Dr. Alan Feller

You really like to put words in other people's mouths, don't you? As I wrote in the very next line that you quoted it looks like head hair to me. No misleading. That's what it looks like. And it is immaterial where on the body it is. The purpose of showing the clip is to show the force of TRACTION which Dr. Bhatti said did not exist. Well, clearly it does. Even if it is on the face where the skin is flexible the grafts still have to endure tremendous traction force, it's just easier to see it. But to my mind we are looking at the occipital area of the scalp. Am I 100% sure ? No, because the "video" is really a collage of clips from three areas of the body. The reason I don't think it's face is because the facial hair area looked to be much lower density. But again, it doesn't matter. So please do not claim that I am misleading people.

Seth, you really are a nasty and unabashed liar aren't you?! I have reported your antics to the moderator, again. You will not succeed in trying to intimidate me off this site. For the sake of the general audience: It doesn't matter if the video clip shows body hair or head hair, the presence of tremendous traction force is available for all to see. Besides, it looks like that clip is focused on the lower part of the back of the head, not the face or body. The density of the hair also looks to be scalp. But again it is of no consequence. By the way, I did plenty of BHT long before your doctor even considered doing HT and found it to be bust. About 1/3 successful growth, so I don't offer it. Just another lie that because I don't offer it for money I can't do it. Ever get tired of hating? One thing you have shown me for sure: you can't be liked by everyone all of the time.

Matt, That's not what I said nor suggested. I only asked you if you believed European physicians have business incentives to push FUE since you already wrote that American physicians had business incentives to hard sell FUT. I wanted to see if you knew you were applying a double standard.

Excuse me, but if you are going to quote someone on a public forum you should be ready, willing, and able to back it up. Clearly you can't because I never wrote it. So remove the false quote. You are now trying to claim that my saying the detrimental forces of FUE "can't be COMPLETELY overcome" is the same as my supposedly saying they "CAN'T be overcome" ? I don't think so. Remove your false quote.

Apologies for the mis-post. That patient asked for help to sign up for an account at the office and the secretary left it open on the computer. Now straightened out.

HTsoon, I never wrote nor said that. You are just blindly quoting Dr. Bhatti (an FUE-only doctor) who made it up and falsely attributed to me. Show me where I ever said or wrote that the three detrimental forces cannot be overcome. Find it and then cut and paste it right here. I challenge you.

VERY popular misconception. It is tempting to think this, and it may even be true in cases where the transplants are placed right into very thinning areas. But what people forget is that by the time a patient has actually gone out of his way to seek out HT help he is already well on his way down the hair loss road. By the time he has an HT he has lost an alarming amount of hair. And by the time an HT starts growing its another 8 months down the road as well. All that time the genetic balding has been at work doing it's dastardly thing. In a case like the one I presented here it is just a matter of time that the forelock would be targeted and eaten away "pac man" style. Usually a bit longer, but perfectly within the norm. Hair loss is progressive and that needs to be taken into account in each and every patient which is why I usually opt for more conservative hairlines. More forward hairlines are very appealing to young men, but doesn't serve them well as they get older and lose more hair. Also, when hair is lost behind the transplanted front line, the front line looks a bit thinner. Better to keep the hairline a bit high and have the grafts necessary to "back fill" if necessary. That's what we did with this patient and why he is signed up for another small procedure. Thanks for playing. More coming...

Sure you have, you just don't think about it. Most people lose their hair in spurts, this was his time. To lose a small section after already having lost the rest of the top is more the norm than anything else. He is in his early thirties and is not on Fin due to side effects.

Ok, time to give the answer. The photos are REVERSED. The photo on the right is the BEFORE photo. He had a good forelock, but the rest of his hair was gone. The photo on the left is the AFTER photo. After about 10 months. The hair you see me holding back were the hairs we transplanted around the forelock 10 months prior. What actually happened is that he had a very strong forelock so we transplanted around it. But hair loss being as unpredictable as it is he lost it sooner so it left a hole where it used to be. If you look at the photo series included here you will see in the real after photo at your far right he has a nice thick top thanks to his transplants, but a hole visible where the forelock used to be. So he is now booked in for a second smaller procedure.

Yes. By the way, I know how you feel, I lost my hair too and got it back with FUT. I would not do FUE on myself unless I absolutely had to. These chat sites are filled with FUE hype and has been taken on as almost a religion by some of the regular and more vociferous posters. FUE has it's place, but not on a patient like you. You are still losing hair and will need more up the road and need every hair you can get. Pack out the front and LIGHTlY into your forelock with about 3000 grafts via FUT. If you do FUE you will need even more grafts to compensate for the lower yield. Because I am always accused of "marketing" I will ask that you do not consider me for your transplant (not that I am saying you were). There are GREAT FUT doctors out there with LONG track records of success. Try the following for FUT(I'm excluding doctors I have financial relationships with). These are some of my favorites: United States: Konior Hasson and Wong Shapiro Brothers Rahal Alexander Gabel Europe: Feriduni Deveroye Bisanga Go with any of these guys and your chances for a knock out result are MUCH higher than if you go with FUE no matter how caring and skilled that practitioner is. That's just how it is. This is reality. By the way, some of those guys do FUE themselves, and some damn good FUE, but if you want the BEST chance for knock out growth with minimal donor damage only go with FUT. You'll be very glad you did. No matter how good or bad an FUE result is, an FUT would have been better. No exceptions. Go with any of those guys and come on here in 10 months with your results and I have little doubt this board will be singing your praises and you will owe me a beer. Don't gamble with your scalp or your donor area, you only get one in this life. Best Dr. Feller

