Ceasar08

Take A Chance -- I am in the EXACT same position as you are. I had to quit Propecia years abck due to terrible sides. I was about a NW5 when I got a transplant. I'm hoping PRP will help with my crown and side fringes so I don't have to worry about a second surgery so quickly.

I suppose it's a compliment to Dr. Arocha's work that I already assumed he was a member of the coalition. In my humble opinion, coalition members should be a very small and exclusive group. Not just doctors who are very good -- but the absolute best of the best. I really do think that Dr. Arocha qualifies in this regard.

Hairhope -- I would be interested myself in knowing the risks involved. According to all of my research, the procedure is about as safe as they come. Obviously, people have reactions to aspirins everyday... so nothing is entirely one hundred percent. The only potential risk that I can see would be a mishandling of the blood, meaning that it is subjected to contamination or mislabeling

Dr. Lindsey -- I believe in the power of prayer, and I will certainly contribute my own thoughts and prayers for your daughter to get well. The best advice anyone ever gave me was to take things a day at a time. Everyone in this community holds you in very high regard, both as a doctor and as a person. All the best to you and your family.

It's dangerous to lump everything "experimental" together into one category. Especially since every effective treatment starts out as experimental and unproven. Putting sugar or peanut butter on a person's head has zero scientific basis behind it. There is strong scientific reason to believe that PRP should grow hair. Does that mean that the treatment will grow cosmetically significant hair? Of course not. Dr. Feller has already cautioned against "hype"ing the thing to death. I personally like the phrase "cautiously optimistic" to describe my attitude about it. But to lump it together with "snake oil" treatments and potions is misleading. The treatment already has real world applications, evidence, and sound science behind it. It's starting to get the backing of reputable people who are usually the last ones to jump on the bandwagon. If a new DHT inhibitor was patented tomorrow, it would be impossible to make any claims about it growing hair until the data was recorded. It would also not be unreasonable to think that it might grow hair for people. The science behind DHT inhibition is scientifically sound. PRP should benefit hair based on its past track record on other parts of the body. I am not saying it will definitely work. I am saying that by putting all unproven methods in the same category you are actually helping the snake oil salesmen. In terms of "side effects," I don't see how injecting somebody's own platelets can cause "side effects." It's done in every hospital every day, all day long. There isn't really anything about this procedure for the FDA to "approve" either. It's basically been done for a long time now in different forms.

The terms "hype" and "snake oil" are different from the word "experimental." PRP is already proven to benefit the tissue it is used upon. The data and real world results exist. "Snake oil" is something that has no scientific basis behind it. PRP does grow hair -- most definitely in Alopecia Areata patients. The question is whether the extent to which it will work will be cosmetically significant. All the other questions also remain about long term effectiveness, etc. It is experimental, but very promising.

Thanks guys. Looking into all of the options you've listed.

Slaps -- Please hang in there, it'll be worth it in the end. I had my transplant over ten months ago, and it really did not start to take shape until month eight. I'm now in month ten, and it's first really getting exciting for me. I know it's incredibly difficult to imagine things improving right now, and it seems like nothing is happening, but you would be shocked how an awful lot of change can start to happen practically overnight. It really takes a long time though. Reading about the wait is a whole lot different than living through it. I also realize that you've had bad work in the past, so that really adds to your worries and concerns. Even at seven months I was worried about my results, and now at ten plus months, the hair is really beginning to take shape. I can't account for what your personal situation and expectations are, but I can just about guarantee you that you are going to look a million times better when all is said and done. By the way, I am also a Dr. Feller patient. Again, hang in there, I bet at the one year mark you will feel completely different.

I was wondering if anyone has any recommendations for a very mild shampoo or conditioner. My hair and scalp tend to fall on the dry and flaky side. My favorite thing to use was Nizoral conditioner (not the shampoo), but it's apparently been discontinued. It almost felt like putting moisturizer on your scalp. I think my scalp becomes very irritated very easily by zinc, nizoral, etc. Any suggestions?

Looks like you've healed very well. Continue to keep us posted... and grow well!

I think that this post from Dr. Lindsey is so well written and so important that it should be bookmarked somewhere on this site. It sums it up beautifully. There is way too much discussion of graft numbers in my opinion. A "graft" is not a distinct unit, so it makes little sense to get caught up in numbers -- they mean nothing. It's hair characteristics and scalp characteristics that are really the key. If these things are less than ideal, it can make the largest surgery with the most skilled surgeon a challenge.

I just stumbled onto this thread, and I think I have an instant crush on "Sizzle." Super eloquent with her words... It's great that she took the time to post and offer her insight. It's true that not all women think in such an enlightened way, but clearly the most worthwhile ones have a lot more substance than this thread is giving them credit for having...

I tried it and have no clue if it helped. I did think it was rather expensive and that its basic active ingredients could be picked up and used for cheaper.

My real results have come after eight months. Who was your doc and how many grafts?

Thanks for answering Jessica. I tried it once a year or two ago and thought it might have helped a lit bit with overall thickness. I'll probably give it another shot at some point.

