public because it is the STRIP hair doctors who are not qualified on the NeoGraft machine. By claiming they have years of experience they are mostly talking about the STRIP method they use for their patients. What does their experience and qualifications (most STRIP docs are not as highly qualified as Plastic and Dermatology docs who buy Neograft) have to do with the NeoGraft FUE method? This whole argument is meant to throw the public off and confuse them as far as I am concerned. I think it is time for these kind of inflammatory comments to stop about the NeoGraft machine. The doctors who buy the machine understand the value of this machine in FUE transplants. The sales of the Neograft machine are increasing every month, and I think that speaks for the machine. The qualifications of the doctor speaks to their ability to do a hair transplant with the Neograft machine. It needs to be said also that on hair blogs, there is often criticism of some hair doctor's work and NeoGraft doctors are not spared. What the public needs to understand is that often the problem is not the doctor. There are risks in any surgery as to the outcome. In hair transplants, the amount of donor hair one has determines how full the hairline looks after a hair transplant. Many patients are still happy with a small improvement, if they do not have a lot of donor hair, but many hair web sites will criticize a hair transplant that is not full head of hair. Yet the doctor did the best with the donor hair the patient had. Furthermore some small percent of patients have poor hair growth. Again, this is not always the doctors fault. For some reason the genetics of some people does not support the follicles from anchoring to the scalp. We are working with some scientists who are experimenting on hair and they have found that the skin of the bald spot in certain patients has greatly thinned and so very little nourishment comes to that part to support the follicle. Perhaps this is a reason for the failure of grafts to grow. Stay tuned as it is my understanding that some new products are being produced to help with this problem.

One of the problems in the hair transplant field is the amount of information that is omitted when writing on some internet about Hair Transplants, which is surprising. Leaving out information does not allow the ;public to know the whole story of hair transplants. Pelo, what I am referring to is that you are carrying on about techs being involved in the NeoGraft FUE hair transplants when you speak about the Neograft machine, but you fail to explain in this thread to the public that hardly any kind of hair transplants are being done or have been done in the past without techs!! They are an integral part of most STRIP Hair doctors practices. The STRIP procedure was the one used for the last 20 years and is still being used today, and mostly always multiple techs are involved. Techs are and always were an important addition to the hair transplant procedure. Why only speak about techs in reference to NeoGraft and not tell this fact about tech involvement in the whole hair transplant industry. If techs are the topic then the readers should know that techs have always been used in the hair transplant industry. In fact the amount of hours techs spend doing their part of the STRIP hair transplant often exceeds the hours a doctor spent or spends on the hair transplant! I have never come across any site that lets readers know that for the last 20 years or more when STRIP was mostly done, because there were not any tools to help do FUE transplants, that the majority of doctors used multiple techs who spent hours extracting the delicate follicles from the portion of scalp that had been excised. The doctor usually surgically removed a portion of scalp and then from 2 to 5 techs would spend the next three hours or more doing what I would call a surgical procedure on the excised scalp, Follicles are FULL ORGANS. They can be dissected in the process of extracting them. These techs were not doctors and yet they were allowed to work with body parts and extract small organs from the removed scalp. No one every wrote in blogs that these doctors were not doing a portion of the hair transplant and that they should be condemned for using techs! Why do so with the Neograft doctors? Even today the majority of Strip doctors have techs do the follicle extractions. In fact I cannot imagine how a doctor would be able to do all the follicle extractions himself if the transplant involved a good number of follicles. It would take him too many hours, which would not good for the follicles or patient. The fact that the scalp is detached from the patient, does not make it less of a surgery. Imagine if your kidney was removed to be implanted in someone else, or your arm was severed and had to be reconnected and in the interim someone worked on that body organ, you would expect that person to be a doctor. And yet in STRIP hair transplants it does not work that way. Once the Strip is removed the techs start excising the follicles. The hair transplant industry, developed using techs and this is now the standard of care for hair transplants. What is important to know is that the techs get the most experience doing a procedure over and over again, whether it is graft removal or other part of the hair transplant and so they are often the most skilled. The hair industry long ago evolved this "tech culture" not Neograft. Furthermore, there is a large percent if not the majority of STRIP doctors that utilize the techs to implant or help implant the follicles into the hair. So techs not only extract follicles but also help implant the follicles in STRIP procedures. I know some doctors may write in and claim they do all their own implanting, but to my knowledge they are the minority. The same with extracting follicles. Some busy doctors run three transplants at one time, how can they accomplish all the implanting and extracting without techs? Why not share these facts with the public when you discuss Neograft? Having said this, I would rather have a tech that spends thousands of hours every year extracting follicles do my STRIP extractions and if they are experienced in implanting I would rather have the tech help the doctor with that part also because it means the follicles are implanted sooner, and the procedure takes less time, all beneficial to the patient and the follicles. NeoGraft techs also have their role in FUE procedures. Each doctor decides for himself what role that should be. Neograft doctors recognize that technology has simplified the hair transplant procedure and there is a place for experienced techs in this procedure, as there was and continues to be in the STRIP method. In medicine there are many technicians utilized for procedures that only doctors did in the past. That is the way of the future as more technology comes on board. Also as I said before, the technology of certain machines, like the Neograft reduces the skill level necessary by the doctor, and techs can do some of the work. Even with the best tech it is recommended the doctor be involved at some capacity as the tech is limited to their skill set and in case any issues arise the doctor is absolutely necessary.

