Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'research'.
Found 4 results
Can we quantify the extent of research that a person should go for prior to the decision for a transplantation procedure? And is all research result yielding? The major purpose of a cosmetic surgery would be for an individual to have an enhanced look. The earlier one receives a better look, the better. But there are a fair amount of people who research for years altogether regarding the procedure to be done. Sometimes, by the time they get their look change, their age has advanced and they don't really get to enjoy their new hair for most part of their prime. Is it indecisiveness, fear of dishonesty or lack of confidence in the industry in general, apart from the financial and time investment, that they get to have such a long period of rigorous researching? It is obvious that getting the correct surgeon is necessary but how much of a research is really required? And is it more beneficial to invest more time at a single stretch of time for the procedure? Or is it better to keep researching for a longer period of time, all the whole enduring the reasons that the person is researching transplant in the first place? With the amount of information on the internet and otherwise, it could become overwhelming for a patient to go through with the procedure. However, is there a noble requirement for a cosmetic procedure for certain individuals rather than a compulsion of vanity? Some researchers are spread across a decade. Does that desire to get the procedure done really last that long? Or does it fade with the time spendlt researching? And does this fact bring about a bitter experience to people? It is a very materialistic phenomenon - this hair transplant. It does not give instant gratification and requires such patience in part of the individuals going through it. The procedure itself, the growth spurt, the wait for density and the shedding period - such a hassle! And if individuals do wait for a long period of time to just decide whether to opt for the procedure and more importantly with which doctor, does it leave them exasperated?
Hey! So, 3 years ago I had 2 procedures with an Australian surgeon. The final results are not good and I am looking to get my HT fixed. I am feeling very overwhelmed by differing opinions, experience of others and the many options. To those who have had success getting great transplants my question is this... Q. What process did you use to research and decide upon a surgeon and procedure that ultimately gave you great results? Any experience you can share would be greatly appreciated!
So first off... I'm an idiot and went to a bosley surgeon. Learned that lesson the hard way with the doctor treating me like I'm an idiot and the consultant just talking over me nonstop when I voice concerns. Once I got home from surgery I noticed they missed a spot and called them. That same consultant told me "the Dr. doesn't normally miss a spot" which translates to "you're just a dumb patient and don't know what you're talking about. So I went back in and he denied they missed a spot, but eventually admitted it after about 20 minutes of me showing him before and after pics. Then he took a microscope camera out and told me I have hair there. Those little blonde hairs that I have literally all over my body. Then tried to tell me they would grow in with rogaine and finasteride use. I've had this same hairline since 19 and have been using my moles as placemarkers. He just told me to come back in 10 months and then we'll decide what to do. Left side looks a ok but pretty thin, right side is where they missed a spot and didn't blend a the hairline in or draw it correctly. Mods please move this if I'm in the wrong forum. I'm still pretty new here. Pics are 3 months and 2 weeks progress.
I've noticed the question coming up a lot about how long it takes after surgery for a graft to be completely secure, and based on the wide range of responses given, it seems that there is no definitive answer for this that is agreed upon. I've seen people giving answers ranging from 5 days, to 10, to 14, all the way up to even 9 months. I'm curious as to why so many doctors seem to have differing opinions on this, as it often seem like everyone is just pulling numbers out of thin air. I was told when having my procedure that the first 72 hours were the most crucial, and that after the 5th day, the grafts would be firmly in place (given that there was no excessive scabbing). The scabs were often what caused a graft to be dislodged, but that even then, it was only a risk up until day 9 after surgery. Thus, by day 10 post-op, I could relax and breathe easily and stress free, knowing that I was out of the woods. However, many guys come on the forum and are stressed out 2, 3, even 4 weeks out of surgery that they may have damaged their grafts. Given what seems to be lots of misinformation online and in the medical community, I understand why they seem to be so worried. Once I started seeing the large discrepancy on here about how long it took for the grafts to be anchored, I reached out to Dr. Mohebi about this. Dr. Mohebi then informed me that this is all based on a study done by Dr. Bernstein and Dr. Rassman where they set out to determine the definitive answer for this. According to the study, this is what they found: "The study showed that for the first two days, pulling on a hair always resulted in a lost graft, but the chance of the graft being removed started to decrease by the third day. By the sixth day pulling on a hair would no longer dislodge the graft. Pulling on an adherent scab always resulted in a lost graft through day five, with the incidence decreasing through day eight. However, by nine days post-op, grafts were no longer at risk of being dislodged." So that leaves me with this: Since the above time frame that I gave seems to be based on facts and research, where are the other numbers coming from? Are there other studies out there that show different results? Was there a study done that supports doctors telling patients they have to wait 9 months after surgery for their grafts to be secure? Why does there seem to be such a wide range of answers on what should be a seemingly scientific question? Do you think there's a way to come to a unified decision on this, or will there always be this large discrepancy? Interested in hearing other thoughts and facts on this matter. It seems to be a topic that causes way more confusion than I think it should.