Dr. Alan Feller

Both the ABHRS and the ABHTS are CLUBS founded by doctors. Neither of these clubs has any power, recognition, or authority of any kind. By improperly using the word "board" in their name, the ABHRS set out to create an entity that would be perceived by the public as "elite". It's founding members shamelessly and arrogantly "grandfathered" themselves into their club, but expected others to jump through their hoops to attain an unrecognized status of "board certification"-and to pay for the privilege as well. Several of this group's first members produced some of the most horrific results in hair transplant history. In my view, the ABHRS represented nothing more than a power grab by group of "good ole boys" that had to be opposed. I founded the American Board of Hair Transplant Surgeons (ABHTS) as a direct response to New York ABHRS member's who practiced deceptive advertising and fraud by falsely advertising "Board Certified" in their advertising. Their favorite phrase was "Board Certified Hair Transplant Surgeon" and it was meant to imply that they had greater training and ability than supposed non-board certified doctors. As I predicted, and made clear to the founding president of the ABHRS, the use of the term "Board" would be abused by their members and used as a marketing tool to imply an unearned "elite" status. Sure enough this came to pass right after the first ABHRS club members were initiated. Two of my closest competitors at the time illegally placed "Board Certified" on their advertising in an effort to con the public. I reported them. When I contacted the New York State medical authority and reported this abusive practice they told me that these doctors would be stopped...but not entirely. What you are about to read is the only reason the ABHRS has been able to keep the word "Board" in their name and continue misleading the public. According to New York State authorities, it is NOT illegal to form an organization and call it a "Board". The person I spoke to said that it is not ETHICAL to do so, but it is also not illegal. What WAS illegal was simply placing the phrase "Board Certified" on their advertisements without specifying what organization they were talking about. So all ABHRS members had to do was include in their advertising the following: "Board Certified by the American Board of Hair Restoration Surgeons" and they couldn't be touched. As long as they included the organizations name, they were fine to claim "board certification" status even though they were not and are not American Board of Medical Specialties(ABMS) recognized. Since there was nothing stopping ABHRS members from using the "Board" terminology, I was left with no choice but to create my own "Board" to level the playing field. The only difference was that members of my "Board" would be accepted and evaluated on their actual technical skill DURING actual surgeries. I would travel to their offices, or they would travel to mine. Eventually, our members traveled to each others offices. I founded the ABHTS with 3 Board Certified facial plastic surgeons and one board certified general surgeon. I founded it as a CLUB, but used the word "Board" just as the ABHRS does. A few years ago I received an email from an anonymous doctor who was part of a group of doctors who regularly emailed each other about various hair transplant issues. Several of them were ABHRS club members who learned of my ABHTS club. I almost fell off my chair with laughter as these hypocrites were sniping to each other about how what I was doing was illegal and unethical and how they were going to report me to the New York State medical authorities and take me into civil court. I say I was laughing because all I did was to copy exactly what they did. I knew they couldn't levy any charge at me that they themselves weren't guilty of so I looked forward to the confrontation. In fact, I couldn't wait for it. I phoned the biggest instigator in the email group, he knows who he is (an east coast doctor), and asked him why he was concerned with anything I do in the first place. Did he think I was such a competitive threat? When he tried to insinuate that the use of the word "Board" in my club's name was illegal I informed him, to his surprise, that it was the New York State medical authorities who gave me the green light for the formation of my club in the first place. I informed him that what gave the ABHRS the right the use the term "board" in their club's name was exactly the same thing that allowed me to do the same for the ABHTS. I reminded him that while he may succeed in fooling the public that his organization was a recognized subspecialty "board", I knew it was really just a bunch of doctors who formed a club trying to pretend they were something they were not. So if he wanted to stir up some trouble with the state to have the word "board" removed from my organizations name, then it would also have to be removed from their name as well. I offered to dissolve my club, or change the name, if they would simply change their name. That was the last time I had any trouble with the ABHRS and the last time I heard from them. They obviously have NOT changed their name, even though incoming president Nusbaum knows it is still a major point of contention. I spent the next few days reporting to the medical authorities of several states the severe abuse and fraud being practiced by ABHRS members and they responded by contacting members and stopping them from the illegal practice. It was this effort on my part and that of many other doctors that put the ABHRS on the run as far as using it for marketing tactics. Dr. Nusbaum even noted in his post that they keep a lid on their members misuse of their club's name. This is the direct result of our efforts. Since then the ABHRS have reined in the abuse of the word "board" and so I allowed my club to fade into the background. Our current members are still close friends and we still visit each other to update our skills and test each other. The formation of organizations like the Coalition of Surgeons and the International Alliance of Hair Restoration Surgeons (IAHRS) picked up where the ABHTS left off because their platforms could do a far better job of exposing a surgeon's TRUE abilities to the public. So the question should not be what the difference between the two clubs are, but rather why the ABHRS insists on continuing to use the term "board" in their name?