[One of the reasons I don't like NEOGRAFT is it appears they will sell it anyone.] Answer: By"sell it to anyone" do mean a majority of the top surgeons in the U.S who have bought the Neogaft machine? Because that is who is buying the NeoGraft machine!. Most of the hair transplant doctors, who do not have a Neograft machine, have not had any surgical training. They may call themselves cosmetic surgeons or hair transplant surgeons, but they are not board certified surgeons. It is just a name they use. It is the doctors from this group that is not board certified, who criticize to highly trained mostly surgical specialists who buy the Neograft machine. The majority of the hair transplant doctors are family doctors who wanted to do hair transplants and were trained by other hair transplant doctors, most of whom have never had any formal training in surgery. The majority of these non formally surgically trained doctors continue to do and promote the STRIP method. NeoGraft is purposely sold to doctors that are mostly real board certified surgeons and they are the ones who mostly buy the NeoGraft machine. Doing a Neograft FUE hair transplant is not a difficult procedure. It is minimally invasive. Any great surgeon that does complicated surgery on accident victims and on patients with grave conditions could learn to use the machine quite quickly. Furthermore, Neograft, being automated, simplifies the procedure to such a degree that the surgeon, or even a doctor that is not a board certified surgeon can learn to be very competent on this machine. This false rumor of selling to "anyone" was started by the hair transplant doctors who did not have a Neograft machine and were not board certified surgeons. Most of them continue to do STRIP or claim to do an FUE procedure but they do not know how to use the NeoGraft FUE machine unless they have one. Why do they continue to spread false statements about NeoGraft: Most likely they feel threatened by the Neograft machine, as it is competition for their older, more invasive Strip Method. They can earn money with the STRIP method, so many of these doctor may feel they do not want to invest money in a new technique like NeoGraft FUE whereby they have to retrain, even if that technique has many advantages for the patient. folks, I had FUE in February of this year. I am just about to reach 5 months and I already love the growth I am seeing. I had 2159 grafts. People who I told about it have already made genuinely very positive comments about it. I live I. The US now but used to live in Ireland and while I was in Ireland last Friday I went to a barber very good friend of mine for a haircut. I didn't say anything and just wanted to see if he would notice. I got a blade 3 back and sides and trim on top. He asked me "why are you shaving the front of your head and not letting it grow" and I told him what he is seeing are all the FUE transplanted hairs now growing from a surgery in Feb.. He then admitted to doing the same thing in ireland and his hair looks great. For me even 1 week later more has grown and I am very excited about it. I totally respect those who have opted for strip surgery, but I want to say that I am very happy with my neograft FUE. From what I cam see based on the post surgery hair wash photos, everything transplanted looks to be growing and if everything transplanted is not growing yet I have confidence that it will. So in a nutshell I am very very happy with my neograft FUE surgery. Good luck. Doing a Neograft FUE hair transplant is not a difficult procedure. It is minimally invasive. Any great surgeon that does complicated surgery on accident victims and on patients with grave conditions could learn to use the machine quite quickly. Furthermore, Neograft, being automated, simplifies the procedure to such a degree that the surgeon, or even a doctor that is not a board certified surgeon can learn to be very competent on this machine. This false rumor of selling to "anyone" was started by the hair transplant doctors who did not have a Neograft machine and were not board certified surgeons. Most of them continue to do STRIP or claim to do an FUE procedure but they do not know how to use the NeoGraft FUE machine unless they have one. Why do they continue to spread false statements about NeoGraft: Most likely they feel threatened by the Neograft machine, as it is competition for their older, more invasive Strip Method. They can earn money with the STRIP method, so many of these doctor may feel they do not want to invest money in a new technique like NeoGraft FUE whereby they have to retrain, even if that technique has many advantages for the patient. It appears many doctors that I never done hair transplants are trying it with no other experience in hair transplants at all. ] Answer: This is a nonsense statement. The doctors who get the most training in hair restoration are those with board certified Plastic or Dermatological Surgical degrees. Therefore those board certified surgeons who are mostly buying the NeoGraft machine had the most opportunity to get such training. They are also, as mentioned real board certified surgeons. Most of the STRIP doctors who are making these false claims have not had formal surgical training, as I stated above, so they are the least qualified for doing surgical procedures. Anytime a new machine comes out for a medical procedure, doctors are trained on it, as they were with Neograft. It is the same with all specialities. Before the Neograft machine came to the market, there were no doctors who knew how to use NeoGraft. The doctors who make these complaints about "no experience" are the STRIP hair transplant procedure doctors. They may have experience with STRIP but this does not count for the FUE NeoGraft procedure which is different. They are the one's with no expeience in NeoGraft FUE. NeoGraft is an FUE hair transplant procedure which most of the STRIP doctors themselves do not have experience in. The only doctors who have experience in Neograft hair procedures are the ones NeoGraft trains. So how can the STRIP doctors claim that the NeoGraft doctors have "no experience" in a NeoGraft FUE procedure, when they themselves have never been trained on the NeoGraft machine. These STRIP doctors are the ones who have "no experience doing Neograft FUE.". This "no experience" comment is ridiculous to say and meant to confuse the patient to not come to a Neograft doctor, again because the STRIP doctor is worried about losing patients to Neograft. When a doctor is making claims about a NeoGraft doctor not having any experience he means no experience with the STRIP method, like they have. But NeoGraft doctors do not use the STRIP method.!! So does this criticism make any sense!! It is meant to confuse you to bring you, the patient into their office. [up to now I have never seen a great NEOGRAFT result only average at best. None of the world top FUE doctors use it which is enough for me. Why wouldn't a doctor want to use a machine that they say makes things a lot easier. Its probably because they don't believe in it. ] Answer: Again you are mistaken. If Neograft results were not excellent then why would such a large number of renowned doctors who own the Neograft machine have a Neograft hair transplant themselves? These doctors do the hair transplants so they know the procedure better than anyone and yet they chose a Neograft hair transplant for themselves. Furthermore, the NeoGraft company is a very honest company who does not try to fool anyone by only showing the hair transplants of people who had a lot of donor hair from which the grafts could be extracted. Anyone can make a hair transplant look amazing if the patient has a lot of hair to give to the bald spots. Unfortunately many patients do not have a lot of hair to give to the bald spots so the doctors do the best with what hair they have. This is the majority of patients. The Neograft doctor does the best he can with those hair transplants and posts those pictures as well, because that is the honest way to let people know the potential for each person. I hope you reconsider your claims and stop trying to confuse patients. Regardless I wish you the best and hope you have a fantastic result.

You are very misinformed about certain facts regarding NeoGraft. You make claims that are incorrect. I will answer you directly under each sentence I wish to address. Your claims are in parenthesis [like this].

You are very misinformed about certain facts regarding NeoGraft. You make claims that are incorrect. I will answer you directly under each sentence I wish to address. Your claims are in parenthesis [like this].

