Jump to content

VIDEO: This video will come as a shock to the LLLT industry. Produced by Dr. Feller of Great Neck, NY


Dr. Alan Feller

Recommended Posts

Dr. Feller,

 

I think it should be clear based on how I presented the information that what I provided about laser therapy is not necessarily my personal view, but rather what is presented by laser therapy advocates. This should have been clear by my use of words and phrases like "supposedly", "this process is said to...", etc.

 

Whether or not all the claims made are true, in my opinion, is questionable.

 

So why am I citing my research rather than presenting my forthright conclusion? Two reasons:

 

1) Because there are a number of ethical surgeons using laser therapy as part of their practice and claim to have some success, I am reluctant claim dogmatically that laser therapy doesn't work. I will however, firmly state that I personally have not seen enough evidence to recommend it as a hair loss treatment.

 

2) Forum members and guests reading this thread have the right to hear how lasers supposedly work and then draw their own conclusions.

 

You are clearly in the camp that believes laser therapy is a worthless treatment. There are a number of others (including ethical physicians) that believe that laser therapy may have some level of benefit in terms of healing, and hair loss prevention.

 

I always lean toward the side of unbelief until I see enough proof that it works. Therefore, before I can confidently recommend laser therapy as a hair loss treatment with any level of benefit, I'd like to see more evidence.

 

But I am willing to keep an open mind while physicians who use it present their case.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 347
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Senior Member

You are clearly in the camp that believes laser therapy is a worthless treatment

------------

And that camp is huge.

Bill why are you doing the dirty work for the cowards that are hiding? Are they even emailing you ?

Could you give us a list of the ethical surgeons you say truly believe in lasers?

Laser therapy has been here in Illinois for 8 years that I know of .How much evidence do you want? LOL

I agree though that maybe theres a small benefit on the scalp right after surgery . Maybe it soothes it or helps the healing . No one has disputed that.

Giving sessions for transplant patients for free would be ok ,but charging people because it "might" help stop fallout is ridiculous and downright bogus.

I love how these laser promises went from growing hair , THEN to making it grow thicker THEN to maintaining hair NOW to possibly helping with healing. People are paying thousands for growth not a hope they "just" keep their thin hair.

Hair doesnt fall out overnight. A doc could get a year or two out of a patient before the patient even notices any loss,and that its not working.

Whats next after those last two probably fail.

It gives your hair luster and shine . Nothing like taking out a loan for luster and shine icon_smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
Originally posted by PLEASE GROW PLEASE:

charging people because it "might" help stop fallout is ridiculous and downright bogus.

 

Please tell me what the difference is when Drs (and almost everyone on these boards) recommend minoxidil or propecia. Its always stated that potential HT patients should try using propecia for 6 months to a year to see if it works for you. Just about every HT Dr out there says that, yet we don't see Drs posting photos of hair growth. They only post photos of their HTs.

 

 

I love how these laser promises went from growing hair , THEN to making it grow thicker THEN to maintaining hair NOW to possibly helping with healing.

 

This again is the same as minoxidil and propecia. When they first came out they were supposed to grow a moderate amount of hair in at least 80% of patients. Both of them over the years are now down to hopefully you will be able to maintain what you have for a few years. There's even talk now that any positive effects wear off after 3 or 4 years. That means after years of using them you'll most likely have no benefit, yet all HT Drs keep telling everyone to use them.

 

I think I've heard of 2 people who have grown enough hair to decide they didn't need a HT yet. I know Janna (think it was Janna) posted a picture of amazing growth with minoxidil, but I believe it was later acknowledged that the person was also using other things and there may have even been a concealer involved.

 

So again, what's the difference between those and lasers?

Al

Forum Moderator

(formerly BeHappy)

I am a forum moderator for hairrestorationnetwork.com. I am not a Dr. and I do not work for any particular Dr. My opinions are my own and may not reflect the opinions of other moderators or the owner of this site. I am also a hair transplant patient and repair patient. You can view some of my repair journey here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

I didnt know doctors charge thousands for minox and fin. I geuss there is no difference then

Hmmm well its worth it since there are thousands of pics SHOWING THEY WORK!!!!

Lasers for hair have been out just as long .

Is there one super responder to lasers,just one .

There are alot for the other two. Check around the forums.

