Hoping

As long as your planned HT with MHR is not soon, they should give you your deposit back. If they don't, sue them in your local small claims court and bring some of the posts from this board to show the Judge why you didn't want to go through with it. The judge just might order they refund your money.

I second Dr. Epstein. I was maybe a Norwood 3V, bald the front 1/3 of my head with decent coverage on ton and on my crown. Hat 2800 grafts. I now, 10.5 months later have an essentially full head of natural looking hair. Nobody can tell I had a HT. With a very small amount of gell in my hair, it looks great. Now if you are really bald and need coverage front to back, my understanding is nobody is as good for mega sessions as H and W.

Looks great Hairworthy. My HT with Dr. Epstein was October 7, 2005. 2800 grafts in the front 1/3 where there were none before. I now essentially have a full looking head of hair, with only mild-normal looking recession for a guy my age (51). I too think it well worth the money and have never had a seconds regret for going through with the procedure. BTW, I too live in Florida so maybe I can make the next outing. Hopingforhair no more. :-)

http://www.brightsurf.com/news/headlines/25849/PSA_test...ing_finasteride.html PSA test has higher accuracy for patients taking finasteride August 16, 2006 - Finasteride increases prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing's ability to detect prostate cancer, a study in the August 16 Journal of the National Cancer Institute reports. Finasteride is a drug prescribed for men whose prostates have become enlarged. The drug decreases prostate swelling and helps men with urinary problems. However, an increased number of high-grade tumors in men taking finasteride in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) has some physicians worried about the effect of the drug. Ian M. Thompson, M.D., of the University of Texas Health Science Center in San Antonio, and colleagues examined the PSA test's ability to detect prostate cancer in the PCPT in men taking finasteride or a placebo. The group studied the PSA test's sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy for both groups. The authors found that finasteride changed the diagnostic characteristics of the PSA test so that it detected prostate cancer with higher sensitivity and accuracy in men in the finasteride group than men in the placebo group. They suggest that the increased detection of high-grade prostate cancers in the finasteride arm of the PCPT may be related to the drug's ability to improve the PSA test's performance and not to it's induction of high-grade disease. The authors write, "This bias would be expected to contribute to greater detection of all grades of prostate cancer with finasteride." Journal of the National Cancer Institute

http://www.brightsurf.com/news/headlines/25849/PSA_test...ing_finasteride.html PSA test has higher accuracy for patients taking finasteride August 16, 2006 - Finasteride increases prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing's ability to detect prostate cancer, a study in the August 16 Journal of the National Cancer Institute reports. Finasteride is a drug prescribed for men whose prostates have become enlarged. The drug decreases prostate swelling and helps men with urinary problems. However, an increased number of high-grade tumors in men taking finasteride in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) has some physicians worried about the effect of the drug. Ian M. Thompson, M.D., of the University of Texas Health Science Center in San Antonio, and colleagues examined the PSA test's ability to detect prostate cancer in the PCPT in men taking finasteride or a placebo. The group studied the PSA test's sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy for both groups. The authors found that finasteride changed the diagnostic characteristics of the PSA test so that it detected prostate cancer with higher sensitivity and accuracy in men in the finasteride group than men in the placebo group. They suggest that the increased detection of high-grade prostate cancers in the finasteride arm of the PCPT may be related to the drug's ability to improve the PSA test's performance and not to it's induction of high-grade disease. The authors write, "This bias would be expected to contribute to greater detection of all grades of prostate cancer with finasteride." Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Epstein did 2800 in one HT. I have never heard of him doing the mega sessions of four thousand or more grafts but maybe he now does. I was fifty when I had my HT, about a Norwood 3V, with most of my loss in the front of my head and expect to keep most of the rest of my hair.

Virtually everybody around here recommends Propecia, as do doctors and the drug manafacturer as being totally safe. A few things you need to keep in mind. There have been virtually no studies with very long term, extended use of Propecia, so who knows what happens after you take it for ten years. Additionally, Propecia in greater doses, was prescribed for men with enlarged prostates. And studies have shown that Propecia reduces the risk of Prostate cancer. On the bad end, those taking Propecia for prostate enlargement who got prostate cancer, got a much more aggressive kind. So Propecia may well be safe, but maybe not totally safe. I decided to take it myself but I am now fifty-one. I would be more concerned about taking it in my twenties, looking at possibly taking it for fifty or more years. But I also recognize how devastating hair loss can be, especially when very young, and how most of us might take the risk to keep our hair. Just a thought.