Bill, This will be my last post about NeoGraft to your forum for a while. Perhaps if things change??¦.. then maybe I will post again. As I said before in several former posts any information given does not seem to get taken in and you return to your original position regardless of the facts or any explanations given to the contrary. There is also speculation and jumping to conclusions about things never said. I cannot see how we can have fruitful dialogue in this forum under these conditions. For example, your comment in your last post and I quote: 'I have no problem with you debating Dr. Feller regarding the use of your machine. But whether you agree with it or not, he has provided a genuine and honest critique of your devise. You're now upset about it because a well respected physician isn't standing behind your machine 100%.' I have pointed out in about 3 or 4 posts in different sections of this forum that Dr. Feller has never seen NeoGraft perform a hair transplant using our full Pneumatic Pressure technique, yet he chose to make negative comments (critique) about NeoGraft without ever having seen our device in action. His critique was based as I said before on pure speculation as his comments were totally incorrect. I keep pointing out over and over again that negative comments made about NeoGraft without ever having observed NeoGraft perform the procedure criticized is not something done in 'good faith' nor is the critique 'genuine' or 'honest ' as you want your readers to believe. Regardless of how many times I have pointed this out in other posts you continue to ignore the real facts that Dr. Feller has never seen NeoGraft do a procedure using the full Pneumatic method and you continue to claim his negative comments were 'honest, and genuine'. Furthermore, you want your readers to believe there is a healthy debate going on with Dr. Feller about NeoGraft. How can we have a debate about a procedure he has never seen? The purpose of my posts has been to point out these facts, not to debate, but I cannot seem to make this clear to anyone. We are going around in circles here as though there is some kind of dialogue to be had about NeoGraft under these circumstances. No dialogue is possible in this framework. Your next comment and I quote: 'It is you who have come to this forum to promote the NeoGraft machine. ' This comment is not accurate. I never came to promote the NeoGraft machine. A doctor who is using our NeoGraft device and is very happy with it discovered Dr. Feller's harsh negative comments about our device on your site and pointed these comments out to me. I came to your site to explain that Dr. Feller had never seen our machine and so his negative comments were not based on any facts. This doctor also pointed out to me Dr. Feller had recently launched his own device. I have no interest in promoting the NeoGraft machine on any forum. My interest is for doctors to come and see the machine do live procedures so that the doctors can judge NeoGraft for themselves. That is why we are doing 4-5 live demonstrations every month throughout the United States. However, no one on this site wants to address the fact that negative comments were made about NeoGraft before seeing Neograft do a procedure. This fact is ignored and then as I have so many times pointed out the negative comments about NeoGraft are classified as 'honest, and genuine' comments. Your next comment and I quote: 'if you have no evidence that the previous generation NeoGraft machines worked, how can you expect us to blindly trust their successor'? This comment is an incorrect assumption . What was there in my previous comments about NeoGraft that makes you think we do not have evidence that the previous generation of NeoGraft worked? The previous generations worked very well and continue to work and be used by their owners. It is like an older model car. They continue to work, but there are always some improvements that can be made to newer models. Your comment and I quote: 'Learning to take genuine and constructive criticism by reputable hair restoration physicians is the basis for further innovation.' We are willing to take constructive and genuine criticism, however, although Dr. Feller is a reputable hair restoration physician and he does excellent work with patients his criticism was not 'genuine' nor 'constructive', because as I said, he had never seen the NeoGraft device when he made his harsh negative comments. He made his comments in March 2009 and he did not see our machine till several months later, and then he saw a totally different procedure than the one he criticized. The procedure he saw worked very well. (These comments I am making I have said over and over again in this post and in other posts.) This back and forth dialogue has gone on for too long. It is a simple matter of clarifying with Dr. Feller the dates of when he wrote his comments and when he first observed NeoGraft. Why not ask him to give you the timeline. That should settle this discussion once and for all and put an end to it. In answer to your question: 'NeoGraft increases the number of potential candidates for FUE compared to what...previous generation NeoGraft machines?......... there's no way you can make the above bold claim in comparision to tools you haven't evaluated. And since you haven't listed what you're comparing NeoGraft to, this claim makes no sense.' In the comment I made you are referring to, I was not comparing NeoGraft to other tools or previous machines but to the manual FUE technique. In general, I have not been comparing NeoGraft to other tools in the posts on your forum or anywhere else, but only to the manual FUE technique. Our goal with NeoGraft was to improve the outcome of a manual FUE and not to compare NeoGraft to other tools. We will leave that to the doctors. When something is unclear in my posts there is no need to call my comments 'nonsensical.' I am happy to clarify anything which was not clear in my post. In giving information about NeoGraft we have stated that NeoGraft uses positive and negative pneumatic pressure, allowing a "no touch, no handling, no use of tweezers" method for the grafts. This is also stated as a comparison to the Manual FUE technique and not in comparison to other tools. I cannot speak of other tools I have not seen and I do not think Dr. Feller should have commented about NeoGraft, until he had seen NeoGraft do the procedure he commented on. I do agree with your comment 'Because even if you put the best tool in the hands of an unskilled surgeon, poor results are inevitable.' NeoGraft is a tool in a doctor's hand. However it is a tool which considerably improves the quality of work compared to doing a manual FUE procedure. Transections are greatly reduced and the process is speeded up, compared to manual FUE. At our demonstrations doctors are personally able to view the grafts which are harvested, including any that were transected. They also view the grafts being implanted. As I said in other posts we are doing everything to be open and transparent. Finally, as I explained in my previous post we are working hard to grow our pictorial portfolio. This takes time, as we are new to the U.S. and do not want to publish results from doctors in other countries, but from doctors that Americans can contact in their own country. This is why we do live demonstrations. We believe this is as good as or maybe better than any pictures. Doctors can follow up on the patients to see the progression of the results of the NeoGraft procedure as the demonstrations are done in the same location where the patients and the doctors reside . As I said, I am signing off for a while. I cannot continue to repeat the same information over and over again and keep getting the same unresponsive response. Hopefully we can discuss another topic at a later date.