There is a very big difference between FUT yields and FUE yields. If you have good physiological characteristics AND you find a good FUE doctor then you have a chance of a good cosmetic result. Great, even. However, you will not know if have good physiological characteristics until AFTER you've done the surgery and waited about a 8 months to 14 months. With FUT your physiology does play a role, but not nearly to the extent that it does in FUE. I have rarely seen completely failed FUT procedures, but I have seen this many times in FUE procedures. The reason is the excess trauma placed on the grafts during FUE as compared to FUT. It is simple common sense. Also, if you chose FUT the majority of your donor area will be available for future procedures up the road, whereas after 2500 to 3000 grafts of FUE the donor area will be pretty scarred making it more difficult to get more grafts up the road. Also, most FUE clinics quote higher numbers to cover the same area as FUT clinics to compensate for the expected lower yield. Here is a patient not much different than you who rebuilt his hairline and thickened the top in one 1800 graft FUT session. Best of luck in whichever you choose.

Wow, I hope you used bottled water and not the airplane tap water!

I must disagree with this on two levels. The first is that the difference in yield via FUE vs FUT CAN be insignificant, but more often than not is NOT insignificant. This is the unabashed truth regardless of internet FUE hype and explains the second point: The second is that while FUE may need 2,000 to 2500 grafts to achieve a significant cosmetic difference on the hairline as mentioned, FUT can do it with less far more often because there is no need to overload the area to compensate for a lower yield. Here are the results of a patient I did FUT on years ago. I just picked these photos off his own blog just now. Look at what 1800 grafts of FUT can do. It is hardly insignificant, and this patient's hair is anything but thick. He has classic thin and silky hair.

No growth at 3 months can be normal. Don't sweat it. You should be seeing sprouts by 4.5 months. Come back on then and share your good news.

Most of the time the new transplants are put in at a "neutral angle" not much different than the angle of the original hairs when they were the there. The problem is that in the hairline the original hairs were softer because they were thinner, and this made them more pliable and "styling compliant". Unfortunately, BECAUSE the original hairs in that area were thin, they were prone to falling out if male pattern baldness was in your future, which it obviously was. NOW you have put in new hairs from the donor area which are comparably thick and not as flexible or "style compliant. The good news is they are not prone to fall out. It's great to try to plan for a particular hair style before a transplant, but I have learned that it's best to tell patients to stick with which ever style looks the best after the first year and stick with it, even if it's not the original style the patient may have been hoping for. This is not a new concept for any of us since as we were losing our hair we changed our hair styles to maximize coverage. So go with what looks best with an open mind rather than trying to force it into a particular style. Remember, an HT is about the illusion of having more hair than you really do and styling plays as much a roll in this deception as do the hairs themselves. Grow well. Dr. Feller

I have had many many patients fly within 12-24 hours of the procedure with absolutely no problem. In fact, the sitting up in the plane for however long the flight is is actually a good thing as it allows the fluid and swelling to drain downward away from the transplants whether you had FUT or FUE. if you have FUT and surgical staples are used there will be no problem going through the magnetometer. This is because while the staples are in fact metal, the density is very low so the magnetometer doesn't sound. If you wear a hat that is usually no problem. If security asks you to take it off tell them you just had scalp surgery and would prefer not to and request they "wand" you instead. It's just another magnetometer which is hand held. Don't ask me why they bother since you will have already gone through the big magnetometer, but that's how it's done. None of my patients have ever had a problem nor been embarrassed. Best of luck with your Ht and grow well. Dr. Feller

That puff of hair right in the front. What's left of your hairline.

I'm going to give the answer today with pictures. But where did Enriquie Iglesias come from????

This is the "Mohawk effect" so I can see why 2 K might seem like enough, FUE or FUE. But if you look into the forelock itself it's thinning, so best to fill that area as well in the same procedure. Probably closer to 3K. At that level FUT is best. Best to you

The less the contrast between hair and skin, the better it looks. You can do more with fewer grafts. Great when we get these patients. Dr. Bloxham of Feller and Bloxham, PC discusses:

You are so close, Pup. So close !

He definitely had a hair transplant. Did it myself. What's wrong here? Think a bit out of the box. There is a virtual Ferrari in it for whomever figures it out.

This is exactly what I've been talking about. Thank you for posting this photo. Those FUE scars speak for themselves. Prime example of FUE confluence of scar. Of course in and of themselves these scars are not bad, but they exist in stark contrast to the claims made by FUE advocates on this and other forums. Fortunately he has plenty of hair to cover them. But if this is the case, he should have just gone for FUT and his growth yield would have been better.

Answer to be announced tomorrow with photos.

There is something wrong with the case being presented below. Can you figure out what happened and what is not quite right about this presentation? What do you think the plan was, and what actually happened? This is definitely a trick, but if you're really good, you'll figure it out pretty quickly. HT doctors invited to chime in but all may try for the prize.