Behappy stop taking the fin and using the minox and see how fast those few hairs your grew thinking it was from the brush fall out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

Almost everything you write includes a qualifying word or words thrown in to limit your commitment to whatever point you are trying to make at the time. There's never any black and white with you, even in the most black and white circumstances. Words like "supposedly", "said to", "indicate", and "questionable" are words that weaken your points and show you really don't believe in what your writing. That's a fact, and you use these terms way too much.

 

Why are you presenting the views of laser therapy advocates as you just wrote in your last post? Who gave you that job? YOU didn't perform the studies and the experiments. You haven't even had first hand communication with those who did. For crying outloud David Michaels won't even release his study to the public! Yet you blindly quote the talking points from LLLT proponents with absolutely no idea what you are talking about while completely disregarding the evidence I just presented in living color that clearly refutes their basic premise.

 

If LLLT proponents have something to say about the data presented on this thread then it is up to THEM to present their points NOT you. And so far your "ethical" doctors haven't written so much as one post to support their positions. Not one. Yet that doesn't register with you, huh? Still on the fence, right?

 

You are insulted that I wrote that you did not understand the video I made. But based on your wishy-washy post you gave no reason for anyone to believe otherwise. The video is prima facia evidence that LLLT CAN'T work according to the very rules and theories laid out by LLLT proponents themselves. Even if you don't agree with this, which is impossible since it isn't subjective, it would be your job to encourage LLLT proponents to counter it with logic and reason, NOT turn on me for exposing these people for what you know they are. A moderator takes the available data and comes to a conclusion. Instead, your usual default is to say that you will wait for more data. It's been 25 years, how much longer does the LLLT camp need?

 

Only ONE person on this thread has taken your position, BeHappy, and he refuses to offer any evidence of his very subjective statements. I offered to meet him in person and he didn't even have the courtesy to respond. Other than him NOT ONE PERSON on this thread sided with the LLLT proponents. So why are you? The evidence is stacked against LLLT, and claiming you know ethical doctors that perform it is NOT supporting evidence it's putting the cart before the horse. Perhaps your basic premise is wrong again. Maybe the doctors you refer to are NOT ethical. Has it yet occured to you that this may be the case?

 

Stop trying to psycho-analyze me. All that's going to do is make me do it back to you, and nothing will get accomplished. I created this thread about a ground breaking video that cuts the legs off the LLLT industry and you are taking it off course. I'm not the one making outrages claims, I am presenting evidence against those who are. I am not the focus of this thread, LLLT and those who offer it for pay ARE.

 

I want to make it clear to you Bill that you are NOT a judge and I do not consider you to be one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
Originally posted by PLEASE GROW PLEASE:

Behappy stop taking the fin and using the minox and seE how fast those few hairs your grew thinking it was from the brush fall out

 

PGP,

I already did that. That's why I believe in LLLT. I don't use minoxidil because of bad reactions. I used proscar cut in quarters for 11 years. I wanted to stop or reduce my use of Proscar, but every time I did I started getting increased hairloss. Once I started using a laser comb I was finally able to reduce my proscar intake to about a quarter pill every 3 or 4 days. I don't even really keep track anymore. I just take a piece every few days. Sometimes I go a week without it.

 

I've had what I thought was permanent shock loss from many HTs back in the 80s and 90s. In those 11 years of proscar use none of the shock loss areas ever grew any hair. Hair started growing in those areas once I started using a laser comb. I wish I took before pictures of 2 specific areas of shock loss, but I didn't expect those areas to grow (hoped for it, but didn't expect it). I thought those would be the hold out areas that wouldn't get growth.

 

It turned out to be the opposite. I get the best growth in the areas where I had shock loss. This is why I've stated before that I can't really show pictues with much noticeable improvement. I can't show pictures of me not taking proscar and I don't have specific Before photos of the shock areas.

Al

Forum Moderator

(formerly BeHappy)

I am a forum moderator for hairrestorationnetwork.com. I am not a Dr. and I do not work for any particular Dr. My opinions are my own and may not reflect the opinions of other moderators or the owner of this site. I am also a hair transplant patient and repair patient. You can view some of my repair journey here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Only ONE person on this thread has taken your position, BeHappy, and he refuses to offer any evidence of his very subjective statements. I offered to meet him in person and he didn't even have the courtesy to respond.

 

Dr Feller,

I have to apologize on that one. I don't always respond to everything on these boards. I did see your offer and I am seriously considering making an appointment to visit you in NY. I'm very hesitant about going through another HT after 25 prior ones. I finally got my life back together after many years of wanting to kill myself over the horrible experience and really don't want to take a risk of going back to that. The non response to a consultation with you was nothing against you.

