Stimpson

I always sort of wondered about this too. I do not really know my fathers pattern of hair loss through the years. There is no heavy baldness on my mothers side, until my generation. However, my own started in the front very early (I had a naturally kind of high hairline anyway), and there was no crown thinning until relatively recently (I am mid 30's). I have progressed through the 'a' variants. I was a Norwood 4a and now a Norwood 5a. Naturally I read somewhere that this progression of balding is likely to be a little less severe than say someone who has a lot of initial crown loss at the beginning. This makes me hopeful for HT purposes, but then reality kind of kicks in, and I come to the conclusion that I am 'grasping at straws', to quote hdude46 from a few posts above. I'll end up where I end up, I guess. That's the unfortunate situation. You can guess. But it is just a guess. Stimpy

Oh. PRP = Platelet Rich Plasma. What's HM?

PRP? HM?

Wether or not you have to take your hat off is a complete gamble. Some require it, some do not. Here is a list of airports that I have extensive experience with, enough to make some sort of determination, although again it depends on the person working (i.e. nothing is ever guaranteed). Personlly, after an HT, I would be safe and ASSUME that you will have to take the hat off no matter where you are. You must be prepared for this possibility. Baltimore (BWI) - NEVER had to take off the hat. Washington Reagan (DCA) - Hat comes off every time. Washington Dulles (IAD) - NEVER had to take the hat off. Chicago, O'hare (ORD) - NEVER had to take the hat off. Chicago Midway (MDW) - Had to take the hat off only once, but I had been selected for 'special' screening. Tampa, FL (TPA) - NEVER had to take off the hat. Orlando, FL (MCO) - NEVER had to take off the hat. London Heathrow (LHR) Customs - hats coming off. Useless I know, but just thought I would share my experiences. Having spent years as a dedicated hat person, I notice these things. Stimpy

Thank you. We are not a socialist state (yet). Companies are free to pursue profit, as that is *precisely* what companies do. There is potentially huge profit to be had here. That in itself is justification. It's sad when this has to be stated out loud. Once upon a time this was common sense. Plus, just because money goes to baldness treatment does NOT mean money is NOT going to other things as well. Stimpy

It's so true about the minimaly invasive tools and small incisions. I remember when my mini's were placed, it was like they were using a jackhammer on my head. IIRC it was definitely a power tool of some sort. It's funny how little I remember of the entire process, though. It's like a stress induced memory blackout or something. Stimpson

I second this. I have NEVER been particularly attracted to the real bitchy 'ten' types that frequent bars/clubs in look of hook ups. I just never have. Give me somebody with a little more depth. The 'ten' types to me always look leathery and worn out. Usually by the time they are sophmores in college. Huh... So in light of the above statements, am I too judgemental? Are leathery and worn out chicks reading my post and running to the facelift doctors? And what about the poor fat girls? You know, thinking about it now, even in college, I used to sometimes go out to the bars in town (as an engineering student my college experience was not *all* parties and fun... I had to work pretty hard too). And holy crap! The bars would be frequented by young girls that were not only leathery and worn out, but also rather rotund! Their manner of dress was disturbing, because they would always be wearing clothes WAY too tight for their, umm.., body types, plus they would have on 120 lbs of make-up, etc. A little baldness would be MUCH less embarrasing IMO. Of course these girls were not the 'tens'. I'll bet these hefty chicks collectively have an insecurity *much* worse than us baldies. This trend towards obesity in the USA is really getting out of hand! Dalew - Are you sure she noticed the plugs? Or was it maybe just baldness? It's interesting nontheless, because I HAVE had the situation many times where I meet a girl with the HAT on. THEN what the hell do you do? Stimpy

That is too funny!! I wonder if sometimes we are not so obsessed that we lose sight of the possibility that nobody really cares that much. Also, it is *completley* true that people quickly forget what you used to look like. The same thing applies to weight loss, for example. You can show people a picture of what you used to look like when you were heavier, and even though they KNEW you at that time, they will still be shocked. Stimpy

Thanks, Joe. I actually thought of your case when I made this thread, as I know you had a *very* successful recovery from a situation that was *so* much worse than mine. I have seen all of the pictures documenting your trip down this road, and you do have a truly undetectable camo job. Those mini's are so far buried they are truly hidden. If I can get them buried like that, hey, all would be great! Stimpy