I want to correct a statement I made about follicles growing after death. It seems this is a strongly held belief by many, including people in the medical community, however after investigating, I found out that the hair growth is an illusion based on the fact that as the skin dries out it pulls away from the follicle making it appear the follicle has grown. Sorry for this bit of misinformation. Bill, I am addressing my next comments to you. We feel that this forum has not been behaving in a respectful, scientific and information sharing manner when it comes to NeoGraft. Nor is there openness to learning truths about NeoGraft and how it operates. We feel our posts fall on deaf ears as we try to explain that false negative information about NeoGraft has been generated on this site. I suppose our 'demeanor' reflects our frustration and disappointment with this site. Here is our experience with this site. As soon as NeoGraft arrived on the scene in the U.S. Dr. Feller posted very harsh non- evidence supported negative comments about NeoGraft. I say non-evidence supported because he has never to date seen NeoGraft perform a full Pneumatic Pressure procedure. If he had seen the procedure he so harshly criticized he would have seen very robust, intact grafts harvested by NeoGraft with a low transaction rate. The full Pneumatic Pressure method is our primary procedure that we teach doctors and is the one Dr. Feller so harshly criticized, never having seen this procedure!! The day Dr. Feller came to one of our demonstrations he saw a second type of procedure which NeoGraft performs that is similar to the one Dr. Feller does with his tool. The grafts were scored and harvested with tweezers during this procedure. On that day we did not demonstrate the full Pneumatic Pressure method. We teach doctors both methods. The grafts harvested with this procedure were excellent according to the doctor and tech who did the procedure. Why did Dr. Feller not mention this in his post, instead of making negative comments about a procedure he had never seen? This type of reporting amounts to speculation and does not belong in a forum as this. Furthermore Dr. Feller's speculative, non- evidence supported negative comments have been accepted as 'truths by himself and by yourself it seems since you mention in your post and I quote: 'Honestly, whether or not the NeoGraft machine is credible is much less of an issue for me than how they've been promoting it and their argumentative demeanor against anyone who offers an honest critique of the machine.' Bill, which 'honest critique' are you referring to? The one Dr. Feller made? We have tried several times to post and explain that Dr. Feller has never seen our device do the procedure he critiqued and yet you still speak of 'honest critique' and Dr. Feller replied when I pointed out the same thing to him that his negative comments were 'made in good faith.' What good faith is there in what amounts to speculation, since his negative comments were not based on any evidence or experience with NeoGraft's full Pneumatic technique? The level of negative comments Dr. Feller generated can only hurt us in the public domain and this is not fair, especially since his comments are absolutely and totally inaccurate and show he has never had experience with NeoGraft. This has been very disturbing to us. We would never do this to his tool - attack his tool in the same way based on no evidence and on no experience with his tool. This would be unfair to him as false negative information has a way of embedding itself in the minds of those who could benefit from a device and causes the image of the device to be unnecessarily harmed. So if you and others insist on accepting 'false truths' about NeoGraft and calling them 'honest critiques' or 'good faith comments', I suppose it will be difficult for us to change our demeanor. Next, I want to comment on another statement you made. You stated and I quote: 'However, I have problems with anything that claims a single approach is the perfect solution for all. Unless NeoGraft can adapt to individual patient characteristics, then I will remain skeptical for now.' It is comments like this that makes us question your site. You seem to use a different yardstick for NeoGraft than for others. First of all we do not 'claim a single approach.' NeoGraft is a tool in a doctor's hand that helps simplify and improve the FUE procedure. Every doctor who has a NeoGraft device can still do a manual STRIP procedure or anything else he deems more beneficial to the patient. The STRIP procedure may be useful for a patient who has a small donor area for example. NeoGraft however, increases the number of patient who can have an FUE procedure done, such as people of colour, and many of those who would not pass the FOX test as with NeoGraft there is a low transection rate. (Ask our techs, or the doctors who perform the demonstrations by e-mailing them through our (promotional link removed) site. Before the FUE method came along, which was not too long ago, all the doctors were doing transplants using the STRIP method. Is this not a single approach? Are you skeptical of this approach? Most STRIP doctors use only STRIP and do not do FUE. What about those patients whose characteristics would be more suitable for FUE and yet they are with a doctor who only does STRIP? It is NeoGraft's position FUE is a less invasive and less painful procedure with fewer complications, no elongated scars, fewer complications and less downtime. For those that are candidates for FUE this procedure is therefore the more beneficial procedure for the patients. If these patients however go to a STRIP doctor they will get a STRIP procedure, which is definitely a single approach but I have never read this is a problem before. NeoGraft simply does the same kind of FUE procedure as other tools do but with the assistance of Pneumatic Pressure. We are not restricting the doctors to only the FUE approach as the only 'single approach'. Therefore it is inaccurate to say we are a single approach tool. Do you question whether doctors who do not use NeoGraft 'adapt to individual patient characteristics'? It makes no sense to claim we do a 'single approach.' Comments like this stick in the minds of those who read them and once again cast unnecessary and not reality based negative shadows on NeoGraft. We are feeling bruised and have not earned the bruises. I think it would show good will to NeoGraft if more questions were asked and less absolute negative comments made about NeoGraft, that are not based in in any reality at all. We are very willing to share all of our knowledge and information openly about NeoGraft. But we do not want to be defending ourselves against false speculations in so many of your posts. The whole exercize is ridiculous, and frankly a waste of our time because all we are doing is damage control. NeoGraft either works or it does not. Check it out before posting such damaging comments. That is the only fair and proper thing to do. Now let me address pictorial evidence. NeoGraft has been in existence for over 10 years in parts of Europe and parts of Asia. The version we have in North America is the latest third generation of this device. We have excellent pictures of transplants from Europe and Asia but we are not posting these as we want to post pictures done with this newer version of NeoGraft and also we want to post pictures of procedures done in the U.S. This is our company policy. We are in the process of building up our picture base, since we are new to the U.S. Some of our pictures are posted on our Neografters.ning.com site and many of our pictures are posted on Dr. Bauman's site. We have many more pictures to post and will shortly do so. For now it is best to view pictures on those sites. As I mentioned on this site before, we do live demonstrations for doctors every month all over the country. Our live demonstrations are open to any doctor and many come to see our demonstrations. We are trying to be as transparent as possible. I am sorry Bill that you were not informed about any demonstrations in your part of the country, but we have not demonstrated yet in your area. We do four to five demonstrations in cities a month so it will take us a long time to work our way through the U.S. However, I believe we are trying to schedule a demonstration in PA. fairly soon. Keep in touch with our NeoGrafters web site as we post our demonstration dates and places on that site. I can also contact you when a demonstration comes to your State. I changed my signature, as I see that my former one did not meet your guidelines and I hope this one follows your guidelines.

