Regular Member pdm68 Posted November 8, 2001 Regular Member Share Posted November 8, 2001 You know I've been reading alot of stuff on doctors and transplants.In my opinion Dr.Beehner gets a bad rap also because everyone cries about he doesn't use all FU's on most surgerys.The reason I don't care for Beehner is because he wants to preform too many surgerys.BUT If you guys were to really do your homework and stop following Spencer so much if you read on here in the "Research Library" read a paper by "Dr.Shapiro" entitled "Follicular Unit grafts vs Mini Grafts" and you will see if performed in the appropiate way ..Beehner and alot of other doctors way is very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member pdm68 Posted November 8, 2001 Author Regular Member Share Posted November 8, 2001 You know I've been reading alot of stuff on doctors and transplants.In my opinion Dr.Beehner gets a bad rap also because everyone cries about he doesn't use all FU's on most surgerys.The reason I don't care for Beehner is because he wants to preform too many surgerys.BUT If you guys were to really do your homework and stop following Spencer so much if you read on here in the "Research Library" read a paper by "Dr.Shapiro" entitled "Follicular Unit grafts vs Mini Grafts" and you will see if performed in the appropiate way ..Beehner and alot of other doctors way is very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member arfy Posted November 8, 2001 Senior Member Share Posted November 8, 2001 I don't think you read the article very carefully. Dr.Shapiro is being generous about the possible benefits of minigrafts, which are really just an advantage for unskilled surgeons. He says that FU grafts take more skill to use, so it's easier to screw them up in unskilled hands. He says that an all-FU transplant is more time-consuming and difficult, but more natural looking. He never says that minigrafts are better, just slightly cheaper, easier for the doctor, and faster to perform. So what? I want the most natural looking transplant possible. "Mini grafting in the central area using 3-5 hair grafts "cut to size" offers the practitioner and patient a faster, slightly more economical way to achieve coverage, and if performed skillfully can achieve nearly the same degree of naturalness as single follicular groupings. However, the caveats are several, and when not observed, the results are a step down from the Mercedes Benz of grafts, the follicular unit." What kind of procedure do YOU want? I want the "Mercedes Benz", the ALL-FU procedure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member pdm68 Posted November 8, 2001 Author Regular Member Share Posted November 8, 2001 Originally posted by arfy: I don't think you read the article very carefully. Dr.Shapiro is being generous about the possible benefits of minigrafts, which are really just an advantage for unskilled surgeons. He says that FU grafts take more skill to use, so it's easier to screw them up in unskilled hands. He says that an all-FU transplant is more time-consuming and difficult, but more natural looking. He never says that minigrafts are better, just slightly cheaper, easier for the doctor, and faster to perform. So what? I want the most natural looking transplant possible. "Mini grafting in the central area using 3-5 hair grafts "cut to size" offers the practitioner and patient a faster, slightly more economical way to achieve coverage, and if performed skillfully can achieve nearly the same degree of naturalness as single follicular groupings. However, the caveats are several, and when not observed, the results are a step down from the Mercedes Benz of grafts. What's more careful to read except what's on the paper? I am not a mind reader I am reading what Shapiro has to say and he issed several "warnings"(caveats) when those skills areen't performed by a seasoned surgeon. It says"Can achieve nearly the same degree of naturalness as single follicular groupings" So,why downplay a doctor because that's there style? Are you saying Shapiro was an unskilled surgeon when he was performing minigrafts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member arfy Posted November 9, 2001 Senior Member Share Posted November 9, 2001 It is hard to argue with your logic. Not because you are correct, but because you aren't making any sense. "Can be nearly as good" does not mean "as good as" follicular units. You said "why downplay a doctor because that's there style?" The reason is because we are talking about "the best" here. There is no point in recommending a "pretty good" or "almost as good as FUs" procedure. The type of procedure you are supporting here (mixing FUs in front with Minigrafts behind) is the exact same type of transplant you can get at Bosley, NuHart and MHR, and every other generic