I quit the drug after being on it over a year. It took 11-12 months before I felt my libido returned. It was a bit nerve racking. After having gone through quite a bit with the drug, I most definitely believe those people on propeciahelp who say they never returned to normal. I tried cut the dose before quitting, but nothing really seemed to get rid of the sides for me.

Hang in there... you've got a looong way to go my friend. My growth didn't really take off until the 7-8 month mark. It's way too early to judge anything. Everyone here has been through the exact same thing... Bernstein knows his stuff and it will all grow in time.

Jessica -- Thank you for that helpful post. Do you have any opinions on silica (more specifically the product biosil) helping with hair texture and quality? I've heard some good anecdotal things similar to what you said about biotin.

Here's what I've been wondering about for years... Take the guy below in this video as an example: http://glock08.tripod.com/Rockwell/Hair.wmv And here is a link to his blog on this web site: http://www.hairtransplantnetwo...e-page.asp?WebID=122 My understanding is that on the most simplistic level, transplant results pretty much come down to the surgeon's skill, quality of donor area, extent of hair loss, and patient physiology. Now, take the guy in the video as a case study... Here is a guy with extensive balding who formerly wore a hair piece, and he certainly doesn't have a jaw dropping donor area by any stretch of the imagination. The guy did start Minoxidil and Propecia at some point, but I would think it's doubtful that they had much more than a stabilizing effect at his stage of the game. This guy got 4300+ grafts from Dr. True. Now, I know Dr. True is a fine surgeon... but this guy is brushing through his hair in the video as if he's Elvis Presley. I don't get it. Another thing of note is that his 9/10 month photos on his blog look a bit thin.. and then somehow by fourteen months he's got a mop. Do patients really thicken up to such an extent from 10-14 months? What do people attribute to his result? Dr. Cooley was kind enough to comment recently on something I brought up regarding dormant non-transplant hair waking up after surgery. Could this be the explanation? I have seen a bunch of examples of guys like these... Patients who have average or even below average donor characteristic, extensive balding, and results that are on a whole other level. Everyone comments and says "amazing", "incredible result", etc. but no one ever brings up the fact that even with the finest surgeon and technique... something just doesn't quite fit together. It's very confusing. Could anyone help shed some light on this? I can come up with a bunch of other examples if anyone would like to see them. Thanks in advance.

Here's what I've been wondering about for years... Take the guy below in this video as an example: http://glock08.tripod.com/Rockwell/Hair.wmv And here is a link to his blog on this web site: http://www.hairtransplantnetwo...e-page.asp?WebID=122 My understanding is that on the most simplistic level, transplant results pretty much come down to the surgeon's skill, quality of donor area, extent of hair loss, and patient physiology. Now, take the guy in the video as a case study... Here is a guy with extensive balding who formerly wore a hair piece, and he certainly doesn't have a jaw dropping donor area by any stretch of the imagination. The guy did start Minoxidil and Propecia at some point, but I would think it's doubtful that they had much more than a stabilizing effect at his stage of the game. This guy got 4300+ grafts from Dr. True. Now, I know Dr. True is a fine surgeon... but this guy is brushing through his hair in the video as if he's Elvis Presley. I don't get it. Another thing of note is that his 9/10 month photos on his blog look a bit thin.. and then somehow by fourteen months he's got a mop. Do patients really thicken up to such an extent from 10-14 months? What do people attribute to his result? Dr. Cooley was kind enough to comment recently on something I brought up regarding dormant non-transplant hair waking up after surgery. Could this be the explanation? I have seen a bunch of examples of guys like these... Patients who have average or even below average donor characteristic, extensive balding, and results that are on a whole other level. Everyone comments and says "amazing", "incredible result", etc. but no one ever brings up the fact that even with the finest surgeon and technique... something just doesn't quite fit together. It's very confusing. Could anyone help shed some light on this? I can come up with a bunch of other examples if anyone would like to see them. Thanks in advance.

At the risk of blowing this out of proportion... doesn't this seem like HUGE news to everyone?? I mean, if I'm reading this thread correctly, this is the most significant new hairloss development I've read about in ten years. Any chance of more info?? How soon is the "near future"?

Ok... so how about this.. whoever guesses the exact number of centimeters of your strip, wins a bottle of that coal shampoo Jotronic has been endorsing... Oh yeah... and congrats Bill! Grow well!

Apparently, a rumor is now circulating that the prize will be a transplant with a coalition surgeon of one's choice. Very generous.

All the best Bill. If it's not too late, I'll go with 2468. Though I hope the number is much higher. Gift certificate prizes come and go, but grafts are for a lifetime... Hope things went great for you.

Hair multiplication would involve taking healthy, DHT-resistant hair from the donor area and cloning it. Therefore, someone who only has 8000 grafts available, can have those grafts multiplied into tens of thousands of hairs, giving them enough donor hair to restore full density. Hair multiplication has nothing to do with reviving dormant follicles. I believe that the average person is born with upwards of over 100,000 hairs. This means that even if medical treatment revived dormant hair, the number of transected follicles should be negligible.