I am affiliated with NeoGraft. You are correct and I am mistaken that the follicles continue to grow after death. This is apparently a very well established myth that has been around for a long time. It only appears as though the hair continues to grow as the body is dehydrating and the skin is shrinking back from the follicle. In my research however, I did find articles that state that the only part of the body that continues to grow for a short while is the hair follicle as it has some of its own blood supply. However the majority of the posts seem to support that hair growth after death is a myth, so I will go with that. My apologies.

I am affiliated with NeoGraft. I am responding to scar 5's post which mentions a comment Dr. Feller made about NeoGraft . Scar 5 writes Dr. Feller 'points out the drying effect' of NeoGraft. I have personally written on this forum to Dr. Feller letting him know that it was not scientific or in good faith to make comments about the grafts harvested with NeoGraft before having seen a demonstration of NeoGraft operating with full pneumatic pressure. The demonstration Dr. Feller did see with NeoGraft was one where the grafts were scored and pulled with tweezers as his tool does and then they were put into solution. At that demonstration we did not use the full Pneumatic Pressure method we normally use in our demonstrations where the graft is gently lifted by the suction and transported to a reservoir. The grafts harvested by the procedure we used when Dr. Feller was at the NeoGraft demonstration did not go through the tube to the reservoir. Dr. Feller has not till today to my knowledge ever seen the full Pneumatic Pressure method as demonstrated by NeoGraft and his comments were not based on first hand observation. NeoGraft has 2 different methods to harvest grafts and Dr. Feller saw only one of them, the one which is similar to the procedure his uses. The grafts that were harvested at the procedure that Dr. Feller saw were of excellent quality. The grafts we harvest with our other faster method, which is with full Pneumatic Pressure are of the same excellent quality, but there are less complications to the grafts with our full Pneumatic Pressure method. I believe Dr. Feller was unaware that Neograft is engineered to pull moisture into the tubing and reservoir from time to time in order to keep the grafts moist. Without that knowledge Dr. Feller was speculating that the grafts would dry out, but this does not happen since the grafts are regularly moistened as is the tubing and reservoir. Furthermore, the reservoir where the grafts are kept is emptied out very often and grafts are placed in solution, the same as with the manual method or Dr. Feller's method. One of the benefits of using NeoGraft, as compared to other tools used for FUE harvesting is that with NeoGraft the graft does not have to pulled, yanked, or twisted with tweezers or rescored with other instruments. NeoGraft harvesting is a "no touch" method. There are risks for harming the grafts when they are pulled, yanked or rescored. Any time one yanks, pulls, or rescores a graft the graft may become transected. NeoGraft's full Pneumatic Pressure method for implanting follicles is also a "no touch" method. Without NeoGraft the grafts that are going to be implanted have to be squeezed and pushed into the receptor sites with tweezers and other instruments whereas with NeoGraft the grafts are placed with negative Pneumatic Pressure into the sites. In addition with NeoGraft's Pneumatic Pressure method there is less chance of the follicles popping out or being buried. We teach doctors both method's, the one that uses tweezers which other doctors use including Dr. Feller and our full Pneumatic Pressure "no touch" method. The reason we teach the doctor's both methods is so that they can fall back on the method other doctor's, including Dr. Feller use which is the one that extracts and implants the grafts with tweezers in case an electrical or power outage occurs and the NeoGraft device can not be used. NeoGraft is very open and transparent about its procedure. NeoGraft does about 4-5 live hair transplant demonstrations around the country using NeoGraft and doctors attend and are able to see the quality of our grafts. We want doctors to see the quality of a NeoGraft transplant. Several months ago we did 2 live demonstrations on the internet. This was a first and we had the largest audience ever on the internet view this procedure- thousands viewed it. In addition one of the patients was Kevin Nalty who had been the former director of Propecia for Mercks, the FDA drug approved for hair loss. He is very well acquainted with all the hair restoration doctors and knows a great deal about follicles (grafts) since his work as director of Propecia was totally focused on hair and he chose NeoGraft to do his procedure live on the internet. The second patient on the internet was his friend Greg Benson, an actor. Dr. Ken Williams, who uses NeoGraft for his patients has just had his second hair transplant done with NeoGraft. You can view him at our web site Neografter.ning.com Other pictures are there as well and more are coming. Dr. Alan Bauman has pictures of NeoGraft follicles on his web sites. Let me say one last thing. Follicles are usually more robust than many doctors would have us believe. I was told that after someone dies and all the fluid has been removed from the body for embalming, the follicles continue to grow for about 10 days. If that is so I do not think anyone needs to be concerned about follicles or grafts drying out that are out of the body for two to four minutes which are being moistened while out of the body with NeoGraft's ability to do so. As I said before, I am affiliated with NeoGraft.