Dr. Nusbaum, I would like to congratulate you on your appointment as president of the ABHRS. I have little doubt that your members enjoy great fellowship and physician education. Any organization that pushes us to excel is a worthwhile one, but I must ask that you, as current president, to finally change the name of your organization. As you pointed out, the American Board of Hair Restoration Surgery (ABHRS) is not recognized as a true Board by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) . As such, the inclusion of the word Board is misleading, unnecessary, and confusing to the public you seek to serve and protect. Furthermore, referring to your members as "Board Certified" or "Diplomates" further confuses the public by falsely conferring a professional status they did not earn and is not even available. Since the ABHRS has no power, no authority, and no recognition, and is really just a club of volunteers willing to take an initiation test, wouldn't it be less confusing to rename yourselves the American Club of Hair Restoration Surgery (ACHRS)? I'm not quite sure what the purpose of the ABHRS actually is because it has never been adequately articulated. Personally, I've always seen it internally as an excellent forum for the exchange of medical information by motivated doctors, but outwardly as nothing more than a marketing gimmick and an attempt to somehow make members seem "elite" to a lay public. If the word "Board" were not in the name, then I would have no such criticism and would join the organization myself (assuming I could pass the initiation requirements of course). For the ABHRS to have purpose as anything other than a marketing tool, in my opinion, it would have to offer something the other established organizations don't already. We all know that fellowship and medical education are covered by at least four other organizations, so nothing exclusive there. So what is exclusive to the ABHRS? At best an argument for "watchdog" status could be made, but even here the ABHRS falls way short by virtue of the fact that they don't physically watch members perform surgery and then evaluate them. Academic knowledge and testing is nice, but it doesn't translate into technical skill. I've read books on tennis and memorized them, but I am still a lousy player on the court. I could pass any test on paper, but not necessarily in the real world. What the public needs is not a self proclaimed elite organization dedicated to teaching what is already available in other venues; but a watchdog group that quantifies the skills of each doctor and make that information public on a consistent basis. A pass/fail test on paper every ten years will not give the public the information it needs to make truly informed decisions. Consistently good results will, and it is websites like HTN that provide the platform for such consistent evaluation. No "Board" needed. The Coalition of Surgeons, in my opinion, can do more to evaluate good physicians than any psychometric test ever could, and it is in this direction that a qualifying body (like the ABHRS is attempting to be) should proceed. I mean this sincerely. The regular posting of patient photos and commentary is far more valuable to the public than any oral exam given in the conference room of a hotel, because now the public and potential patients are actually part of the process. Because such evaluations are constantly occurring in near real time, the Coalition doctors will always stay on their toes and give each surgery their very best. Add to this the fact that as a Coalition member your door must always be open to Pat for on site inspection and you now have a layer of evaluation that simply doesn't exist in the most elite and selective of organizations. I hope as the new president of the ABHRS you will give these comments sincere thought and move to strike the word "Board" from the name. I look forward to any comments or reply you may want to make as this is an important topic for me and the other doctors who, although qualified, have resisted joining your organization thus far. All the best, Dr. Alan S. Feller

MrJB, Thanks, but the truth is 90% of the doctors do NOT support our position that laser therapy is a waste. In fact a few even sell it.