transplant clinic! Will you also tell me I shouldn't "downplay" Bosley, NuHart and MHR just because they mix grafts too? The all-FU transplant is the best. Period! Anything else is not as good. The reason doctors mix grafts is not for "style", it's because Minigrafts are easier and faster for the doctor. When they use minigrafts they make more money, by doing more patients and paying fewer technicians to cut grafts. Minigrafts do not need to be cut as carefully as a FU graft. Minigrafts are pluggy-looking. FUs are natural looking. Doctors use minigrafts because they're lazy, because they make more money with Minigrafts, and because they don't want to admit their technique isn't the best. If you don't know why FUs are so important, then you don't really understand what an FU is. [This message was edited by arfy on November 08, 2001 at 08:56 PM.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member arfy Posted November 9, 2001 Senior Member Share Posted November 9, 2001 You keep saying that using minigrafts along with FUs "is just as good as FU's". Dr. Shapiro wrote that using minigrafts along with FUs "can achieve nearly the same degree of naturalness". In other words they can sometimes be "nearly as good". Sometimes. Nearly. I know what point you are trying to make, and I don't buy it. This is not just my opinion, either. I wonder why the all-FU procedure is usually referred to as the "Gold Standard" in hair transplants, and why Dr. Shapiro calls it the "Mercedes Benz"? Read the article "The Best Procedure" that you will find on your left. That will spell it out for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member pdm68 Posted November 9, 2001 Author Regular Member Share Posted November 9, 2001 Nearly -(adjective)--In a close manner or relationship 2a)almost but not quite 2b) to the least extent --- Again why bash someone who wants to use Dr.Beehner and or his method of transplantation when the results will ultimately be the same or similar? Who did you transplansts and who did your touch up work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member Jonny Posted November 9, 2001 Regular Member Share Posted November 9, 2001 Arfy, give it up. This guy won't get it. He is the same guy that wrote "Farrel is a Clown" thread. And he called a guy making a very difficult decision about which doctor to go to (Gabe) "a little school girl". He goes by Machine on Hairlosshelp. Read his posts and I think you'll find he isn't playing with a full deck, or he is just argumentitive. He's very rough and very difficult to understand as well. If he can't understand what "nearly" means by now, he'll never get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member pdm68 Posted November 9, 2001 Author Regular Member Share Posted November 9, 2001 Just because someone wants to be objective and show people that even one of the best surgeons says minigrafts can be just as good if done the right way.Maybe guys don't have 6 bucks a graft to spend on Bernstein and maybe they don't wanna fly 2 1/2 hours to find a surgeon.It seems that everytime someone brings up a different view from arfy he claims to be the god of hairtransplants.he puts down Limmer who invented the things. Yes I compared a guy to a little school girl BECAUSE he wrote on every message board Shapiro/Woods "who's the man and why"? That was stupid.But was even dumber for me to read that posting.And then turn around and say he's going in december like it wasan't already planned.I just hope he gets good results.That's all that counts. The whole point of all this was to let everyone make an educated decision for themselves when choosing a surgeon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member arfy Posted November 10, 2001 Senior Member Share Posted November 10, 2001 pdm68/Machine Nice try, but I've never said anything bad about Dr. Limmer. Unlike you, I think it is much more important that a doctor uses "all-FUs", than how much work the doctor has the technicians do. In other words, I'd much rather have an "all-FU" transplant performed mostly by technicians, than get a bunch of Minigrafts put in personally by the doctor, all by himself. In my opinion, graft size (all-FUs) is the first priority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member pdm68 Posted November 11, 2001 Author Regular Member Share Posted November 11, 2001 Dear Arfy: Why don'y out tell us your whole story with transplants? All that I have read is that you got burned awhile ago.You say your glad"Pat" got a good transplant but you make it seem that there are very few good transplants out there?Maybe you should start a site for anti-transplant patients and explain your self there.I have never read a post where you say something is good.Are you that miserable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now