Dr. Feller, I am affiliated with NeoGraft. On March 30, 2009 in this forum you wrote: "The neograft also features the use of suction to aid in the extraction process. This suction serves no useful purpose and is indeed a danger to the graft in that it will increase the chances of desiccation due to the continuous airflow over the graft. But those aren't my biggest objections. The real problem is that this device requires the graft to travel through the punch and down a tube. Many FUE grafts splay out at the deep root, which means the chances of it getting clipped by the sharp edge of the punch is quite high. The second problem [with NeoGraft] is that as the graft is being desiccated while being sucked through the punch and the tubing, it is also being physically traumatized as it slams against the walls of the tubing as it travels on it's tortuous path toward the collection basin after which the graft has to be picked free of the other debris that travelled with it." You wrote those criticisms of NeoGraft before you had ever seen a procedure done with NeoGraft. Your post above was written on March 30, 2009, but I believe you did not see a procedure with NeoGraft until several months later, around June, 2009 one month before the ISHRS meeting in Amsterdam. How were you able to offer such harsh criticism about a machine and a procedure you had never seen? When I wrote to this site about your negative comments you answered : 'My comments about the negatives of your product were made in good faith, are colorable, and justified.' How could this be so when these comments were made several months before you had ever seen a NeoGraft demonstration! In that case your comments were pure speculation and not evidence based. This is not good faith. Furthermore, at the NeoGraft demonstration you attended, which as I said was a few months after your critical comments, our tech did not use the full suction method but an alternate method which NeoGraft is able to perform. Therefore you never saw the grafts move through the tube to the reservoir and have never seen the technique you criticized performed till today. As I explained in an earlier post, the tech was not following company policy by not demonstrating both methods because the tech was disgruntled due to personal demands the tech was making that NeoGraft could not support. He is no longer with NeoGraft. Your comment in one of your posts that you believed the technician ' was in good standing with your company not only up to the time I saw him perform a procedure, but well beyond as he was in the product booth right next to mine during the Amsterdam scientific meeting' is totally inaccurate. At the time you spoke with our tech he was our only tech and we needed to work with him. The fact you believed we were having okay relations with the tech during that period of time simply attests to the good front we put up in order to hide our situation. (Like married couples do while preparing to divorce). The fact that our former tech and the NeoGraft group were able to work together for a certain amount of time before parting, attests to the complexity of human beings and shows that many things are possible in human relationships. We now have four techs working with us and are training others as well. The comments our former tech made to you about NeoGraft are not supported by any of the other highly skilled techs that work with us now, nor the doctors using our machine. We mainly demonstrate the full pneumatic method, the one you have never seen. We teach doctors both methods. I will leave it to your imagination why our former tech made any comments to you about NeoGraft during the very difficult time we were having with him. Our current techs have many years experience working with other doctors, both in FUE and in Strip and can attest to the quality of the grafts harvested by NeoGraft's full pneumatic pressure method. The following information may help you understand why your comments do not apply to NeoGraft. With the NeoGraft device the doctor controls the pneumatic pressure and uses just the right amount of pressure for each individual so that the grafts are gently harvested and transported to the reservoir. No hands touch, pull, yank or push the grafts during harvesting or implanting as with all other FUE tools. The grafts are kept moist because the doctor or tech has the ability to suction some saline solution into the tubing to keep the tubing, the reservoir and the grafts moist. Hence no dessication occurs. The notion of the 'grafts getting clipped by the punch' is incorrect. NeoGraft has one of the lowest transaction rates we have seen. We record the number of transections in all live demonstrations attended by many doctors. How many doctors do you know willing to put themselves under such scrutiny? There are many technical reasons for the low transaction rate and one of them is the suction. Your comment that 'this suction serves no useful purpose and is indeed a danger to the graft' is incorrect. It is the assistance of the suction that produces the excellent quality of grafts harvested with NeoGraft. As you know we do about 4-5 live demonstrations a month for doctors around the country and every doctor is welcome to come and see for themselves the excellent grafts harvested by NeoGraft. The demonstrations are free to doctors. The grafts require no trimming. We post the demonstration dates and locations on neografters.ning.com The NeoGraft group will also come to any doctors office to do a live demonstration. I believe our demonstrations show complete transparency. We expose everything. We have done enough live hair transplant demonstrations around the country at this point with NeoGraft that many doctors have seen the quality of a NeoGraft procedure. Members of the forum suggested we post pictures of NeoGraft patients. Dr. Williams, who is on our neografters site, is the first doctor who received a NeoGraft hair transplant. You can see the excellent results of the before and after pictures of him on our neografters.ning.com web site. He has since had his second NeoGraft transplant and we are waiting for more pictures. Dr. Williams also offers transplants using the NeoGraft device. What better verification can you ask for than a doctor using his own device on himself. He is very happy with the results of his hair transplant. There are other pictures of NeoGraft procedures on our neografters web site as well. Kevin Nalty the former director of the drug Propecia for Merck, chose NeoGraft for his procedure which was done live on the internet. He could have chosen any doctor for his procedure as he was closely connected with many of the hair restoration doctors but he chose NeoGraft. His friend Greg Benson, an actor also had a live NeoGraft transplant done on the the internet. These live internet procedures drew the largest one time internet audience ever. We are very proud of the work we are doing to be very open and public with NeoGraft. You also refer in your post to NeoGraft as being just another "spinning punch." This is inaccurate criticism as well. NeoGraft is not a spinning punch. NeoGraft does not spin when doing a hair transplant. It rotates in an arc, just enough to gently score the follicle. The rotation is controlled by the doctor as is the pneumatic pressure. One of the benefits of NeoGraft, as I pointed out before, is that no human hands pull, twist and yank the grafts with tweezers, actions that can damage the grafts, and could be called 'torturous and traumatic' ??“ the words you chose to describe a NeoGraft procedure. NeoGraft also has a tool that uses reverse pressure to implant the grafts, avoiding once again human hands tweezing, pushing, and shoving the graft in order to implant the graft, all actions that can damage the grafts. With NeoGraft, there are less chances for buried grafts and popping grafts. One more thing needs to be said, if we are to be honest. The NeoGraft group, like others, wants to protect and preserve every graft. However, in reality the grafts are more robust than some doctors would have one believe. If they were so fragile, then very few follicles would survive either the FUE or STRIP method. With the Strip method for example, many technicians sit under the hot lights of their microscopes cutting the strip of hair that has been excised from the scalp. These lights are very drying to the follicles and could cause dessication. The strip is cut further into smaller sections and given to several techs, who then cut the strip into follicles. All this happens under these hot lights. Both the strip and follicles are often not in any moisture for a while, only getting misted by the technician intermittently, putting them in danger of drying out, and they are handled quite a bit by the technicians leaving them prone to damage. No one writes about that. Of course a caring technician will assure the grafts are kept moist,and gently handled, but there are cases where this does not happen. Nonetheless, most of those follicles will grow again once transplanted. In NeoGraft's case as I pointed out the doctor draws liquid into the tubing to moisten the grafts and the reservoir is emptied very often to prevent drying. I have been told that when someone dies and the moisture is removed from their body for embalming, the hair follicles continue to grow for up to ten days! This shows the robustness of the follicles. Furthermore, no one mentions that with the Strip method many follicles are damaged when the strip is excised and more follicles are at risk for damage every time the strip is cut up into smaller pieces for the techs, as well as when the tech tries to separate follicles from the strip. With manual FUE there is damage possible also as mentioned above because there is a high transaction rate generally with manual FUE. Furthermore, as stated, grafts can be damaged when they are 'tweezered' during harvesting and implanting. NeoGraft offers important advantages. One is speed, which reduces the cost of what is usually a very expensive manual FUE procedure, the way NeoGraft is engineered allows for a low transaction rate, there is no touching or tweezing of the grafts, there are less complications, reduced down time than with the Strip method and more patients are qualified for an FUE procedure with NeoGraft due to the use of pneumatic pressure. As I stated above, I am affiliated with NeoGraft.