Hello. First, a brief history... I had my first procedure with Bosley in Dallas during the height of the mini-graft craze in the early 90's. 132 grafts total. It was fine, until my hair continued to fall and the minis became more visible. In the subsequent 15 years I had two procedures to cover the mini's, the two combined for about 3100 grafts. Much better and very competent work. Yet, if I cut my hair too short, the blasted mini's still show because they are sticking up at a higher angle than the rest of the surrounding hair. If I leave my hair long, it's great and you cannot tell a thing, and the mini's even contribute to the overall percieved density. So, I would REALLY REALLY REALLY just like these damn mini's gone, or at least the problem ones for sure. Of the 132 if maybe about 50-70 of the worst offenders could be removed that would be thrilling! I know some people on this board (e.g. Dewayne) have had mini's removed. However, it seems like they are always removed from the HAIRLINE. Thankfully, I do not have, and never have had, mini's in the hairline. So, my questions are as follows: 1. I plan to get an HT early next year, and if I had some of these mini's removed, could I do that at the same time as the HT? Could they just take those suckers out and replant them in a less clumpy more distributed pattern, along with a strip surgery the same day? While I would prefer the same day, I will do whatever is better (which my intuition tells me is probably two seperate procedures). 2. Since the mini's are not in the hairline, would a good doc even remove them? Or would they instead just try to do the thick camo coverup (which hey, I'm all for that, I just kind of want the best of both worlds, removal AND thickness). I know Dewayne at least said they did not remove the mini's that were further back on his scalp. These are precisely the ones I want removed, becuase they are the limiting factor when cutting my hair short. Is it generally practical to have a fairly large scale mini-graft removal process? And what of scarring? What are the chances that it will leave huge pits where the mini's were removed? If the risk of this is very real, I would rather just leave them be and get by with more camo. These are of course questions that I will discuss when I start going for consultations. But I thought I'd try to seek some expert opinions on here first. Here is a picture. It is a dreadful picture taken during the WORST DAYS of the ugly duckling period following the second coverup procedure about 1.5 years ago. This was taken about 2.5 months post-op and does NOT represent my current situation, as I was in the dark days of post-op shock-loss, still some visible pits, and so forth. There are no such issues now, as the recovery was fine. I post this picture, though, because it clearly shows the mini's that I would like removed. They are right freaking there for all to see. So, what do you guys think? Here is another picture that shows my current situation. As you can see, it is not bad. Which is kind of the reason for this thread. Am I crazy for wanting the mini's removed? Should I just deal with them? Thanks for all input - Stimpy

Hello. First, a brief history... I had my first procedure with Bosley in Dallas during the height of the mini-graft craze in the early 90's. 132 grafts total. It was fine, until my hair continued to fall and the minis became more visible. In the subsequent 15 years I had two procedures to cover the mini's, the two combined for about 3100 grafts. Much better and very competent work. Yet, if I cut my hair too short, the blasted mini's still show because they are sticking up at a higher angle than the rest of the surrounding hair. If I leave my hair long, it's great and you cannot tell a thing, and the mini's even contribute to the overall percieved density. So, I would REALLY REALLY REALLY just like these damn mini's gone, or at least the problem ones for sure. Of the 132 if maybe about 50-70 of the worst offenders could be removed that would be thrilling! I know some people on this board (e.g. Dewayne) have had mini's removed. However, it seems like they are always removed from the HAIRLINE. Thankfully, I do not have, and never have had, mini's in the hairline. So, my questions are as follows: 1. I plan to get an HT early next year, and if I had some of these mini's removed, could I do that at the same time as the HT? Could they just take those suckers out and replant them in a less clumpy more distributed pattern, along with a strip surgery the same day? While I would prefer the same day, I will do whatever is better (which my intuition tells me is probably two seperate procedures). 2. Since the mini's are not in the hairline, would a good doc even remove them? Or would they instead just try to do the thick camo coverup (which hey, I'm all for that, I just kind of want the best of both worlds, removal AND thickness). I know Dewayne at least said they did not remove the mini's that were further back on his scalp. These are precisely the ones I want removed, becuase they are the limiting factor when cutting my hair short. Is it generally practical to have a fairly large scale mini-graft removal process? And what of scarring? What are the chances that it will leave huge pits where the mini's were removed? If the risk of this is very real, I would rather just leave them be and get by with more camo. These are of course questions that I will discuss when I start going for consultations. But I thought I'd try to seek some expert opinions on here first. Here is a picture. It is a dreadful picture taken during the WORST DAYS of the ugly duckling period following the second coverup procedure about 1.5 years ago. This was taken about 2.5 months post-op and does NOT represent my current situation, as I was in the dark days of post-op shock-loss, still some visible pits, and so forth. There are no such issues now, as the recovery was fine. I post this picture, though, because it clearly shows the mini's that I would like removed. They are right freaking there for all to see. So, what do you guys think? Here is another picture that shows my current situation. As you can see, it is not bad. Which is kind of the reason for this thread. Am I crazy for wanting the mini's removed? Should I just deal with them? Thanks for all input - Stimpy