BeHappy, One must prove an "effect" before worrying about side-effects. Your links are testimonials, but they are NOT proof. Not even close. Let's discuss: 1. Your first link contained written "tesitmonials" from anonymous authors to what I imagine is a laser product distributor. Hmmm, no way that could have been faked, huh??? How convenient that there is no way to verify the people or the statements. I think it is amazing that there wasn't even one negative letter. Not one. Pretty weak. 2. Your second link was a News bit about the man of the hour, Dr. Bauman himself. How do you think the news network came to know about Dr. Bauman and his magical lasers? I'll give you a hint, someone's public relations employee called the News station. Want to bet it wasn't a group of incredibly happy and satisfied laser customers? As usual, no true evidence was given during the "story", just happy happy people making the same old hair jokes and spouting the same old platitudes. 3. My favorite was the third link that is supposed represent PROOF of the efficacy of laser light. Who is the very first person to "testify"? Why, it's Matt Leavit! A man who (would you believe it) has a financial interest in "laser therapy"! He is also a man in possesion of a head of hair that would make a lion think about using a laser comb. The next speaker was...an unknown woman in business attire. No before photos of course, just her good word that in some nebulous way she benefitted from the magical laser comb. Next was a cute blonde who said basically the same thing the business chick said, only she sprung on us that she was a Registered Nurse at the end of her segment. In case you're not sure, that was designed to give some sort of medical credibility to laser therapy, and oh...NO before photos-as per usual. The next guy was my absolute favorite: This guy has tried "everything"...his words...and the laser comb was the one that did the trick. Then a "BEFORE" photo is shown which shows really thin hair and then an impressive "AFTER" photo is shown that shows an impressive amount of hair. But don't get your checkbooks out yet ladies and gentlemen, because if you look at the photos closely there is quite a bit of deception involved. The BEFORE photo is a close up of the tip of what's left of his hairline. The AFTER photo is pulled back and shows a much greater area that ALREADY had hair in it! If you look at the tip of his hairline in the after photo you will see that there is no cosmetically significant improvement at all! The last testimonial is from a journalist who was asked by HairMax's director to write an article. Sure, she is unbiased...right! Behappy, can't you do better than this??? Perhaps Dr. Bauman can do better?

Nervous, Putting more "energy" into the cell would not stimulate it to grow better hair. If anything the opposite would be true. Hair doesn't fall out because the "energy level" of the follicle is falling due to age or "rotting". It falls out because the cells of the follicle were programmed to die. The process of hair loss requires energy to occur. Therefore, putting MORE energy into the system would either do nothing or simply hasten the hair loss effect. And just so we are clear, i don't buy that lasers can "energize" cells! I look forward to Dr. Bauman's input or that of any of the laser therapy industry's representatives. Interesting how none of them has chimmed in by now don't you think? Dr. Feller

Bill, I believe Jotronic did a great job exposing the disingenuousness of the female photo you linked to. I'll take on the rest. I checked out the FDA 510k and believe that the omission of proof of efficacy is clear. Furthermore, I saw that they cited 4 studies that were performed BY THEMSELVES. I wonder how much stock the clinicians were given to perform the "studies". Also, you may notice that the STANDARD by which these clinicians gauged the success of the product is not articulated. My bottom line is that if you need a microscope to claim success, then you don't really have a success at all. So far, without hype,disingneuousness, and heavy marketing laser hair products wouldn't be given a second glance. On Dr. Bauman's link to flikr all you see is a hodge-podge of patients who have combinations of hair transplants, propecia, and maybe some "laser treatment". Where are the PURE laser treated patients? Why is the hair in the before photos wet down and then dry in the after photos? But Dr. Bauman is not the only doctor engaging in this purposful confussion. Hair Max laser comb is even more bold in their photo presentations. I pulled just the first two patient exapmples right off of hairmax's own website. There is no information giving any detail as to what medications these patients may be on nor does it say how long they used the laser comb IF AT ALL!!!

Nervous, My business will NOT be affected at all by laser therapy, so please don't think it is my motivation. My motivation is that I can't stand claims that go beyond the reasonable. Laser therapy has stepped way over that line in my view. You are right that I am not a specialist in biophysics, but neither is Dr. Bauman, and since it is he who is making the fantastic claim shouldn't it be he who is held to a higher standard and not me? Doesn't this just make common sense?

Pseudo-science, disingenuousness, and quackary should be illegal, but they are not. They even get rewarded in certain cases. I believe, as Jotronic pointed out, that laser comb sales and useless in-office laser treatments by physicians will skyrocket in the coming years. One only has to look at the success of the bogus hair regrowth formulations that are sold over radio and tv daily to see the bright future for laser "therapy". Very unfortunate. Marketing products that don't demonstrate any true clinical efficacy is nothing new, but the laser comb breaks new ground in that now PHYSICIANS have become openly complicit. I for one am very disappointed in the doctors that are selling this form of "therapy" to patients and hope that they will someday be held accountable. Jotronic's motivation in exposing laser treatments is to protect the consumer from paying thousands of dollars for a useless treatment. My motivation is to protect the trust that the public has placed in physicians in general, and hair transplant doctors in particular. Doctor's who sell this "therapy" put that trust in danger for all of us. By the way, has anybody noticed that Dr. Bauman has NOT joined this discussion? Where are you Dr. Bauman?

