Jump to content

hairyjoe

Regular Member
  • Posts

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About hairyjoe

  • Birthday 01/01/1972

Basic Information

  • Gender
    Male

hairyjoe's Achievements

New Real Hair Club Member

New Real Hair Club Member (1/8)

1

Reputation

  1. I'd like to consider Dr. Lindsey as he's relatively close to me, but something doesn't add up. Positives.. He's affiliated/endorsed by Feller. Spex represents him online. dr. Lindsey posts lots of cases online. Negatives... Even with all these positives going for him it seems like nobody on the boards is using him..or if they are, they sure aren't posting their results. If he was just bad, I'd expect bad reviews, but nothing...good or bad. Very strange. Any explanations out there?
  2. Have we heard from the OP since last September? Very curious to know what he thinks of density now. Hope he has been pleasantly surprised.
  3. People can talk about free market all they want, but we as consumers are allowing these outrageously priced FUE docs to rip us off. Why don't we stick up for ourselves by calling out the docs who are over-charging? We as a group can effect change in this industry..but for some reason when it comes to price nobody wants to come forward and say enough is enough...STOP RIPPING US OFF. $10/hair from Feller and others....I'd say they should be ashamed of themselves, but we're the dumb as___ who agree to pay it. Can anyone recommend a Quality FUE doc in the USA who is more reasonably priced?
  4. key- Did the doc ever tell you why he didn't think adding a density greater than 50 would better match your existing hair? He knew u have super dense existing hair so adding the same 50/cm he probably gives most of his patients seems inadequate. Too often on this site we hear that 50/cm gives illusion of existing hair. I think that's way too general a statement...over and over we see guys get 50/cm and have to go back for more density. If it was me, I'd tell the doc, give me higher than 50... There is no way 50 will match my 100/cm existing. ( I know necrosis is an issue with super high dense packing approaching 100/cm, but 60-70 should be safe...or if it isn't i haven't seen a post from a doc stating so)
  5. I have no idea who's better, and I'm guessing nobody here does either. Why? Because most of the info on this site is second hand knowledge or based on doctor before afters that are unreliable IMO. I also wouldn't put too much faith in recommendations from satisfied patients. Although it's nice they are happy with their result, their idea of good might not be close to what you expect. Unfortunately, the only way to truly know is to view multiple patients in person from each doc. Anyone that doesn't do this before taking the plunge is asking for trouble.
  6. Jotronic- Why do you think it is, that you are the only one talking about getting all docs to show realistic/ standardized pics? If this industry has really come so far since the 90's, how do we, on a site moderated by experts/advocates, still not have this very most basic of information? If the owner/ moderators of this site truly care about helping consumers make informed decisions, why aren't they up in arms demanding real/standardized pics? How can they have built this great community, and provided so much good info, then just sit back and allow docs to deceive us with photos that don't give us a true picture of their work? Seems like this site's rule number #1 should have been ... "moderators of this site will remove any photo, from any doc, that intends to deceive by embellishing results. All before/ after photos must meet the following criteria...no flash, same lighting, same hairstyle, same angle, no crazy new tan...etc). Anyone from this site like to chime in?
  7. If what Joe says above is true (I believe him)..that almost all photos use flash which doesn't give an accurate view of results, most of us haven't a clue what REAL results from most docs look like. That is scary. I applaud H&W for their commitment to natural photos. lets hope others follow suit. Makes me wonder who does really know which docs are good. Seems like the only way to know for sure is seeing dozens of results in person and who has the time to do that? I guess Jotronic, Spex, Spencer, and probably a handful of other experts/advocates do, but the rest of us are stuck looking at a zillion bad pics and maybe seeing a couple patients. It is also insightful IMO, that these advocates/experts tend to be the most conservative when they talk about the current state of transplants. I'm guessing they've seen enough in person to know that the results we are seeing in photos are optimistic to say the least. So how about this for an idea.... Think Comicon for Hair Transplants....a convention where docs set up booths and have with them 5 patients for all of us to view in one place. You'd get to see a 100 transplants in one place, in one day... problem solved. Maybe Pat can work on that
  8. I don't think you have to be an expert to know what a natural hairline looks like. I think the fact Konior is still obsessing and trying for more natural hairlines is great, but it also supports my point that there is work to go to get to totally natural. As far as my recommendations.... I think hand picking thinner hairs for hairlines is a big improvement and am glad to know Dr. Konior does that...I had not known that. I wonder why more docs haven't followed suit. I also believe nape hair should be standard procedure if the normal thinnest hairs still appear too coarse for hairline. I underatand the yield might be less and lifespan may be less, but a more refined hairline for maybe just 5 years would be desirable to me. Hair angle still seems to be a problem for many docs.. Specifically, many after photos of guys who comb back their hair, have this weird look where the hair first goes forward and loops backward (looks like a fish hook shape). Maybe this is nitpicking to many of you, but I see room for improvement. If you don't, that's fine. DrNoHair is right..I shouldn't have said I'd avoid that particular doc like the plaque...that was inflammatory.. I will edit that out.
