butchered

[Al - Moderator]

Originally posted by wantego:

John I do not know why anyone would blame you for a bad HT performed by a doctor.

 

I know plenty of people who tell me I was dumb or stupid to get a HT. When you get a good one they think you did a smart thing. When you get an obvious bad one they wonder why you would ever do such a thing.

[Desperately Seeking Hair]

I know I gave you some slack, but I do hope the best for you. Go to a top doc and get repaired.

[john36]

thats fine,you didn't really.

I can't get repaired ,I don't have money,I can't afford it.

 

thanks desperately seeking hair.I have to accept walking arround with scars on my shaved head,or with redicilous plugs and some lenght to cover the horendeous scar in the back.

 

you know what they say,what doesn't kill you makes you stronger

[wantego]

Originally posted by BeHappy:

Originally posted by wantego:

John I do not know why anyone would blame you for a bad HT performed by a doctor.

 

I know plenty of people who tell me I was dumb or stupid to get a HT. When you get a good one they think you did a smart thing. When you get an obvious bad one they wonder why you would ever do such a thing.

 

I'm sorry people have told you that. People sometimes say stupid things.

[john36]

The content of this message has been removed at the request of the original poster.

[wantego]

Originally posted by john36:

wantego

 

I don't really understand what BeHappy,wanted to say.

I don't think he wanted to say I was stupid.

 

 

John if you are referring to Behappy's response to me he was not calling you stupid at all. He was telling me that people have called him stupid for getting a HT.

 

I think anyone that calls anyone stupid over getting a HT is possibly stupid themselves.

[john36]

Iactura paucorum servat multos

 

learn from my sacrifice.This exposure costs me great humility.

It happens, it is out there.Stupid or not stupid learn from my case.

 

Omnium enim rerum principia parva sunt

 

Everything has a small beginning

[wantego]

Originally posted by john36:

Iactura paucorum servat multos

 

learn from my sacrifice.This exposure costs me great humility.

It happens, it is out there.Stupid or not stupid learn from my case.

 

Omnium enim rerum principia parva sunt

 

Everything has a small beginning

 

John nobody called you stupid.

[john36]

I know that wantego

 

I didn't say anyone did.

 

However many said you should have done better research.

Yeah,I know that,now.

 

I feel stupid ,without anyone calling me that,that I trusted that I can trust all doctors,and believe they will treat me as the law requires.

 

It is not my fault for believing so.

It is my fault for being naive to belive so.

Never mind

have good nite

thanks for friend

[wantego]

Originally posted by john36:

I know that wantego

 

I didn't say anyone did.

 

However many said you should have done better research.

Yeah,I know that,now.

 

I feel stupid ,without anyone calling me that,that I trusted that I can trust all doctors,and believe they will treat me as the law requires.

 

It is not my fault for believing so.

It is my fault for being naive to belive so.

Never mind

have good nite

thanks for friend

 

John if a doctor purposefully mislead you than the doctor is to blame not the patient.

I hope you have a great night.

[john36]

Originally posted by wantego:

 

John if a doctor purposefully mislead you than the doctor is to blame not the patient.

I hope you have a great night.

 

And since true knowledge gained from experience gives rise to knowledge, also doubt or controversy, it is obvious from the controversies,I allege, that people who have written about these topics up to now, have understanding of their own subject.

 

Even if I am just as wrong as they are, I can do no harm, since I shall only be leaving people in their present state of doubt and dispute.

But I hope to make fewer mistakes, by not taking any principle on trust, but merely drawing people's attention to what they already know, or can know by their own experience.

 

When I do make mistakes, it will be because I have drawn conclusions too rashly ??” which I shall do my best to avoid.

 

If, on the other hand, I do reason correctly, but (which may very easily happen) I fail to win the agreement of people who are so confident of their own knowledge that they fail to consider what I say carefully enough, then the fault is not mine, but theirs.

 

It is my agenda here to produce my arguments, and theirs is to be seen.

 

What we usually mean by the word 'conscience' is either scientific knowledge or opinion. People say that something or other is true 'upon their conscience;' but they never say this when they think it is doubtful; therefore they know, or think they know that it is true.

