youngsuccess

Some people use emu oil I think, but I don't know that there is any compelling evidence that it works.

The studies I have reviewed seem to indicate that on average, hair count is increased for up to 5 years; after 10, the person is back to where he started before taking the drug. So that suggests to me that it can maintain for 10 years. This of course is me trying to be optimistic about it. A lot of the information on Balding Blog seems to contradicts itself. Regarding finasteride, one blog says it will last for 5 years, another 10... I remember Dr. Rassman once writing "I have never seen anyone go bald while staying on Propecia". I don't know if he responds to all of the questions or if other editors contribute, but this topic definitely needs clarification because the shit is confusing. It's weird that doctors recommend a year on finasteride before considering transplantation; won't that only leave 4 effective years left after the transplant then? I don't think the five year thing is solid, although I agree that if results taper off that quickly in a lot of guys that it almost isn't worth it if you want a hair transplant because it's just distorting the big picture.

I definitely agree with you there.

I agree: analysis of hairloss based on pattern and age in the end relies upon mere speculation. Combating hairloss is an inexact science and hair transplantation is an imperfect art, if you consider the potential risk factors. That being said, with a good doctor and the right plan, I think most people who get this done nowadays with the right expectations will be happy with the results in the longterm sense. I think 10-25 years is worth the risk of having some degree of scar detection possible when you're older. 60 really is nothing at this point though... that's like the new 40. Oh well, I think you are giving all this enough thought that you will make the best decision for yourself in the end.

"So, just for reitteration purposes: I wonder about Chuckys friend who's safe zone continues to decrease even though he is so young?" Hmmm... regarding Chucky's friend: "He was a diffuse thinner from about 17 then by 20 it was going and by 27 he was completely bald" I think this is clearly someone who was in danger of progressing to a NW 7 and beyond; nothing unusual about someone like this losing below the crown and sides. You can kind of, KIND OF look at these cases in a comparative sense I think. If you're a norwood 3 at 30, do you have less of a chance of getting to a NW7 than someone who was completely, shiny bald at 27? Probably. Yeah it sucks that there is no guarantee of anything, but at some point, if you and a good doctor are trying to develop a plan, you have to take some kind of risk. Otherwise, just consider FUE; at least if the donor thins, you will loose the grafts up top and won't have a linear scar in the back, leaving you just looking... bald.

Provided the hair grows, the minimal scarring associated with FUE probably will allow these guys to shave their heads if need be in the future. If they progress to a NW5 and on, and have poor donor areas, rendering them unable to place a cosmetically significant amount of grafts into the back half of the vertex and crown, they will probably just look like Zinedine Zidane, a perfectly acceptable look IMO. As far as anyone knows this is his natural balding pattern. Some guys do retain a somewhat juvenile hairline and lose it elsewhere. It's not common, but it happens.

I read this on baldingblog; it is Dr. Rassman's opinion: "Actually, men who become a full Norwood Class 7 balding pattern usually have significant balding by the time they are in their early 20s. If the balding is mild at 30, chances are that the balding will not be advanced as you get older. Obviously this is a generalization and cases vary but I think the age at which you begin balding plus the amount of time you've been losing your hair can be helpful indicators. One of the major exceptions to this argument is that some guys don't show any signs at all until after 40. It seems most men who get some level of MPB are afflicted earlier, insidiously creeping throughout 20s and early 30s, but there are some who think they're safe until it comes out of nowhere. I remember reading somewhere else on that site that the percentage of balding men who actually progress to a NW 7 is very small. I guess you never really now who's safe, but for the guys who are already significantly thinning or bald at 18, I think it's safe to assume that descending into upper Norwood territory is a strong possibility.

"yongsuccess- did pro have any adverse effects?" No, I personally haven't experienced any side effects.

You're supposed to take Propecia every day; however, some guys take finasteride every other and feel that they are getting the same benefits. Who knows but I don't want to risk it. I have been on the drug for 2 1/2 years and maybe only missed one or two days, so it definitely can become second nature. I feel the same way about rogaine: who wants to put up with that? If I ever start to thin in the crown I may consider it, as the foam is supposedly much easier to deal with. It may have a synergistic effect when used with Propecia, especially if your loss is limited to the vertex. My hairline started to thin at about 20; the loss had stabilized but by the time I was 23 I started Propecia to be safe. I have not lost any hair for the past five years (almost 26), so things may slow down for you, especially if you get on the meds. I had the hairline restored at 24, but in retrospect I could have waited a few more years. Even if it doesn't regrow the hair you have lost, Pro may allow you to maintain what you have for the next ten+ years. Sounds like the level of thinning you've experienced is cosmetically insignificant at this point, so it may buy you A LOT of time, relatively speaking.