Nervous, I do not believe there is any benefit in using lasers for healing purposes. You can rest assured that if that were true every emergency room and operating room would be bathed in such light. There is no such phenomenon, just wishful thinking at this point. What is your profession and why are lasers the rage in it? Dr. Bauman also used the mystical effect on the mitochondria to support his claim, but clearly couldn't explain how it related to hair re-growth. Just throwing out a bit of biological jargon is not enough to prove a phenomenon like laser hair growth-although that's exactly what he attempted to do on the air. I'll blow that claim right out of the water right here and now: We already know that cells that have dht receptors receive a signal to kill themselves when dht arrives. That is the accepted mechanism of hairloss and it is called apoptosis. This means that the programming within the cell is altered to cause it's own death. Now, if you "energize" the mitochondria, the "powerhouse of the cell", then all you are doing is giving it more fuel to carry out its established programming- WHICH IS TO CAUSE CELL DEATH. This will accelerate hair loss, not slow it or reverse it. It's like increasing the current available to the powersupply in your computer and thinking it's going to somehow change the programming on the hard drive. It's ridiculous and it doesn't happen. Curious- I'd rather you think less of me and know the truth about supposed laser hair regrowth treatments. I know my post is a bit upsetting and definitely confrontational, but if you know of a better way to get the point across without stepping on toes I'm all ears. I'm not the one making fantastic claims to the public and then charging thousands of dollars for it. And please remember that there is nothing stopping me from doing so-except the fact that I know it doesn't work. The emperor is wearing no clothes. There, I said it.

Wanthairs: Perhaps you can contact the company and trade in your comb for a new and improved deluxe model Nobuzz: I don't know if it has been archived yet, but imagine it will be. You can be sure I'll post a link to it when it comes available. Your post about laser pushers is funny, but not as funny as doctors beginning to subtly slam laser combs because they're not as good or effective as the large laser units they have in their offices (and bill thousands of dollars for). Looks like the laser combs are taking a big bite out of their business and they are beginning to react. Watch as more and more doctors start claiming on their websites that their office machines have one hundred lasers and are therefore better and more effective than the "cheap" home units or laser combs. In my book ZERO times ZERO is still ZERO Also watch out for moving laser heads in different patterns to start making an appearence as well as magnet and new age crystal attachments (just to cover all the bases you know)

