Jotronic

by saying that the books in a doctor's office is a good indicator of his work but only for preliminary research. The true testament to a docs abilities is the freedom to contact his female patients to see how they feel about the work. Not just one or two but several. Peace, Jotronic Carpe Capillus!! www.jotowen.com

Eat your heart out guys,LOL!! Jenn, if you already have your pics on your PC then when you write a new post scroll down to the bottom of the page before you hit "post now". There will be a check box that says,"post attachment" on the left side of the screen. Once you do this then hit "post now" and you will go to the normal screen that says thank you for your post. Then you will be directed to another screen that will ask you to browse for your files. Hit "browse" and you will see your file system. Just direct it to where your file it, double click on the file then post. Done. Peace, Jotronic Carpe Capillus!! www.jotowen.com

Jenn, Are you asking because you saw my striking images?LOL, kidding. Seriously, your question is a good one and I have never really thought about it. I've certainly seen women before with hair loss but the thought of dating never crossed my mind. I guess it would really have to depend on what the rest of her qualities were. I won't lie about it, the hairloss would be an issue, at least up front, but if she had other great qualities,(physically,mentally,emotionally etc.), then I could see myself looking past it. Sure, no problem. Thinking about this reminds me of a girl I once dated years ago. She was a VERY attractive Phillipina and was a cheerleader at my college. She certainly had all of the right physical attributes but once she opend her mouth it was like pod of evil wild dolphins commanded by Satan himself were unleashed. She had this absolutely horrible voice that would make men sterile and crack windows from two miles away. Yeah that problem, in hindsight, is something that can't be fixed. Hairloss is. You should feel lucky Peace, Jotronic Carpe Capillus!! www.jotowen.com

but congratulations?!? Seems like par for the course. I'm very glad for you. Augustart!!! Damn, bro how ya been? I look forward to your pics. I've had people asking me about you. Peace, Jotronic Carpe Capillus!! www.jotowen.com

You should be fine. Like the nurse said, the grafts have "taken". It shouldn't impair the growth anymore than if you bumped any other area of your head. Peace, Jotronic Carpe Capillus!! www.jotowen.com

Robertt, There are also thousands of strip docs performing really bad work, mini/micros, bad closures, flaps, scalp reductions etc. All this in an unregulated industry. What do you expect? FUE docs? Hmm, three that regularly perform the procedure and only one that can show results past six months post-op. Overall, I would bet that the very same docs that perform FUE now that still/used to perform strip have just as many happy strip patients. Strip isn't your enemy. The lack of regulation is. It is the lack of regulation that is ultimately responsible for allowing the butchery that you speak of. Peace, Jotronic Carpe Capillus!! www.jotowen.com

I just thought I'd share this. Here I am, ten months post op and I just got ANOTHER ingrown hair on the top of my head just before my crown. The same type that I got several months ago when my hair was finally coming in. How's THAT for a delayed reaction?!? Peace, Jotronic

Jim, Yeah, I had new growth just like you at six weeks post-op. It was very noticeable here in my eight week photos... http://www.jotowen.com/Pagefivea7.html It will be slow going for the next couple of weeks but after that then get ready to be a Chia pet cause it's going to explode on your head. Get ready for fun with ingrown hairs:) Peace, Jotronic

Scarhead, No one knows the answer to your question because everyone is different in this case. Yes, all of them could have sprouted, or you will start to notice a few here and there for the next few months. Aside from new hair however you can expect what hair that has come in to get thicker and fuller. Peace, Jotronic

Dr. Feller, I agree and that is why I took the photos on this page... http://www.jotowen.com/Page2a.html . Granted, they are not as good as the ones you took simply because I was new at this documentation thing but you can rest assured come January 30th of next year I will have LOADS of pics during my procedure. Great pics by the way. Peace, Jotronic