Man, I do not like having my personal space violated by other guys (close talkers, touchers, punchers)... especially not after a HT! I was worried about this happening to me post surgery: some clown at work swaggering up to me like, "Hey there, chief!" and putting his arm around my shoulder or touching my head or something like that. I agree that the grafts should be well secure by now but make sure it doesn't get infected; looks like some kind of rugburn. That guy must have given you a serious noogie.

You should sleep with a few pillows stacked so that your head is somewhat elevated. This can reduce swelling and leave you in a position in which it is less likely for you to roll over onto the grafts. What I want to know is how people sleep after receiving FUE into their previous donor scars. In these cases, the recipient area would come into direct contact with your pillow, unless you sleep on your face.

That sucks. Why did you switch? I have read that the foam is easier to manage and possibly more effective than the traditional liquid.

Interesting. I recall on a few threads small FUE sessions being proposed as a way to soften previously transplanted hairlines that are too flat, or hairlines that are made up of single hairs of thicker caliber. But if it's difficult to "single" out single follicles, let alone the softest single follicles, then I guess it's not the answer. What I mean is (or what my question is), a Lunchtime FUE session, for example, might not be appropriate for hairline refinement?

The transformation is already apparent at not even 6 months. Should keep getting better and better as it matures. Nice!

Nice amount of growth so far I'd say. Some people hardly see anything at 4 months.

People generally say to take pictures in good light without the flash. Digital cameras today especially seem to produce a very strong artificial light from the flash. I think that the flash can actually make areas of hair appear more dense; however, it might have the opposite effect if there is scalp showing (to exaggerate it). You are right that the only way your hair loss can really be assessed accurately is by meeting with a doctor who can perform a miniaturization study on your scalp.

Some people have a more prominent whirl pattern in which the center appears like a tiny bald spot. Sometimes the orientation of the hairs there produces this little scalp spot, but it's certainly not unlikely that if you are receding that the crown might simultaneously be thinning too. It could be normal though. You don't want to post the pic here? "Its hard for me to check it out myself". What you should do is take a small vanity mirror and look into it with your back turned to a full sized mirror to see the back and top of your head.

I tend to agree with you. I think that if a hair transplant patient does not obsess over his donor scar, then it's likely that nobody else is going to dwell on it either. Some guys sport shaved heads for a while right after their hair transplants and just say "f it" about the scar in the back and embrace it. I commend this attitude. Because the scars associated with today's more refined procedures don't make people look unattractive; it's just that it is evidence of the transplant, which is embarrassing. The scars themselves normally are not all that dramatic, even ones that are more visible when shaved down. We just don't want to be found out.

I can only speak from my personal experience: I have not experienced side effects, sexual or otherwise while taking Propecia. I think that the silent majority of people do not have these adverse reactions, or they do in fact subside when the medication is stopped. However, there are those who experience these side effects, and some do claim that they seem to be long lasting or permanent. I can't imagine that people make this stuff up, so the possibility of extreme side effects should be considered. I will say though that I wouldn't assume that just because it's easy to find negative Propecia testimony online that it makes it a regular occurance. Of course people who have had these horrid experiences are going to be more outspoken about it, and I guess they should. But, people bitch about everything on the internet, so it's not like it's hard to dig up. I would hate though to recommend Propecia to someone and than have it turn out that he fell into the unlucky 2% category. Perhaps the percentage of those who experience the side effects is higher than what Merck is reporting. Regardless, if someone has to convince you that the drug is worth the risk, then it probably is not for you. It is after all an elective medication. Most of us understood the potential for side effects and were eager to proceed with treatment. If your gut is telling you not to take it, then trust your own instincts and judgment.