How wonderful it was to have a public forum like "The Bald Truth" radio program to debate questionable modalities of hair loss treatment like laser therapy. For a long time I've wanted to debate a "cold laser" industry advocate publicly, but there were never any takers when I would ask. However, I think the national recognition Kobren has earned over the years as a consumer advocate made his request one that couldn't be refused or ignored on the part of the industry. The following are my thoughts and opinion of the debate. On Sunday August 26 on XM-radio Dr. Alan Bauman and I debated the merits of low power laser therapy for hair loss. Dr. Bauman was given the floor to make his case for laser therapy, but he failed to do so. One might have expected him to point us to a website that demonstrated undeniable and mind blowing before/after photos and testimonials, but he couldn't. Instead, he gave us a website of photos that would easily be torn apart by educated viewers like readers of the Hair Transplant Network. None of these photos showed any significant change after "treatment" and the usual deceptive photography practices were well represented: such as the wetting of the hair in the before photo and then showing dry puffed out hair in the after photo; or showing the scalp in the before photo at one angle and then the after photo at another angle to make an area APPEAR to have grown hair, or showing the existing hair cut short in the before photo and grown out longer in the after photo. Of course there was no clinical information about the medical history of these laser "patients" so we can't know what medications they were on before, during, or after "treatment". How convenient. Without convincing photos he really couldn't establish that the supposed phenomenon of "laser induced hair growth" was a reality. But that didn't dissuade him one bit. He then launched into a well rehearsed list of scientific studies, texts, and papers that supposedly supported the existence of the phenomenon. This was supposed to quiet me, and while some of the sources he cited sounded a little impressive, most sounded outright ridiculous and laughable-like his reference to Russian scientific evidence. I was prepared for this tactic and was able to dismiss any and all supposed scientific evidence out of hand by simply pointing out that you can't use the scientific method to prove a phenomenon that doesn't exist in the first place. That's putting the cart before the horse and is an invalid way of demonstrating the existence of a phenomenon. It's like looking for the details a crime when NO crime ever took place. Plainly stated- if you can't see a cosmetically significant change in hair volume and/or coverage after "treatment" with just your own eyes then there simply is NO phenomenon to speak of or study in depth. This is just common sense. A phenomenon is SELF EVIDENT and doesn't need scientific evaluation to prove its existence. For example, the Northern Lights are a well known and easily described PHENOMENON, you do not have to understand the scientific aspects of electro-magnetic radiation, atmospheric distortion, and solar wind to witness it, you only need to open your eyes and look. The growth of hair from laser light therapy does not suffer from such obviousness and so does NOT exist as a valid phenomenon. If it is not an existing phenomenon, then only someone with an agenda will attempt to "study" it. Think of s???©ance mediums at the turn of the 20th century. In reality, the "science" that Dr. Bauman presented had absolutely nothing to do with the growth of hair using laser light. Rather I believe it was a hodge-podge of studies that were thrown out in an effort to lead a lay public to INFER that a non-existent phenomenon had scientific support. The connections were as weak and tenuous as those presented in support of wild theories about UFOs, the Bermuda Triangle, and the Loch Ness Monster.My personal favorite was the paper Dr. Bauman cited about how ATP is "energized" when in the presence of laser light. I think both the public and the scientific community deserve better than that when handing him thousands of dollars for a treatment that uses a phenomenon that does not exist. Dr. Bauman's credibility really came under fire when it was found out that the ONE person who called the show in support of the laser comb turned out to be HIS OWN PATIENT. This would not have been such a scandal except for the fact that neither Dr. Bauman nor the caller disclosed this very important fact until I started questioning what the caller was claiming. When it came out who the caller really was and that Dr. Bauman actually put him up to it behind the scenes, Mr. Kobren stated on the air that he was never informed that the caller was a patient of Dr. Bauman. I can't state what Dr. Bauman's intentions were when he asked this patient to clandestinely call in on behalf of laser hair treatments that he sells for thousands of dollars, but I have my suspicions. Also note that throughout the entire 2 hour live broadcast, only ONE person called in supporting laser therapy. For a show that reaches millions of people each week I think that's enough evidence to show that no such phenomenon exists. It seems that the only people who claim such a phenomenon exists are those who stand to benefit from it -not very convincing to me. Why is it that grocery store check out clerks whose hands are exposed to laser light all day do not complain of excess hair growth on the hands or forearms? Why is it that people who work in laser printer factories or laboratories that use lasers all day have not reported unwanted hair growth? The obvious answer is that there is no such phenomenon. The bottom line is that I am convinced my position is correct simply because I know and understand what lasers are. "Laser" is NOT a substance as laser therapy advocates would have you believe, but rather a form of energy. As such it does not contain any mystical powers and cannot affect cellular material in anyway other than to transfer the energy into to heat. If lasers positively affected the body at the cellular level then advocates of laser therapy would have us implant fiber optics throughout our bodies and light ourselves up like an internal Christmas tree, and while this may sound silly, it is only marginally more ridiculous than shining a laser pointer on your head and expecting it to grow hair. I look forward to continuing the debate with Dr. Bauman on this forum.