In my last post I mentioned Dr. Feller had not seen NeoGraft perform a transplant. Dr. Feller responded he had seen one but that the tech who was using NeoGraft did not allow the graft to be sucked through the tubing...rather he chose to score the graft and pluck it separately. This is another method that NeoGraft has incorporated into it's procedures, but I want to make it clear that pneumatic pressure is still used with this method as well. Only the pressure is reduced. The reduced pneumatic pressure gently sucks the graft out after being scored but the suction only raises the graft above the scalp, rather than lifting it completely from the scalp. This method makes it much easier to remove the graft with tweezers than a manual FUE method. This is an alternate method possible with NeoGraft that a new doctor can fall back on if the hair is very splayed. However, having said that our doctors are using the full suction and reverse suction method with patients of colour whose hair is splayed and getting excellent results. Again it depends on the experience and skill of the doctor and on the difficulties some patient's hair presents which method will be used. For most cases it will be possible to harvest grafts with the full pneumatic pressure. Using the full pneumatic pressure requires a little more skill but with sufficent training and practice, which NeoGraft offers, that skill is gained. It is unfortunate Dr. Feller did not see NeoGraft operate with full pneumatic pressure which is used to fully extract and then implant the grafts. Dr. Feller, could not have known that the information he was given by the Tech about extracting grafts using NeoGraft's full pneumatic pressure was given to him during a time when there were serious issues pending with this tech which we will not discuss. During this time this tech was disgruntled and not showing good will, nor following NeoGraft instructions to train doctors in both methods. The alternate method Dr. Feller saw is easier to teach. I will not say any more about this situation, however, shortly after Dr. Feller saw the alternate procedure that is possible with NeoGraft, NeoGraft and the tech parted company. Since then we have trained several new techs who have been teaching all doctors both methods and getting very good results with both methods. Every doctor in the country is invited to come and see our live demonstrations, which include both methods. We are doing four demonstrations in the next two weeks. Go to NeoGrafters.ning.com where NeoGraft posts it's Live Surgery Workshops. Or go to NeoGraft.com (watch for our new web site) and e-mail us that you are interested in seeing a demonstration or google NeoGraft and our web site comes up. The Neografters.ning.com web site is a site where doctors can share information. Patients and others are welcome also. Any doctor that really wants to see NeoGraft in action can invite NeoGraft to come to their office to do a live demonstration. Contact us by going to either of our web sites. I think seeing NeoGraft personally will answer all the questions and eliminate all the false information about NeoGraft on the internet from individuals and doctors who have not seen NeoGraft perform a transplant procedure. As for some of the questions on this site of cost, each doctor will have a different price. You need to check. Questions about doctors using NeoGraft, many doctors have bought the NeoGraft machine, but have not yet posted their websites. There are three doctors on NeoGrafters.ning.com who do NeoGraft FUE procedures. These doctors have experience using NeoGraft. The question on the site about body hair, is that it is possible to do FUE with body hair, either manually or with NeoGraft.

I cannot understand why the member who calls himself, or herself Please Grow Please is knocking Dr. Alan Bauman - "anything Alan Bauman endorses worries me." This kind of statement is pretty strong and should be substantiated before being allowed on the internet. Unless you mean to do harm to someone with innuendos, why not let us know what it is about Dr. Bauman that worries you? We would all like to know so we can be honestly informed. As far as I know he is one of the most sought out hair transplant doctors in Florida, doing a very large number of transplants a year. Since he acquired a NeoGraft machine he has been even busier. If patients did not think highly of him do you think he would be such a popular choice among patients? Last month and several months before two people had transplants done with him that could have chosen any other doctor. One was Kevin Nalty who was the former director of Propecia, and now does marketing on the internet. He could have gone to any hair restoration doctor since he probably knows more about hair restoration than most people from his propecia experiences, but he chose Dr. Bauman and NeoGraft to do his procedure. The procedure was done using NeoGraft live on the internet. Thousands of people watched. Next Dr. Bauman did a hair restoration for Kevin Nalty's friend, Greg Benson, someone in the film industry and this procedure was also done live on the internet using NeoGraft. It drew a huge audience. Dr. Bauman is technically savvy and he understands how NeoGraft works. As a result he understands the value of NeoGraft in his practice and for his patients. You can follow Kevin Nalty and Greg Benson on the internet as they are regularly showing videos and pictures of their transplants so people can see how their hair is growing and how successfully NeoGraft does hair restoration surgery. They are doing this to help educate the public about FUE and NeoGraft. As for Nuhart. they do not use NeoGraft. They do a manual FUE procedure and they call this procedure neografting. NeoGraft is an automated hair transplant machine that speeds up the process of transplantation, extracts excellent quality grafts which do not trimming, and helps the grafts to remain more robust because they can be transplanted more quickly. With NeoGraft the grafts are not handled manually, which avoids the damage that can be done to the grafts with a manual FUE procedure where the grafts are pulled or yanked out with tweezers and pushed in with instruments. I hope this clears up the confusion.