To be honest, if I were you, I would NOT lower the hairline. I agree with your doc in that regard. You MUST think of the future. You don't want to be stuck with some silly looking 16 year old hairline when you are 50. It will look weird. I would just fill it in where it currently sits. Just my opinion, though. I am all about the conservative approach. . Stimpy

Sounds like normal shedding. When the hair falls out it usually has a whitish bulb around the base. EVERYBODY gets concerned when they see this. There are a gizzilion posts about this exact same thing. It's normal. Try to just relax a bit. Stimpy

AIY!! I had the first at 21 or 22 with Bosley (very bad desperate decision). I had the second at 27 to cover the first. Regards, Stimpson

Ceasar - You seem entirely credible and I do not doubt you in the least. Some people really do have side effects. I am indeed thankful that I have not had any of these issues. Stimpy

Fin for about 2 years. No side effects whatsoever. People might scream at me, but I think most people who claim sexual sides have it in their heads that they are going to have trouble, and so they do. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Sex isn't so great when you approach it with a nervous "oh shit..." attitude. Then, after the sting of the 'incident', I could see where it would be REALLY easy to blame the fin, as some guys will do anything to save face at this point. Of course the problem was not the fin, it was the nervous "oh shit..." approach. Sitting there waiting for trouble. To quote my very respected HT doctor when I was 27, "a 27 year old man will NOT have sexual side effects from propecia". No disrespect intended, and I wonder if maybe I missed a joke or something, but if you have to ask if somebody "took a break from fin in order to procreate", you are DEFINITELY in that group that has it in your head that you are going to have trouble, and as such you probably will. If you are that worried, just avoid the fin altogether. Period. You are going to have trouble. When I read crazy threads about finesteride sides, I am usually laughing after a few posts. I have nothing but sympathy for my fellow baldies, but damn, fin gets blamed for EVERYTHING that is wrong in peoples lives (saggy faces, lack of concentration, etc.). It's really over the top too much of the time. Stimpy

Generally, and kind of ironically, you have a very good point. The further along you are with the balding, the more predictable the future becomes, and the odds of a one and done scenario improve greatly. The thing about your hair (which looks very similar to mine) is that it appears you can see something of what *might* be the final pattern. Mine is just like that too. It is possible those sides may drop a little more in the future, but they might not either. Plus, if the sides do drop, it will probably not be too much, and maybe something that can be filled in with a relatively small FUE procedure or something. PLUS, it will likely be WAY down the line timewise before those sides drop (IF they ever do). Basically, in summary, I think you are in great shape for a possible one and done HT. If anybody can do a one and done procedure on somebody like you, it's H&W. You are in good hands. You never quite know for sure, though, so just keep it in the back of your mind that a decade or so down the line you MAY need a small procedure. Regards, Stimpson

I had the first procedure with mini's by Bosley about 17 years ago. There is no WAY that would have stood on it's own, and I made it about 5 years before it HAD to be covered with a second procedure. As is typical for Bosley, the work was not very good. The second procedure successfully covered the bad Bosley work for about 6 more years, and then a third was required. The second procedure was a saving grace for a long time. But, hair loss continues, my remaining native hair continued to fall, and the Bosley mini's once again reared their ugly little pluggy heads. The third procedure was really good, and I feel like I COULD stop here. It's weird, I guess it's the meds, but my hairloss has slowed down SO much. Odd, because I was one of those guys where you could see the loss starting in high school. Bottom line, if your hairloss is still in the stage where it is progressing (i.e. you have not reached your final pattern), I think it is foolish to assume you can do a one and done procedure. There is debate about this topic and many good people have different opinions. To me it's blatantly obvious though... If your hair is still falling out, you cannot entirely predict the future. 10 years later you made need to do another. I will say that good doctors account for this as much as possible. They try to make it so that as your hair falls out it might look THIN, but it won't look unnatural. Alas, though, even this is not guaranteed. Basically, NOTHING is guaranteed. JMO, but if you are going into a procedure, and you are NOT prepared for the possibility that another procedure might be necessary at some point, you might be dangerously close to the realm of unrealistic expectations. Avoid looking at this through those rose colored glasses. Stimpy