How wonderful it was to have a public forum like "The Bald Truth" radio program to debate questionable modalities of hair loss treatment like laser therapy. For a long time I've wanted to debate a "cold laser" industry advocate publicly, but there were never any takers when I would ask. However, I think the national recognition Kobren has earned over the years as a consumer advocate made his request one that couldn't be refused or ignored on the part of the industry. The following are my thoughts and opinion of the debate. On Sunday August 26 on XM-radio Dr. Alan Bauman and I debated the merits of low power laser therapy for hair loss. Dr. Bauman was given the floor to make his case for laser therapy, but he failed to do so. One might have expected him to point us to a website that demonstrated undeniable and mind blowing before/after photos and testimonials, but he couldn't. Instead, he gave us a website of photos that would easily be torn apart by educated viewers like readers of the Hair Transplant Network. None of these photos showed any significant change after "treatment" and the usual deceptive photography practices were well represented: such as the wetting of the hair in the before photo and then showing dry puffed out hair in the after photo; or showing the scalp in the before photo at one angle and then the after photo at another angle to make an area APPEAR to have grown hair, or showing the existing hair cut short in the before photo and grown out longer in the after photo. Of course there was no clinical information about the medical history of these laser "patients" so we can't know what medications they were on before, during, or after "treatment". How convenient. Without convincing photos he really couldn't establish that the supposed phenomenon of "laser induced hair growth" was a reality. But that didn't dissuade him one bit. He then launched into a well rehearsed list of scientific studies, texts, and papers that supposedly supported the existence of the phenomenon. This was supposed to quiet me, and while some of the sources he cited sounded a little impressive, most sounded outright ridiculous and laughable-like his reference to Russian scientific evidence. I was prepared for this tactic and was able to dismiss any and all supposed scientific evidence out of hand by simply pointing out that you can't use the scientific method to prove a phenomenon that doesn't exist in the first place. That's putting the cart before the horse and is an invalid way of demonstrating the existence of a phenomenon. It's like looking for the details a crime when NO crime ever took place. Plainly stated- if you can't see a cosmetically significant change in hair volume and/or coverage after "treatment" with just your own eyes then there simply is NO phenomenon to speak of or study in depth. This is just common sense. A phenomenon is SELF EVIDENT and doesn't need scientific evaluation to prove its existence. For example, the Northern Lights are a well known and easily described PHENOMENON, you do not have to understand the scientific aspects of electro-magnetic radiation, atmospheric distortion, and solar wind to witness it, you only need to open your eyes and look. The growth of hair from laser light therapy does not suffer from such obviousness and so does NOT exist as a valid phenomenon. If it is not an existing phenomenon, then only someone with an agenda will attempt to "study" it. Think of s???©ance mediums at the turn of the 20th century. In reality, the "science" that Dr. Bauman presented had absolutely nothing to do with the growth of hair using laser light. Rather I believe it was a hodge-podge of studies that were thrown out in an effort to lead a lay public to INFER that a non-existent phenomenon had scientific support. The connections were as weak and tenuous as those presented in support of wild theories about UFOs, the Bermuda Triangle, and the Loch Ness Monster.My personal favorite was the paper Dr. Bauman cited about how ATP is "energized" when in the presence of laser light. I think both the public and the scientific community deserve better than that when handing him thousands of dollars for a treatment that uses a phenomenon that does not exist. Dr. Bauman's credibility really came under fire when it was found out that the ONE person who called the show in support of the laser comb turned out to be HIS OWN PATIENT. This would not have been such a scandal except for the fact that neither Dr. Bauman nor the caller disclosed this very important fact until I started questioning what the caller was claiming. When it came out who the caller really was and that Dr. Bauman actually put him up to it behind the scenes, Mr. Kobren stated on the air that he was never informed that the caller was a patient of Dr. Bauman. I can't state what Dr. Bauman's intentions were when he asked this patient to clandestinely call in on behalf of laser hair treatments that he sells for thousands of dollars, but I have my suspicions. Also note that throughout the entire 2 hour live broadcast, only ONE person called in supporting laser therapy. For a show that reaches millions of people each week I think that's enough evidence to show that no such phenomenon exists. It seems that the only people who claim such a phenomenon exists are those who stand to benefit from it -not very convincing to me. Why is it that grocery store check out clerks whose hands are exposed to laser light all day do not complain of excess hair growth on the hands or forearms? Why is it that people who work in laser printer factories or laboratories that use lasers all day have not reported unwanted hair growth? The obvious answer is that there is no such phenomenon. The bottom line is that I am convinced my position is correct simply because I know and understand what lasers are. "Laser" is NOT a substance as laser therapy advocates would have you believe, but rather a form of energy. As such it does not contain any mystical powers and cannot affect cellular material in anyway other than to transfer the energy into to heat. If lasers positively affected the body at the cellular level then advocates of laser therapy would have us implant fiber optics throughout our bodies and light ourselves up like an internal Christmas tree, and while this may sound silly, it is only marginally more ridiculous than shining a laser pointer on your head and expecting it to grow hair. I look forward to continuing the debate with Dr. Bauman on this forum.