 

But when people say things 'upon their conscience,' it should not be assumed that they know with certainty the truth of what they say. So it follows that the word is used by people who have an opinion, not only as to the truth of the matter, but also as to their knowledge of it.

Consequently, 'conscience', as people usually use the word, signifies an opinion, not so much about the truth of the proposition, as about their own knowledge of it, from which the truth of the proposition follows. I therefore define conscience as the opinion of evidence.

 

Now,It is of it self manifest, that the actions of Physicians and patients/customers,proceed from the will, and the will from hope (cure baldness), and fear,insomuch as when they shall see a greater good, or lesse evill,

likely to happen to them by the breach,of what legislated as patients rights and physicians conduct,by normative acts.

 

 

Then observation of the Law's,is important,as it is designed to protect patients from harm and exposure to harm.

 

Who wittingly violates them is justly asked,for what purpose it is done so.

 

That is why legislator has implemented the instrument Informed Consent.

 

That is violated when Consultant takes the role of a doctor and explains HT to patient.

[Al - Moderator]

I don't really understand what BeHappy,wanted to say.

I don't think he wanted to say I was stupid.

 

No John. I'm in the same boat as you. I got a really bad HT and I keep hearing people tell me how it's my fault for not researching or that I shouldn't have gotten a HT.

 

These are supposed to be Drs. The law requires that they tell you the truth of your situation and what can or can't be done. How can anyone put the responsibilty on the patient to know more than the Dr? That doesn't make sense. I would have to go to 6 years of medical school and be practicing in the field of HTs for X amount of years to know what the Dr knows. You can't ever blame the patient for not knowing more than the Dr., yet too many people seem to want to do that.

 

Besides even if the patient feels the Dr may be wrong about a particular aspect is the patient supposed to refuse the Drs advice and insist on doing an operation the way the patient thinks is best? If that happened and it didn't turn out right then the same people would still be blaming the patient for not listening to the Dr.

 

It can't go both ways. The Dr is the one to blame. Unfortunately nothing happens to them. They just keep going about their business while we are left in misery for years.

 

As for research. When someone gets a toothache does anyone expect them to spend 6 months to a year researching various dentists to see which one can do a root canal or pull a tooth? No, of course not! So why should I be expected to research for that long for a procedure which is supposedly just like going to the dentist (or so it's advertised as).

[john36]

excelent point beHappy.Exactly what I said.

[john36]

Originally posted by BeHappy:

.

 

It can't go both ways. The Dr is the one to blame. Unfortunately nothing happens to them. They just keep going about their business while we are left in misery for years.

 

.

 

Very true.That is a fact.It is a fact because This medical field,or ,Industry,is unable or unwilling to obay the laws or/and regulate its self.It has become wild west.

I will try to analyze why.

 

1.

One problem is that there (appears to ) be no identifiable sovereign in democratic societies. In democratic societies, for example, the ultimate political power (seems to ) belong to the people, who elect lawmakers to represent their interests.

 

Elected lawmakers have the power to coerce behavior but are regarded as servants of the people and not as repositories of sovereign power.

 

The voting population, on the other hand, seems to be the repository of ultimate political authority yet lacks the immediate power to coerce behavior.

Thus, in democracies , the ultimate political authority and the power to coerce behavior (seem to...) reside in different entities.

 

2

A second problem has to do with lawmaking authority is incapable of legal lntimidation in this instance

 

HT industry,with the weapon of affidavit of merit has become sovereign power to decide existance or non existance of aplicable standard of care in its industry.

 

A sovereign cannot be legally constrained because no person (or body of persons) can coerce herself (or itself).

 

Since it is interest of the HT industry to keep the status quo,HT industry works in that interest.

 

Since provisions limiting certain conducts of physicians in the field of elective surgery are sabotaged by that interest, the authority of the legislative body to make laws and APPLIES them ,is limited only to the part of TO MAKE THE LAWS

 

So the the victoms of abuse,BeHappy,me,and ten of thousands more are forced to argue that what we refer to as law in this field is really not law at all; rather, it is principally a matter of "positive morality" judged SOLELY by HT doctors,which financial interest is incompatible with the "positive morality"

 

 

It is difficult to reconcile those two.

