Are FUT hairlines really that good??

[Jupiter23]

I have seen some really good FUT hairlines, but you cannot help but notice a BAD HT. People with bad HT look much worse than being bald. Are people here on this board really happy with their FUT hairlines or are the good ones just a fluke?

 

Mark

[Jupiter23]

I have seen some really good FUT hairlines, but you cannot help but notice a BAD HT. People with bad HT look much worse than being bald. Are people here on this board really happy with their FUT hairlines or are the good ones just a fluke?

 

Mark

[arfy]

I don't know if I would call a good HT a "fluke" but in my opinion a really really great transplant is very rare, and something that most doctors in the field can't consistently do.

 

Look at it this way...there are approximately 700 doctors who belong to the ISHRS (the industry's "teaching organization"). One doctor recently commented that at the last ISHRS meeting, an informal "show of hands" revealed that only about 25% of members used an all-FU approach (the rest use the older Mini and Micro approach). That means that 75% of the doctors can (in my opinion) be immediately dismissed as possible choices. And the truth is that there are many bad doctors who do not belong to the ISHRS, so that percentage of doctors to avoid is actually even higher.

 

Look at the list of recommended doctors here on this website. There is a wide variety of skill and experience with high-quality FU grafts, among the doctors who are recommended. Some of the FU doctors have only recently begun to use an all-FU technique. It's important to pick doctors who have lots of experience with FU grafts.

 

In my opinion, do not settle for merely "good" hair transplants, because "good" transplants can be spotted by other people as a hair transplant, making them a waste of money. Only a great transplant can actually "pass" in public and fly under most people's radars. The list of doctors who can do that kind of transplant consistently is really not very long, in my opinion.