Hey hairlossnebwie, I will try to scratch the surface of your first question: 1. Is it possible to take hair from the donor area without a long scar from one side of the back of the head to the other? (the thought of staples in my head, and a noticable scar across the back of my head scares me) Bill, I don't know how you've managed to go through all of that. Yes: Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE), the removal of grafts one by one, can accomplish this; however, some people argue that this method method may not always be the better option. Thinning out the donor area is sometimes a concern of patients, and there also is a small degree of scarring associated with FUE (little dots), although in many cases people opt for this over one consistent scar (the smiley face). The healing time is also less after FUE. I think FUE is normally recommended to patients who want smaller sessions. Some people will argue that the "trichophic closure" technique can produce a more cosmetically appealing scar after relatively smaller sessions. Look at the last 3 links under the "My Journal" section of this page created by Dr. True which gives some examples: http://www.hairtransplantnetwork.com/blog/home-page.asp?WebID=114 The healing of the donor area presented here after strip surgery is quite remarkable. I would have to guess that the strip was relatively small though to be this undetectable buzzed down this far. The bottom line IMO is that if you think that you may want or NEED to shave your head one day, FUE currently is the way to go. But, most people can camaflouge strip scarring entirely if the hair is worn above a #2/#3 clipper. FUE is also more expensive, but that shouldn't be the main reason not to choose it. If you ever consider FUE you may want to talk to Dr. Feller.

Props to Nervous Nelly! Over 1000 thoughtful posts will help ease the nervousness of many others looking into hair restoration.

I can see both sides here as well; I just tend to trust the judgment of the Coalition doctors as it has been drilled into my head how ethical they are. I suppose nothing is absolute however, as posters on occasion have reported bad experiences even after being worked on by the elite. I want to ask you guys a question about this type of procedure since I am almost in the same boat as Benihana, although my hairline was not as receded and I only needed 600 grafts. Let's say upon closer inspection in person Rahal recommends 2000 instead of 2500. Hypothetically, let's imagine the bad scenario unfolding (we'll throw family history, Propecia, Minoxidil, and concealers out of the equation here): Benihana has the procedure and loses significant amounts of hair on top and in the crown. If he has an above average donor supply, let's say like 7000-8000, do you think it would look that unnatural with today's refined methods to use the remaining 5000-6000 grafts on top and taper a little bit to the crown (with mainly empty very/thin crown)? I don't mean unnatural to us, I mean to the average person. I know everyone here says you never see a person with an intact youthful hairline and a bald spot but I say that I do see this on occasion. Maybe they are in fact the results of transplants, but I never think it looks all that unnatural. And if you do want to consider medications and concealers, I mean, do you really think it could wind up looking that unreasonable? We mainly have old plug work judge this kind of thing by. And you have to imagine that Dr. Rahal is taking these factors into consideration. Bill, Let's take you for example: you are a self described Norwood 6; you had 7550 grafts transplanted; you have a relatively youthful looking hairline as far HTs go, with a thinner crown. From the front and even from the top, you do represent the head of hair that has a lower hairline and the illusion of being full with a thinner crown IMO. My hairline is a little lower than yours, but I would like to believe that if I, or someone like Benihana and Scooping Around, do descend into the upper Norwood area that results similar to yours would be possible after having early, refined hairline work (provided the donor is there). I wanted to bring this stuff up on the live chat but my damn screwy schedule has prevented my from joining in.

Based on your profile pic I would say you're a Norwood 2; however, the hair at the upper temple angles appears thinner in some of the others, so maybe pushing NW3? Norwood 2 is considered to represent the mature hairline, and isn't classified as balding. That's what I was pre-transplant too. Rogaine foam most likely will not regrow hair in the hairline. Are you taking finasteride (Propecia)? I'd imagine the doctor would discuss this option with you to protect against more significant future loss. Dr. Rahal's estimate may change if he assess your hair loss in person since he only has access to pictures right now. Many people would consider 2500 grafts at age 26 in the hair line a little aggressive. But, provided you have a good donor area and you guys can develop an overall game plan, 2500 with Rahal you should be golden .

Ha ha nice. I once saw a guy in a magazine that actually incorporated his beard into his hairstyle by tying it into a bow above his head. Looked almost as bad as the guy in that commercial, although I think he was acting like it was some kind of artistic statement or something.

This is THE question. Giants response was accurate: the lasting value differs from person to person. I was pleased to hear during the Feller/Bauman debate on "The Bald Truth" radio program that Spencer David Kobren has been on it for over 14 years and he feels it has maintained his hair. I also suspect the long term effectiveness has something to do with when the medication is started in the individual and what he would naturally have in store for him regarding the level of loss. A guy who gets on fin. early enough who was destined for maybe Norwood 3-4 may have better long term results than someone with a more severe progression of loss in store like a Norwood 7. Based on what I have read, I don't think the body becomes acclimated to fin; it may become less effective in preventing ALL of the hair loss over time as MPB becomes more aggressive in some people. My humble opinion.