 

The "positive morality" imposes no duties; it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been existed.

 

The rule,had become namely that which requires HT doctors "to do or abstain from certain actions, whether they wish to or not"

 

While every legal system must contain so-called primary rules that regulate citizen behavior, .they are non existen in specialised form in HT Field.

 

Legal rules are obligatory, because people accept them as standards that justify criticism and, in extreme cases, punishment of deviations.

 

Now the paradox is we have arrogance of entire Club that can say,it is ILLEGAL but it is OUR STANDARD!!

 

 

What is necessary is that there should be a critical reflective attitude to certain patterns of behavior as a common standard, and that this should display itself in criticism (including self-criticism), demands for conformity, and in acknowledgements that such criticism and demands are justified, all of which find their characteristic expression in the normative terminology of 'ought', 'must', and 'should', and 'right' and 'wrong'

 

There is my question again.How do you justify practicing,what was legislated as unjust conduct?

 

The subject who reflectively accepts ,or does not accept,the rule as providing a standard that justifies criticism of deviations is said to take "the internal point of view" towards it.

 

The legislation is the "external point of view"towards it and has supremacy over the internal desire of the subjects.

 

So,would it be too much to require that the bulk of the population accept the rule of law,recognition as the ultimate criteria for legal validity...but some "chosen ones" to give the reality of the situation that a great proportion of its members-perhaps a majority-have no general conception of the legal structure or its criteria of validity" ?

 

I guess it is.

 

Instead, since all this fals upon deaf ears, what is necessary to the existence of a legal system is that the majority of officials take action upon the internal point of view of HT physicians towards the rule of recognition and its criteria of validity. All that is required of citizens is that they generally obey the primary rules that are legally valid according to the rule of recognition.

 

That will come,HT Industry like it or not.

Better to come with initiative for change from itself,by its leading members,then in any other form.

[Old Baldy]

Just read most of this thread John.

 

Just want to say that I sympathize with your situation. Hang in there.

 

It wasn't a good result but you don't look that bad to me. You still look like a man.

 

Edit: I hope you win your lawsuit.

[john36]

Thanks old baldy

 

My advice to HT patients.

 

Don't smoke 1 month before and 2 months after HT.

 

I am not medical professional.If doc tells you it is ok to smoke,as mine told me ,trust him,as I did mine.Or read my posts and think.

 

Thanks again old baldy

[Old Baldy]

John: Get yourself some neem oil from the link below. It should help clear up the red frontal area and pustules surrounding that frontal area IMHO.

 

It's stinky but leave it on for at least 30 minutes (longer if you can) a few times a week.

 

See if that clears up the inflammation. (Neem is stinky but will not harm your skin. In fact, it has good stuff in it and will clear up alot of skin problems.)

 

Give it a try, you won't be out much money if it doesn't work, but I'll bet it might help.

 

http://www.neemresource.com/Neem&KaranjaOil.html

[Vasilius]

John,

 

I would feel the way you do if I were in your shoes, it makes me mad as hell that a hack doctor took advantage of you, and undoubtedly many others. I hope you find justice and some peace from this soon.

 

As for those who blame you for choosing the wrong doc, I'll say this: it could have happened to many of us. A lot of people who have lost their hair (and have the psychological damage that goes with hair loss) are vulnerable to unethical transplant surgeons. Think about it: if you care enough about restoring SOME of your hair (impossible to restore all of it with current technology) to undergo expensive SURGERY, take medicines for the rest of your life, apply concealers daily, things that most of us in this forum do, then there is a deep psychological need that drives us to do these things.

 

The industry eases our natural skepticism of transplant surgeons with their marketing. Most surgeons advertise transplant surgery as noninvasive, low-risk, "go back to work the next day like nothing happened" surgery. This is almost true - if you have a GREAT surgeon. It takes an elite surgeon with patient empathy and artistic ability to make a great transplant surgeon. These are few and far between, as the rest of the forum will tell you. Some of these surgeons' patients (i.e., the members of this forum) did their homework; many were lucky they picked a good doc. You were unlucky, but not truly to blame for your situation. Doctors, as a profession, are in a position of public trust, no less than police officers or the military. Docs that abuse that trust for money are despicable and should lose their licenses.