Sound advice. Frankly, baldies like us should probably be wearing a hat anyway when out in the sun for prolonged periods anyway due to skin cancer and so forth. I remember Dr. Lindsay posting once about how he had seen a lot of patients recently with suspicous looking spots/growths on top of their heads. Stimpy

I don't know. That's just how it is. If you do a search you will find a million people asking this EXACT same question on this board. They are all okay. The transplanted hair sheds and it often has a bulb attached. It is not a lost graft. It's just a shedded hair complete with bulb. I know it's freaky, but just relax. You are in that 'worried' phase. We all go through it. You're fine. Stimpy

Through the roof, dude. So good it's freaking rediculous! Regards, Stimpson

Holy smokes we have EXACTLY the same type of hair. I think you are going to be pleased. FYI - for me months 7-12 were MUCH more exciting then months 1-6. You still have a long way to go. Don't be discouraged. Regards - Stimpson

It's obvious but it cannot be said often or loud enough!! I remember when I got my first procedure at Bosley at the age of 21 (or maybe 22, I forget). In retrospect, ALL I was concerned about was fixing my IMMEDIATE situation. Although the Bosley work was pretty attrocious, as Bosley usually is,thank GOD they had the sense to place the minis well behind the hairline, and at least angle them more or less correctly. This at least allowed the mini's to be camoflauged pretty easily later by a good surgeon (Dr. Parsley in Louisville). I was so desperate when I went to Bosley I literally do not remember having one single thought beyond the immediate future. I even remember them trying to instill into me that this was a commitment to a lifetime process and that I would never have a 16YO hairline (even the evil Bosley has their moments I guess). I was just like "yeah yeah...", and I STILL had it in my head that I would walk out of there with my baldness problem cured for life after receiving my 132 mini's. Of course those minis became a real problem for me when my hair continued to recede. If I could go back in time and visit myself, I would TOTALLY kick my ass. I was SO stupid. It's not that I'm a stupid person, I just could not see beyond my immediate desperation. This site was not here, as the internet was not what it is today back in the early 90's. Caution and careful planning for the future are a MUST. Also expectations MUST be kept realistic. Avoid looking at things with rose colored glasses. Personally, I am believer in a nice looking receded hairline. Like a 3V. This way you do not look bald, and since you are not filling in a low hairline, you have less area to cover and more grafts to play with. It's win win. Of course a 3V looks great on me with my facial/hair characteristics. I guess everybody is a little different in this regard. Boy I just cringe sometimes though when I see young patients taking aggressive approaches. I am afraid they are like I was at that age, only concerned about the IMMEDIATE future. Oh my, some of the trials a lot of these Armani type patients are going to face later in life are going to truly test their inner strength in ways they cannot yet even imagine. There is another category on this forum, called something like "support for hairloss issues" or something like that. I don't know if most people check in there, but posts like this one by dalew should be required reading: http://hair-restoration-info.c...41047973/m/461102761 Caution, people. Caution... Best Regards to all, Stimpson

Oh... Imissthebarber beat me to it... Damn!! I felt so smart!!! Oh well... Best regards - Stimpson

Alas, I am sorry to imform you that your math *is* wrong. If you do the calculation as you described, i.e. 9.5 inches X 7 inches, and THEN convert to centimeters, you do not just multiply by 2.54, but you multiply by 2.54 SQUARED. If you only multiply by 2.54 once, you are not converting BOTH sides to centimeters. The actual calculation is 9.5 inches X 7 inches X 2.54 X 2.54 = 429.03 CM2. To check this, lets convert FIRST before we do the area: 9.5 inches = 9.5 X 2.54 cm = 24.13 cm. 7 inches X 2.54 = 17.78 cm. Now, we just calculate the area as 24.13 cm X 17.78 cm = 429.03 cm2. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news... Best regards - Stimpson