Well, the bottom line is this. Everyone knows that anyone can put anything on their website. We can quote all the research papers in the world but in the end it won't amount to squat next to true testimonials in a forum environment such as this. If you come to a site like this and ask questions then you need to be prepared for the answers. We have nothing to gain if you listen to us. We are not part of a huge conspiracy to push any agenda. We have the experience of being the patients that have been through excellent procedures, bad procedures and some have been through both. Would you rather listen to someone trying to sell you on their technique or someone that has experienced it? If you can't believe us then who can you believe? I am through with this conversation and good luck with whatever you choose to do. Peace, Jotronic

WW, In your last post you quote Dr. Unger... "However, if high density combined with high hair survival rates is the objective, Dr. Unger often uses FUT in combination with other types of grafts." In your previous post you provided a link to the study by NHI which contradicts Dr. Unger DIRECTLY by saying that mini/micro grafts is not the preferred method to insure high hair survival rates. This should just go to show you that you will get a lot of different information from a lot of different web sites. If you can't trust the people that have been through this then who can you trust? Peace, Jotronic

WW, Okay, we got that part out of the way. I'm glad to hear you won't be going to B. To address your two points... 1)I am not convinced that the use of microscope is that really important. In the article I read from the new hair institute it says that many skilled doctors can cut excelent grafs without it. Actually it quoted Dr. Richard Shiell as "suggesting" that experienced technicians can cut excellent grafts without the need of microscopes. I did not see where it said that many doctors can. You need to understand the conclusion of that study. It supports the use of microscopic dissection wholeheartedly. Also, consider that this paper is several years old and the use of microscopic dissection has more than proven it's worth since it's publication. WARNING, LONG QUOTE AHEAD... "Conclusion The growing popularity of the stereo-microscope can be justified by the increased yield that it achieves, especially in the patient who will fully exploit his, or her, donor supply. Greater absolute numbers of follicular units and increased hair counts in the individual grafts, have been observed and documented with microscopic dissection when compared to loop magnification with back-lighting. Although microscopic dissection represents a significant departure from the "old school" of graft dissection, the new requirements of follicular unit transplantation, and other transplant procedures which require the increasing use of very small grafts, mandate more sophisticated dissecting techniques. Some of the barriers to microscopic dissection can be lessened by having a transitional period in which a limited number of staff members use the microscope for only a part of the dissection, while the team gradually builds up confidence, technical competence, and speed. The technique of subdividing the donor strip into smaller pieces may also aid in this transitional process. Even for a "team in transition" the use of the microscope offers many tangible benefits over other methods of graft dissection. These advantages will be even greater when complete stereo-microscopic dissection is used. The limiting factor in all hair restoration procedures is the patient's finite donor supply. Meticulous stereo-microscopic dissection can help us preserve this supply, and ultimately provide the patient with more transplantable hair. As surgeons, we should make every effort to avail our patients of any technology that will improve the procedures that we perform." Also, Dr. Shiell went on to say that the 20% increase in yield from using microscopes was not enough to warrant the use of microscopes. THIS IS INSANITY! The authors further state that it is there belief that the presevation of the donor area is critcal and can be maintained by the use of advanced dissecting techniques,i.e. microscopes. Your second point... 2) From what I know Dr. Walter Unger is among the best doctors in the field. I heard that he has done many celebrities. I found in the Walter Unger's web site that all FU is not the way to go. And he refers to FU and micrografs as the same. From whom did you hear that he's done many celebrities? Just curious. On this page from Dr. Unger's site... http://www.walterunger.com/grafts.html He says in the beginning that the term Follicular Unit and Micrograft are used "interchangeably". This is a gross mistake. Dr. Unger says this... "Donor tissue may also be sliced into sections containing 2 or 3 follicular units and approximately 2-4 or 5-8 hairs." Remember how I first told you to beware of places that used the terms interchangeably? This is a perfect example. In this quote he is using the term follicular unit appropriately however he is decribing how more than one FU is in a larger graft which is a MICRO graft. To further expose this technique I direct you to the same page and look at figure 14a. This man has potholes bored into his head and is completely absurd. This man is talking about using 2mm "round holes" as being completely acceptable. WW, I am understanding now that you are trying to be as objective as possible and I can appreciate it and I am actually now encouraging it but I also recommend that if you don't listen to me then at least listen to the others on this forum. We are hear to help each other and you if you will allow us. Peace, Jotronic