Al

Forum Moderator

(formerly BeHappy)

I am a forum moderator for hairrestorationnetwork.com. I am not a Dr. and I do not work for any particular Dr. My opinions are my own and may not reflect the opinions of other moderators or the owner of this site. I am also a hair transplant patient and repair patient. You can view some of my repair journey here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. Feller,

 

Your last post was unnecessarily hostile and I don't appreciate your tone. It's my prerogative to present my opinion, or any information I find relevant to a discussion (even if its presenting a viewpoint you disagree with).

 

I would however, like to continue this discussion constructively without the hostility. Can we do that? If so, read on.

 

I am not ignoring or dismissing the data you presented. But it doesn't conclusively prove laser light can't benefit scalp tissue or hair follicles. All it proves is that a laser converts to light and energy when it hits a target. The proponents of laser therapy concentrate on what that energy does after it hits the target (the scalp). In my opinion, this is more relevant than what is presented in your video. This is not an argument for laser therapy. I'm only pointing out my observations.

 

However, I agree that it's up to proponents of laser therapy, not me, to prove its efficacy. That's why I was only presenting, not defending their position. I did this for the sake of discussion. The discussion is valid, your personal attacks were unnecessary and inappropriate.

 

Dr. Feller, you are acting as if I'm discrediting your point of view when I'm not. However, it's unfair for you to accuse your well respected colleagues of being unethical for having a different point of view.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Regular Member

Out of curiosity what doctor's, w/in the Coalition, suggest laser therapy? Anyone, anyone?

 

Also, there's seemingly a fundamental difference between a "point of view" and a science, no?

 

A point of view would be akin to the interpretation of art, whereas a science is based on hard empirical data which establishes a strong, sound relationship between it's premises and conclusion('s).

 

Either empirical data supports the claims of LLLT proponents or it does not (?).

I am zee capt'N!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Bill, no hostility on this side. It's all good and we're all still friends. By all means I agree it is your prerogative to present your opinion, but please don't take it so personally when I challenge those opinions or when I know they are based on what I believe to be invalid or irrational logic. That's not a personal swipe, just my opinion. Now on to the business at hand...

 

You wrote:

-----------

But it doesn't conclusively prove laser light can't benefit scalp tissue or hair follicles

------------

Bill contrary to your assertion, it is not my job to prove LLLT doesn't work- even though that's exactly what I did in the video as a matter of objective scientific fact. I think every poster on this thread agrees with that.

 

You wrote:

----------------

All it proves is that a laser converts to light and energy when it hits a target

---------------

It is not the only thing it proved. It also proved that the light reaching the follicle is no longer "laser" in nature-it's just a red light, the kind of light LLLT proponents admit is ineffective- yet another objective scientific fact.

 

You wrote:

---------------

The proponents of laser therapy concentrate on what that energy does after it hits the target (the scalp)

--------------

That's a factually incorrect assertion, Bill. The proponents of laser therapy, like the doctors mentioned in your article, have been deafeningly silent on how they claim LLLT actually works. Yet another objective fact. I could ask you to cite your "other" source(s), but I know it would be a fruitless effort because they don't exist. Spare me the Russian studies and supposed laser induced healing studies. None of that has been demonstrated to have any clinical effect on hair follicles. And until I see a new protocol or mandate that all wounds must be exposed to laser light for optimal healing I will reject it for any such use.

 

You wrote:

-----------------

t's unfair for you to accuse your well respected colleagues of being unethical for having a different point of view.

-----------------

The issue is not what I think about doctors who engage in such practices, that's irrelevant. The issue is whether the actions of these doctors can be considered objectively ethical. What would you call a doctor who charges top dollar for a therapy that's based on junk science and who, at the same time, ignores indisputable physical evidence that might cut into his bottom line?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Regular Member
Originally posted by Bill - Associate Publisher:

But it doesn't conclusively prove laser light can't benefit scalp tissue or hair follicles. All it proves is that a laser converts to light and energy when it hits a target.