Dario, There are practically no situations where implanting 2000 grafts instead of 1500 is of any disadvantage. If shockloss is not an issue at 1500 grafts, then it most likely will not be an issue at 2000 grafts, especially if they are implanted densely. Very very few surgeries should be under 2000 grafts in my opinion ESPECIALLY when you are dealing with repair cases. Best of luck in your decision process. Grow well, Dr Feller

Jag, I did a double take when I saw your new photos. FAR better than your old work. Congratulations and grow well. Dr. Feller Feller Medical, PC Great Neck, NY www.fellermedical.com

Here are Michaellovesnyc photos

I want to thank Pat for going to the trouble to not only visit my office, but that of other HT doctors claiming to perform ultra-refined follicular transplants. Regrettably, almost ALL doctors claim to be "experts" and "pioneers" in the field of hair transplantation. Because there is no knowledgeable authority to check out their claims, clinics that KNOW they are performing sub-standard work continue to operate and be successful. This is disgraceful. When it was proposed at an ISHRS meeting ( the largest HT doctor organization) that standards be set for all individual clinics to meet it was rebuffed very harshly. The powers that be at the ISHRS only wanted the organization to remain more of a club than a self governing body. Recognizing the need for a self-governing body though, the ISHRS backed the formation of the ABHRS ( American Board of Hair Restoration Surgery). I did not support this organization and refused to join it because: 1. It is not a legitimate "Board" in that it is not recognized by the ABMS (American Board of Medical Specialties)-and never will be. Despite this, the organization continued to use the term "Board" in it's name when "Club" would have been more honest. There is no question in my mind that the use of the term "Board" was designed to ascribe more credibility to the organization than it otherwise deserved. 2. Some of the people who became members (or who were grandfathered into it) are among the worst HT doctors in the business. While there are definitely a few excellent doctors in that mix, the bad ones know who they are and there are far too many of them. 3. There are no rigorous standards of excellence to meet nor are there on-site inspections of not only the doctor, but his staff and facility as well. Clearly there existed a quality control vacuum in the field of Hair Transplantation. This field was screaming out for it's version of a "consumer reports" and Pat Hennessey stepped up. He could have just kept running his website from the comfort of his home and continued to collect income from sponsoring doctors without getting out of his chair, but he decided to get out there and put all the doctors to the test. It is amazing that he is the ONLY person who has traveled the globe to observe as many doctors as he could performing surgery to see if they TRULY measured up to their own claims AT HIS OWN EXPENSE. This gives Pat credibility beyond that of all other consumer advocates combined and he has earned a higher level of respect from me because of it. I can guarantee you that there are many doctors who do not want a visit from Pat Hennessey. They know very well that they will be exposed as liars who are definitely NOT "leaders in the field" nor "pioneers" as claimed, but rather poorly trained and inexperienced amateurs whose only motivation is money and whose only credibility to a lay public is the fact that they have a medical degree. Bravo to Pat for taking the time and the energy to "police" this field, because this is exactly what he's doing and he's the ONLY one doing it. It takes guts and stamina to do what he's doing, and both the hair transplant industry AND patients are benefiting from it immensely. Because of the credibility Pat has brought to his site and the Coalition through his efforts, I would rather have "Coalition Member" at the end of my name rather than "Board Certified by the ABHRS". Keep up the good work Pat. Keep fighting, because if it were easy, everybody would be doing it! Your helping us all win the fight against bad hair transplants and bad doctors. All the best, Dr. Feller

This is excellent work IMO. Dr. F

Irish, Nice growth for five months. Hope all is well. Keep updating us with photos from the emerald isle. Dr F

The Joe, I appreciate the effort you went to in posting the laser studies. And I did bother to read the first study whose link you posted. May I say that wound contracture does not correlate with organ (follicular) apoptosis (self inflicted necrosis). The experiment cited attempts to treat external trauma, not pre-programmed death. The assumed connection between the two is just too much of a leap to be applicable. Second, and more importantly, the experiment cited did not take into account heat. If you read about wound healing under different temperatures you will find the same degree of difference in wound contracture. In other words, the presence of a 5 cent bandage would have produced the same wound closure differential as a $10,000 laser. Again, laser is NOT a substance. It has NO properties other than to act as a form of ENERGY. When those photons hit a surface the amount of energy absorbed varies with the amount of power and the wavelength at which the photons were sent. Once absorbed, the energy is re-radiated as HEAT. That's all there is to it and there is absolutely NO physiological benefits delivered other than HEAT. Finally, most of the laser in LLLT is deflected by the remaining hair and the skin itself! If anyone can prove a significant cosmetic difference on any kind of a consistent basis I will go out there and buy a machine that day. So far I still don't own a machine. For now, LLLT is only a way to make money without delivering cosmetically significant nor consistent results. In essence, modern day snake oil. I look forward to be proved wrong, I hope someone can do so.