WW, Before I continue with this post I need to ask a couple of simple questions. First, you have not answered me as to whether or not you've read the links I pasted about the definitions of the different grafts and most importantly the link to Bosley Medical Violoations. Have you read them? Second, how long have you been researching this? How many clinics have you been to? How many docs have your spoken to? Have you met with any previous clients? Ask Bosley if you can meet or call any former clients. I bet they will tell you it would be against patient confidentiality ethics. Please answer these questions first if you plan on responding. Apparently you have convinced yourself that Bosley is the way to go. If not, then why are you challenging every effort we put forth to educate you? There is nothing in it for us except to save another person from making the same mistake that so many others have made. There are only a select few doctors that can give you the best chance of having the greatest results possible and this site is the place to find them. You asked the questions and we have answered them. It appears that you simply don't like the answers. If you came here hoping that we would support your interest in Bosley then I believe you will be disappointed I found at least seven other statements in your link that support the use of microscopic dissection along with the preservation of the follicular unit as it is found in nature and this is after I quickly skimmed the content. Did you read the link that you provided or did you simply paraphrase from the summary at the top of the page? WW, I am sure that I speak for everyone else on this forum when I say that I truly wish you well but your Bosley ambitions is something that is not recommended by any of the experienced regulars to this site and I'm sure any other. If you don't believe me then take a walk over to this site and ask the same questions. They will be even less supportive than we... http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/ You can lead a horse to water but... Peace, Jotronic [This message was edited by Jotronic on November 17, 2002 at 10:57 PM.] [This message was edited by Jotronic on November 17, 2002 at 10:58 PM.]

Maybe my grafts were not the best example. To help you with the difference between a true FU graft and a mini/micro graft go to this link... http://www.hairtransplantnetwork.com/Best_hair_transplant_procedure/index.asp Perhaps I should have used the other consequence of mini/micro grafts to slam home my point. Take a look at this link from my website... http://www.jotowen.com/HTPageEighteen.html . Take a look at the first picture. See those pits in my head? That is from mini/micro grafts. Mini/micros leave behind generous scarring known as "cobblestoning". When you have scarring like this then overhead lighting, especially flourescent lights, become your worst enemy. EVERYONE can see the scars. Did you even look at the link to the medical violations by Bosley I linked to? Peace, Jotronic

Allen, Good God man, you could give someone a complex! Wow, what a great story and what a great compliment. Like I told you and the hordes of others that have personally written to me from my site...I built it for guys just like you. You knew you wanted to take the plunge but you just weren't sure if the hype was true and what to expect immediately post-op, relatively speaking, instead of just a "before & after" shot. I've meant to email you in the past couple of days because your last email to me said that you were taking the plunge but I guess I know how it turned out. Your post reminds me of my personal elation after I had my HT with Dr. Wong. Also, I'm glad you stuck tight to the Graphcyte spray regimen. I swear that stuff works wonders. My scabs were gone in six days flat. Well, now that you've done it you are entering the worst phase of all. WAITING! I personally am now seven weeks post-op and I have been, as you all know, buzzing my head and lately I've buzzed it down to a #1. Hehe, I can't have Futzyhead outdoing me:) I just had it done again yesterday and I do have some good news to report. I am already getting some growth. How do I know it just isn't regrowth after shock loss? Because it is in my new hairline where there wasn't hair before but that is for another post and I'll add pics to my site soon. It's good to hear that Doc Wong said you have excellent elasticity as I do too. I was told a week post-op that my scalp was already more elastic than a virgin scalp which I guess is also good to minimize shock loss,( anyone know about this?), and allows for more work than on others without the same elasticity. Because of my situation Doc Wong was able to remove both previous scars that were rather far apart. Well, again, congratulations and what a great post. Hang in their, don't scratch and be patient. Jotronic