 

I'm with some of the others in this forum who have recommended repair work by a qualified, reputable surgeon. I don't blame you for being gun-shy after your last experience, but there are a couple of good docs out there who could vastly improve your appearance. I know money is an issue though and having been poor most of my life I empathize. You seem to be an intelligent dude though, and you very well may be in a better position to afford it in the future. I wish you well brother.

 

 

-AF1

[john36]

Thanks guys

[john36]

by the way I am not asking any more the estinguished doctors here to evaluete my HT example for affidavit of merit any more.It is too late.

Message for all potential patients.

 

No HT doc.I ever spoken to was willing, inspite of the abuse of my rights as a patient,the butchery performed on me ,to help me seek justice.

 

It could happen to you.

[Bill - Seemiller]

No HT doc.I ever spoken to was willing, inspite of the abuse of my rights as a patient,the butchery performed on me ,to help me seek justice.

 

John,

 

The above statement isn't entirely fair. It's just that what you asked other doctors to sign couldn't be substantiated by anything other than your word and by looking at the result. None of these doctors witnessed the surgery itself.

 

Your scar was lower than usual, but cases can be made to harvest a strip below the occipital bump. You say the technicians chose the location and not the doctor. But this can't be substantiated with anything than your say so. I'm not saying you are lying, but nobody can substantiate it. I can understand why a doctor wouldn't sign an affidavit like this since they didn't witness the surgery.

 

The bottom line is, your result is subpar and its unfortunate. It's your choice to choose legal action against your doctor. But I don't know why you are holding a grudge against other doctors who won't sign something they can't substantiate. Would you agree to sign a declaration of fact that you aren't 100% certain of? I wouldn't.

 

I have seen hair transplant cases much worse than yours that have been able to be repaired. In my opinion, you may want to consider this avenue.

 

Bill

[Mr. GQ]

wow what a story!!!! i feel sorry that this happened to you bro. yes you will definitely have hard time finding some doctor that will vouch for you in the court. they all stick for each other just like cops, lawyers, teachers and almost any other profession that you can think of.

 

Bill -

I have seen hair transplant cases much worse than yours that have been able to be repaired. In my opinion, you may want to consider this avenue.

[john36]

Originally posted by Bill - Associate Publisher:

No HT doc.I ever spoken to was willing, inspite of the abuse of my rights as a patient,the butchery performed on me ,to help me seek justice.

 

John,

 

The above statement isn't entirely fair. It's just that what you asked other doctors to sign couldn't be substantiated by anything other than your word and by looking at the result. None of these doctors witnessed the surgery itself.

 

Your scar was lower than usual, but cases can be made to harvest a strip below the occipital bump. You say the technicians chose the location and not the doctor. But this can't be substantiated with anything than your say so. I'm not saying you are lying, but nobody can substantiate it. I can understand why a doctor wouldn't sign an affidavit like this since they didn't witness the surgery.

 

The bottom line is, your result is subpar and its unfortunate. It's your choice to choose legal action against your doctor. But I don't know why you are holding a grudge against other doctors who won't sign something they can't substantiate. Would you agree to sign a declaration of fact that you aren't 100% certain of? I wouldn't.

 

I have seen hair transplant cases much worse than yours that have been able to be repaired. In my opinion, you may want to consider this avenue.

 

Bill

 

Hi Bill

 

Bill I would agree with you if your first premise was correct."It's just that what you asked other doctors to sign couldn't be substantiated by anything other than your word and by looking at the result. None of these doctors witnessed the surgery itself. "

 

I know you have a good intention but you don't understand what affidavit of merit is.(sorry)

 

Affidavit of merit is another doctor opinion as to whether negligence if without need to go into proving of the FACTUAL ALEGATIONS (did it happen realy). In providing an affidavit of merit, doctor would not be attesting to the truth of the factual events surrounding the surgery. he will leave that to me to prove to the judge/jury.