As an HT doctor, I would have been swayed by that post op photo that Pat posted. NO doctor would want to be associated with a practice or website that considered THAT work to be true follicular transplantation. Why doesn't that doctor simply improve his technique? It's not like these new methods are secrets. And if he insists on NOT changing his methods, why doesn't he just come on this site and post his reasons. Who knows, maybe he's right...although I highly doubt it. I never heard of this doctor before this post, and that photo Pat showed is all the reason I need to know why. Should he read this post I would tell him not to be offended or frustrated. Just admit you are a bit behind in skill and technique and make an effort to improve. Simple as that!

Aquarius, I can't say I agree with your last statment, but lately I am begining to understand what you mean by it. I have been shocked by the number of doctors offering bogus "laser hair" therapy to their patients, and this latest advertisment posted by a very high profile HT doctor goes beyond the pale. I called Spencer Kobren about the doctor in RI who basically offers "heat" therapy for hairloss and he informed me that MANY high profile HT doctors have jumped on the "laser bandwagon". As a recognized consumer advocate Kobren could NOT endorse the laser treatments. He attributes the rise in doctor use solely to the recent FDA approval it received. Whether these doctors actually have valid reasons to offer this questionable treatment remains to be seen, but I intend to call each of them and find out. I will report back here with my findings. As for the advertisment at the top of this thread, there is clearly no defense and the intent to mislead is beyond refute. Hyperbole in the name of good marketing is one thing, but outright lying is quite another. Had a NY licensed doctor placed this ad in NY, he would be disiplined IMMEDIATELY. If this doctor has a practicing associate in New York state with a NY license he's about to get a nasty letter from the state. It was by my reporting a very similar fraudulent advertising scheme that kept another off shore group of supposed FUE specialists out of New York. They did have an associate with a NYS license ready to act as a "franchisee", but after I sent a copy of the advertisment (similar to the above)to the NYS Dept of Medical Conduct that group vaporized. I know for a fact the State acted. Less than ethical HT doctors may bother you all, but they absolutely nauseate me and I will never shy away from calling one out publically. I hold myself to the same standard should any knowledgable doctor or professional out there think I am acting unethically. That's the very power of this medium. Dr. Feller

Rhode, Thanks for the link. I must say that I am SHOCKED. I know Dr. Leonard. Even had a scotch with him at one of the meetings a few years back. I am shocked that he is using "infra-red" light to regrow hair. Do you all know what "infra-red" light is? Of course you do...it's a HEATING LAMP!!!! Why not just use a hair dryer or a french fry warmer!!! His credibility just sunk through the floor with me. It's a shame. A real shame. There is not even a point in calling him and asking him about this. There is just no defense. To ALL patients and potential patients out there, please understand that not all doctors fleece their patients in this manner. It may be legal, but it shouldn't be. This is a sad day for HT doctors.

A DOCTOR in R.I. was doing this??? Was this an HT doctor? Who? It's a good thing you didn't waste any money there. Wow, this is more of an epidemic than I first realized.

Here is the front of one of the brochures. You can see in the very first line what they are all about. Everything they wrote on the brochure is FALSE and is a scam. Nothing more, nothing less. Look at the supposed before and after photos. You can see that the first photo was overexposed and the head is tilted way down. In the follow up photos the photo is darker and the head is tilted up to give the illusion of more hair. An old trick well known to viewers of sites like HTN. There is absolutely NO cosmetic difference between any of the photos. If anything, it looks as if the "patient's" forelock is thinner and missing a section on his left side in November compared to January. Blantent scammers like these absolutely nausiate me, and there is nothing that can be done about it. They will continue to con the public until the public catches on. How thankful I am for sites like this one where frauds like this one can be exposed. What they are doing may not technically be illegal, but they shouldn't be allowed to get away with it either.