  9. I wasn't being negative, I was being honest. I didn't mention the pics Matt posted looked unnatural because I was trying to offend anyone. I mention it, because I think both doctors and most on this board except the current state of transplants as being natural when they are not. They are much better than they used to be, and I understand a nw4 might be thrilled with the result, but I believe hairlines could and should be even better. Innovation shouldn't just stop bc transplants are better...we should strive to improve them until they really look totally natural. Spanker, with all due respect, To say this is the best they can be and you shouldn't have one if you expect totally natural is ridiculous in my mind. Tell Konior we know they are much better, but we want him and all docs to strive for even better. I really believe they could eventually do totally natural if we expected/ demanded it from all of them. It baffles me why more on this board don't talk about wanting transplant improvements to continue and not stall. Better does not equal totally natural. Most of you don't seem to care., but some of us do and we should make our voice heard. I'll get off my soapbox now. Joe
  10. key- I think you have a right to be angry. It seems you were more than clear that you wanted a dense hairline that would match your existing hair and the doctor seemed to ensure you that would be possible. For him to change his tune after the transplant is horrible. It's seems he should have either gave you more density than 40-50 or, if he doesn't do higher density because of fear of necrosis with too dense packing, he should have been more honest by telling you 50 doesn't get you anywhere near your existing hair, but will PROBABLY look ok once it grows out. Your experience is depressing in that it shows these docs haven't changed all that much...they tell patients what they want to hear before the surgery, then change their tune after. That said...you may still have adequate coverage as the hair grows out...or at the very least, be fixed with a second procedure with a different doc. Best of luck!
  11. Looking at the pic BDM posted on 6/23 brought to mind a question I haven't seen asked. Many transplant patients who comb their hair back have this weird hairline where the hairs seem to go forward then loop backward (like a shape of a fish hook). I've never seen this in a natural hairline. If today's top docs now place hairs in the proper direction and angle, why the loop d loop hairlines?
  12. 1878matt....are those photos what u consider a natural result or are those examples of a poor result. They look unnatural to me..hair direction looks off looping back strangely...hairs also look way too coarse for hairline.... If they are an example of Konior's best work and he is one of the best, I will wait until docs achieve even more refined results. I think they will eventually do that. This is just my opinion, no insult is meant to anyone.
  13. What great results were used to determine he was worthy of recommendation? His work Is downright horrible, and his explanations/responses disconcerting.
  14. Isn't it strange that not one person responded with a concrete example of a natural hairline. Normally you can't stop the paid doctors reps who troll these boards to be quiet. Now they've dissapeared. C'mon reps...you can't stop talking about how great Fellar, Rahal, Konior etc. are...so where are your examples of natural hairlines?
  15. I've been reading this board for years and through that time I've seen hairlines look better and better, but never totally natural. Granted, there may be natural results out there I just haven't seen, if so please post them if you have. The reason they don't look natural is the caliper of hair at the hairlines are too thick and docs for some reason are super resistant to use thinner nape/ body hair because of POSSIBLY losing those hairs down the line. We'll, I must rather have a natural hairline for 5 years that needs to be touched up later, than an unnatural wall of fake looking hair forever. wouldn't you? So my question is this... We as patients, now demand 1's in the hairline, a natural staggered hairline design, hairs placed in the proper direction..... But we don't demand docs complete their improvements with the final piece of the puzzle...thin, natural looking hairs. Why don't we? Why do we give the docs a pass when it comes to this? Are we just so happy that hairlines now look so much better we don't care if they look TOTALLY natural? We should be banding together and demand this from ALL docs. If we don't, they will never change...they have no incentive to do so. But the thing that discourages/ infuriates me the most is that this community seems to poo poo the idea too, just regurgitating the docs argument that the hair may eventually fall out. Who cares!!!! It's a risk I would gladly take and the docs should at least give us the option. ( I know I'm not alone, there is a similar thread on page 2 or 3.)
×
×
  • Create New...