I have to agree with a former post of Doug Monty's that this site is very anti-NeoGraft. Your site outwardly projects education but your extreme bias shows up very clearly and serves to protect certain doctors that your site chooses to represent. Many of these doctors have their own tools they want to sell. NeoGraft is a competition for them. How can so many doctors and people who write on this forum make such bold, seemingly knowledgeable statements about NeoGraft, when they have never seen NeoGraft in action? The only thing transparent on this site is the biased stand this site has about NeoGraft. For example, Dr. Feller has never seen NeoGraft perform. I happen to know because I am affiliated with the NeoGraft team. Yet, Dr. Feller writes with so much misplaced authority that NeoGraft generates Torsion, Overheating, Traction etc. This sounds as though NeoGraft is committing FOLLICULAR HOMICIDE!! This kind of speculation from such an esteemed doctor as Dr. Feller is an attempt to do harm in the public domain to our machine. This was not honest reporting by Dr. Feller. Doctors are trained in the scientific method. How scientific is made up speculation about how NeoGraft works? The NeoGraft Staff have never publicly commented on his tool, nor would we ever, unless we had used it ourselves and discovered if there were any shortcomings. Do not forget Dr. Feller has a hand tool he is trying to sell as well. Might you not wonder about his motive to write such a scathing, but totally wrong rendition about how NeoGraft works? Here is some real information about NeoGraft. NeoGraft is meant to be used as a tool in the doctor's hand. The tool is ergonomically angled to help the doctor get the right angle to extract the graft. The tool forces the doctor to angle his hand and therefore assists in getting the proper angle. It is hard and tiring to keep your hand angled on you own when doing a manual procedure. This is one of the reasons manuel FUE has so many transections and NeoGraft does not. The beauty of NeoGraft technology, is that NeoGraft is powered but is the only tool where the doctor can control the power of the tool. Before NeoGraft, those wanting FUE had to have a fox test to see if they were candidates for FUE. Many patients were not. With NeoGraft's technology almost everyone can be a candidate, even people of colour, who's hair splays tremendously. In fact one of the first demonstrations done live by NeoGraft was with an African American and the procedure worked brilliantly. The only one's who may not be a candidate are those with a very small donor area. NeoGraft can however work with other hair that grows on the the body. Whether to go that route is between the patient and doctor's assessment. NeoGraft if not like other roto drills. With NeoGraft the doctor can control the arc which the drill goes through, which with Neograft is a very minimal rotation. This tool does not whirl around like others. It makes the slightest move and stops once the follicle is cored. Hence, no heat is created. A doctor doing a manual FUE does the same thing only in many instances the scalp is tough and it take soooo long to core out all those grafts. NeoGraft makes this part of the procedure easy and effortless. It is hard to core the scalp manually, because the skin is tough. NeoGraft speeds up the process. This is an advancement. Any yet some of the contributors on this site actually dismiss this important advancement. One of the reasons FUE has not caught on is because of the tedious, laborious amount of time needed to do FUE. And FUE by hand produces a high transection rate. Probably in the range of 10-30 or more percent. Doctors get tired and their hand cannot keep up the required effort needed to core out all the grafts. With NeoGraft, an experienced doctor may transect from 1 to 5 percent at the high, which is excellent. We have studies to show this is possible. With Strip there is also a lot of transection when the piece or pieces of scalp are cut out. There are also transections when the technicians cut up the scalp into follicular unit. But no speaks of that. I am curious why anyone would talk about less doctor dedication when automation is used , or that a physicians touch is so important when our studies show that doing a manual FUE produces a much higher transection rate than with NeoGraft? Someone else, who has never seen the NeoGraft perform wrote," the introduction of SPEED into the FUE process is detrimental to overall yield." I am assuming by yield you mean the quality of the yield. On the contrary, SPEED in NeoGraft has nothing to do with the quality of the yield. The doctor has everything to do with the quality of the yield. But NeoGraft helps the doctor get a better quality because of how it is engineered. the doctor and Neograft work as a team. If the doctor uses our tool properly he will get an excellent yield. We are proud to show NeoGraft's capabilities. Almost three months ago Dr. Bauman did a live hair transplant surgery that was watched by thousands of people on the internet. People were given advanced warning for the event. Kevin Nalty was the patient. He worked for Mercks pharmaceuticals as the director for Propecia and he is also an internet marketing guru watched by millions of people. He knew most hair transplant doctors and what they did and yet he CHOSE the NEOGRAFT machine to do his hair transplant. He is constantly updating his transplant videos on the internet to publicly show people how great his transplant is doing. The follicles were made public. You can see them and Kevin Nalty on the sites below. Furthermore, Greg Benson, an actor and another internet marketing Guru, like Nalty, also chose to have his transplant done live on the internet just last month. Thousands watched this video also. He is also updating his videos so you can see his terrific hair transplant. NeoGraft has transplanted over 3000 grafts in one session. The NeoGraft Company is doing live hair transplants for doctors all over the United States. We are doing several of these a month. We are not afraid to show doctors our machine and how wonderfully it performs. The machine you speak of in your forum is not NeoGraft. It is a made up NeoGraft, made up in the minds of people who have never seen it perform. I think you should not allow a thread like this as it confuses the people who could really benefit from a NeoGraft procedure. Like our video says, our procedure is less painful, we have less complications like cutting veins and damaging nerves, there are no large elliptical scars. You get mostly invisible scars with FUE and the worst is some tiny white marks which are covered over by hair. There are always exceptions because people are different, but most people get no visible scars. There are no buried grafts with NeoGraft that can cause problems, no yanking and pulling with tweezers and no tight scalps as some people experience. Most Strip doctors do not tell you all these possible complications. Everyone is welcome to our demonstrations. Go to our website (promotional linke removed) and e-mail us that you would like to view one and we will arrange it. We are proud to show NeoGraft to anyone willing to see it. Here are some sites that may interest you. Dr. Williams had a NeoGraft hair transplant himself. Look at his great 6 months post op pictures. He was so happy with his results bought our machine and is doing hairtransplants for others. Below is his site. (promotional link removed) Here are more sites. Also google neograft. (promotional link removed) (promotional link removed) (promotional link removed) (promotional link removed) (promotional link removed) (promotional link removed) (promotional link removed) (promotional link removed)