Virtually everybody around here recommends Propecia, as do doctors and the drug manafacturer as being totally safe. A few things you need to keep in mind. There have been virtually no studies with very long term, extended use of Propecia, so who knows what happens after you take it for ten years. Additionally, Propecia in greater doses, was prescribed for men with enlarged prostates. And studies have shown that Propecia reduces the risk of Prostate cancer. On the bad end, those taking Propecia for prostate enlargement who got prostate cancer, got a much more aggressive kind. So Propecia may well be safe, but maybe not totally safe. I decided to take it myself but I am now fifty-one. I would be more concerned about taking it in my twenties, looking at possibly taking it for fifty or more years. But I also recognize how devastating hair loss can be, especially when very young, and how most of us might take the risk to keep our hair. Just a thought.

Epstein did my HT. About 2800 grafts in the front 1/3 of my head. I sometimes wonder what would have been the difference if I went to Hasson in Vancouver, but I am ten months post op and tickled with my results. I can now pass for having a full head of hair, and whoever said here recently that its not worth it can't put themselves in the mind of those of us who think it is.

Your a young guy aren't you Troy? But yea, if you loved a girl from say highschool or college, still deep down know you are in love with her, if she was your first or deepest love at a young age, you can forget ever getting over her (and she you if she felt the same way). You may be happily married some day, but nobody will replace that lost girl, so if possible, look her up now before it is too late

Anybody and everybody who is honest with themselves will admit that looks are very important. We who have had HT's know this very well. But I am a little surprised a woman, who is your dream girl, would admit that she would not have been attracted to you if you didn't have hair, even though likely true. We all like to think, I am sure, that our soul mates are attracted to us for who and what we are rather an appearance over which we have no control. But I guess true love comes after physical attraction. Interestingly, I have read up on "lost love" and "first loves". These are people (and there are a lot of them out there) who have always been in love with a person from the past but for whom the relationship did not work out. Most of these people go on to marry others, etc, but may meet their lost loves, five - ten - forty years down the road. And no matter what these people may look like at that time, no matter how much they have aged, studies show that it doesn't matter. If the parties were in love with each other at a young age- say 15 - 22, it kind of leaves an imprint on the brain, like a bonding between a mother and her baby. Many of these people fall madly in love all over again, leave their spouses for their lost loves and when they marry, have some of the best statistics out there for staying together. Just thought you should know :-)

sutures for a hair system? Are there people out there who have sutured their systems on to their scalp? Are these like clips that are permanently sutured into the scalp to attach a hair piece? Does this really go on and does it work? Just curious.

You have every right to your opinion, to express it and to think HT's shouldn't be performed. I have every right to be very happy with my HT and don't understand why you think the government should have the right to outlaw it simply because you aren't happy with your results.

I'm curious Justaguy, just how old are you? You sure sound like a teenager but I would bet your twenties?

Justaguy, what a really ignorant, superficial, imature thing to say. You have every right to not get a hairtransplant if want, but you have no right to judge why or whether anyone else should get a hair transplant. You are wrong about the results from good HT doctors and you are certainly wrong about how important looks are in our society. I am a trial lawyer. I can tell you for a fact that those lawyers who get the best results are generally the better looking lawyers, everything else being equal. You my friend live in a world of ignorance. Maybe it shouldn't be the way it is, but it is the way it is: Looks are important in Romance and in life. Accept it or not.

I put Hair transplants in Google and your cite comes up number one. That's pretty good. I'm trying to get my legal cite within the top one thousand right now.

I put Hair transplants in Google and your cite comes up number one. That's pretty good. I'm trying to get my legal cite within the top one thousand right now.