 

Rather, doc would be stating that in his opinion, based upon taking an oral history of the patient, examination of the patient, and review of the patient's medical records,taking that presumed allegations,description is indeed factual (the doctor does not need proof in this phase...that is for the court to find out) it is his opinion within a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the standard of care was breached.

It doesn't have to be definitive degree of certainty.

You see the doc here who signs the affidavit just gives me clearence to go and have a CHANCE to prove the facts in the court.The doctor just says "if what this patient says is true,then yes it is POSSIBLE the standard of care was breached and yes he should have a chance to go to court and prove his case"

 

If in my case there was no grounds to state that,then WHEN grounds exist?I was abandoned almost whole time during surgery by the doctor,surgery done in non licenced facilities for surgery and medical tasks performed by non medical personel....goes on and on...I don't need to prove that to the doc signing the clearence for me to go and prove my case in court.The doc will not endorse anthing factual.He would just say"If what you say is true then yes you should be able to have a chance to prove your case."

 

No doc wanted to say that.

 

http://hair-restoration-info.c...6060861/m/2261058104

[Optimus Prime]

Originally posted by BeHappy:

I don't really understand what BeHappy,wanted to say.

I don't think he wanted to say I was stupid.

 

No John. I'm in the same boat as you. I got a really bad HT and I keep hearing people tell me how it's my fault for not researching or that I shouldn't have gotten a HT.

 

These are supposed to be Drs. The law requires that they tell you the truth of your situation and what can or can't be done. How can anyone put the responsibilty on the patient to know more than the Dr? That doesn't make sense. I would have to go to 6 years of medical school and be practicing in the field of HTs for X amount of years to know what the Dr knows. You can't ever blame the patient for not knowing more than the Dr., yet too many people seem to want to do that.

 

Besides even if the patient feels the Dr may be wrong about a particular aspect is the patient supposed to refuse the Drs advice and insist on doing an operation the way the patient thinks is best? If that happened and it didn't turn out right then the same people would still be blaming the patient for not listening to the Dr.

 

It can't go both ways. The Dr is the one to blame. Unfortunately nothing happens to them. They just keep going about their business while we are left in misery for years.

 

As for research. When someone gets a toothache does anyone expect them to spend 6 months to a year researching various dentists to see which one can do a root canal or pull a tooth? No, of course not! So why should I be expected to research for that long for a procedure which is supposedly just like going to the dentist (or so it's advertised as).

 

Well said be happy. If the patient ends up unhappy the can just right it off as unrealistic expectations and then know doubt they will find other Dr's to support there case.

[john36]

Originally posted by Optimus Prime:

Originally posted by BeHappy:

I don't really understand what BeHappy,wanted to say.

I don't think he wanted to say I was stupid.

 

No John. I'm in the same boat as you. I got a really bad HT and I keep hearing people tell me how it's my fault for not researching or that I shouldn't have gotten a HT.

 

These are supposed to be Drs. The law requires that they tell you the truth of your situation and what can or can't be done. How can anyone put the responsibilty on the patient to know more than the Dr? That doesn't make sense. I would have to go to 6 years of medical school and be practicing in the field of HTs for X amount of years to know what the Dr knows. You can't ever blame the patient for not knowing more than the Dr., yet too many people seem to want to do that.

 

Besides even if the patient feels the Dr may be wrong about a particular aspect is the patient supposed to refuse the Drs advice and insist on doing an operation the way the patient thinks is best? If that happened and it didn't turn out right then the same people would still be blaming the patient for not listening to the Dr.

 

It can't go both ways. The Dr is the one to blame. Unfortunately nothing happens to them. They just keep going about their business while we are left in misery for years.

 

As for research. When someone gets a toothache does anyone expect them to spend 6 months to a year researching various dentists to see which one can do a root canal or pull a tooth? No, of course not! So why should I be expected to research for that long for a procedure which is supposedly just like going to the dentist (or so it's advertised as).

 

Well said be happy. If the patient ends up unhappy the can just right it off as unrealistic expectations and then know doubt they will find other Dr's to support there case.

 

http://hair-restoration-info.c...134107179/m/89910551