Brian don't sweat it too much about that revenge thing. They get it with age. I'm now 51, good looking for my age, successful on a professional level, and although married I have had more than a few pretty woman as young as their thirties show interest in me (not that I ever bit). All those gorgeous women who were in their twenties when I was in my twenties are not in or approaching their fifties. I gurantee you they are no longer getting the attention they once got or any attention at all. Sad to say that I barely notice women in their late forties or fifties, and don't think they don't know it. So all of those women who today are superficial are one day going to find out that they no longer have the power they once had. It is true that many guys age gracefully and can still be attractive to woman for reasons other than looks. Women simply age.

I think you are wrong about women, at least women who are no longer in their twenties. I got an HT for me, not women? I have known plenty of bald guys who a number of women find very attractive. My best friend was bald as a cue cumber and had the prettiest blonde in the world, ten years younger, madly in love with him. Woman are much more into who the guy is and what he is about then whether he has hair. If you are slim with a good physique, have a handsome face, etc. your baldness should be little of an impediment. Its your outlook and confidence that is the problem.

I tell anyone who asks. Somebody who works in my office remarked six months after my HT that my hair really looked good lately and she wanted to know what I was doing. I said I had an HT. Its nothing to be embarassed about in my opinion, course I'm not twenty one anymore.

Pat you do a great job here, and probably are a much better gate keeper than most in keeping out the trash. And I am not defending Dr. Elliott. His post was pretty condescending in his comparing California to the Easter US, an attitude which is pretty much what I have learned to expect from many members of the medical profession. Still, defamation is defamation. Not that you've done so or others on this board have done so, but it is a big problem on the internet.

Sorry Pat, I got the wrong doctor but the principal is the same. To what extent can professionals be defamed in public forums? Your forum provides a great public service. The problem I have is that it (and any other public forum of course) leaves open the possibility any person, maybe a manic depressive, can write in, trash a professional's reputation, blame that professional for all of their problems, and to some extent gain credibility on a forum such as this. There may well be lots of professionals out there who deserve a poor reputation. But it is simply too easy for anybody to trash anyone these days and there has to be some sort of accountability when that happens, imho.

Interesting thread. I do not know anything about Dr. True and take no position on whether he should or should not have operated on a nineteen year old, but I do know it is impossible for people on this forum from "afar" to judge whether what Dr. True did was reasonable under the cirumstances. There is no one size fits all category. Each case and circumstance must be judged on its own facts. Some of you have come down on Dr. True for threatening a lawsuit. Maybe I am biased because I am one of those "trial lawyers" who our wonderful President is so fond of bashing, but the fact is that it is probably not pleasant to have your professional reputation bashed on a public forum. Free speech does not circumvent the tort of libel and slander and defamation can be devastating to one's reputation and ability to earn a living. The sharing of information is important, but so to is the necessity of discretion by the moderator to ensure the legal rights of people are not violated. Face it, this is a public forum. There are a large number of disgruntled people in the world and certainly it is easy for any of them to come on a public forum such as this where they can trash the reputation of a professional, justified or not. Should they be able to do so with impunity? Does a moderator have any responsibility for what goes on in his public forum? I don't think the answers are so clear.

I've never used any concealers but thought I might try Toppik. Its website promotes it as as numerous hair like fibers that cling to your thinning hair giving it more fullness and body. Is this like a powder and if so, anybody concerned about inhaling this stuff?

Fifty when I had mine although almost had one at when I was about 29. Also looked into hair transplants at about 40 with MHR (the one with Levitt). I went for a consultation and for at least one year they constantly called me asking me to come back. Now why did I do it? Well I guess there are several reasons. When I was young and in my twenties I was a very good looking guy with very thick hair. I started losing my hair in my mid twenties and thought about a transplant when I was 29 because I thought I had lost too much hair. (I chickened out last moment while in the surgeon's chair). By the time I was about 50, I hated looking at photos of myself because I looked so bald from the front (top 1/3 of my hair), but in a way I really didn't care all that much about my looks any more. After all I was fifty, good career, married, kids, the works. And then I decided that I didn't like not caring anymore. And one day I simply decided to go for it - did an internet search, found Dr. Epstein (before I found this site) and had the work done. Best thing I ever did and if the technique was better ten years earlier, would have wished I had it done when I was forty. I have definitely gotten back some of my youthful good looks, but alas, the twenty year old women don't even know I'm there :-)