 

Bill,

 

You are wrong. Dr. Feller's video, and the laws of physics prove that lasers cant benefit the follicle more so than any other plain old monochromatic red light. It is impossible for the LASER light in the combs to reach the follicle. LLLT is therefore exactly the same as taking a red lightbulb and shining that on your head. Since laserlight is broken up instantly when it hits the scalp, when lasercomb proponents say that laser treatments work, they are essentially saying that monochromatic red light, NOT laser light will regrow hair. If LLLT proponents are to say that their treatments work, they must then say that shining a flashlight with a red bulb on your head would have the same effect. Otherwise they are hypocritical, and I would agree with Dr. Feller that any doctor who charges for LLLT is unethical.

August 12, 2008 - 3100 grafts Dr. Feller

 

Check out my blog - http://www.hairtransplantnetwork.com/blog/home-page.asp?WebID=876

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. Feller,

 

Sorry Bill, no hostility on this side. It's all good and we're all still friends. By all means I agree it is your prerogative to present your opinion, but please don't take it so personally when I challenge those opinions or when I know they are based on what I believe to be invalid or irrational logic. That's not a personal swipe, just my opinion. Now on to the business at hand...

 

Fair enough. I'll be happy then to continue our discussion.

 

Bill contrary to your assertion, it is not my job to prove LLLT doesn't work- even though that's exactly what I did in the video as a matter of objective scientific fact. I think every poster on this thread agrees with that.

 

I never said it was your job to prove LLLT doesn't work. You took it upon yourself to perform this task with your video.

 

It is not the only thing it proved. It also proved that the light reaching the follicle is no longer "laser" in nature-it's just a red light, the kind of light LLLT proponents admit is ineffective- yet another objective scientific fact.

 

Correct. But my question is once the laser is dispursed from a concentrated area into the surrounding tissue, what is its function? Can it have benefit for scalp tissue? How about the follicles? Lasers have apparently been accepted as legit for other healing properties. And if this is legit, then clearly lasers have to be creating some kind of positive impact on the tissue. I take it you are not a proponent of lasers for healing either correct? I want to be clear here that these are questions, not conclusions. I'm not convinced of the science myself which is why I'm waiting for the visual proof like everyone else.

 

That's a factually incorrect assertion, Bill. The proponents of laser therapy, like the doctors mentioned in your article, have been deafeningly silent on how they claim LLLT actually works. Yet another objective fact. I could ask you to cite your "other" source(s), but I know it would be a fruitless effort because they don't exist. Spare me the Russian studies and supposed laser induced healing studies. None of that has been demonstrated to have any clinical effect on hair follicles. And until I see a new protocol or mandate that all wounds must be exposed to laser light for optimal healing I will reject it for any such use.

 

If you are going to rule out the current studies, nobody can argue with you. Aren't you the one that said that as the moderator, I should draw a conclusion based on ALL the available evidence? icon_smile.gif

 

The issue is not what I think about doctors who engage in such practices, that's irrelevant. The issue is whether the actions of these doctors can be considered objectively ethical. What would you call a doctor who charges top dollar for a therapy that's based on junk science and who, at the same time, ignores indisputable physical evidence that might cut into his bottom line?

 

 

The problem is, you are basing whether or not a doctor is ethical based on your point of view that laser therapy is "junk science".

 

But isn't that what we are trying to determine with this discussion? Your point of view is clear. I'm simply pointing out that there are a number of reputable doctors that would agree, and a number of reputable doctors that would disagree with your view point. Clearly there are a number of outfits that oversell its benefits, but some reputable physicians claim to have positive experiences with it both for healing and hair loss.

 

I cannot speak for these doctors. It is up to them to come on this thread and plead their case. If they don't, it's their loss.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Regular Member

So who precisely are the "reputable" and "ethical" doctor's that prescribe laser therapy to their patients?

never got an answer (?)...

 

Bill,

 

do you have a doctorate degree in any of the sciences, or are you speaking merely from a balding blog moderator point of view? Im still on the fence as to which side to choose and am currently evaluating both camps credentials.

 

Respect to all, very interesting discussion.

I am zee capt'N!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

Dear Colleagues

 

I need to tell you one thing.

 

Let suppose you are loosing hair with 200 per day and you have 219000 hair present, in that way lets calculate that in 3 years you would be 0nly left with 500 hairs.

 

Now if you use any product XYZ and in 3 years instead of 500 hair you still have 150000 hair.

 

What does that mean?

It means that the hair loss was contained due to that product but the pictures would reveal hair thinning. I call this that product is working. Reducing loss is as important as improving the condition.

 

Most of medical treatments are supportive they cant be count on to do the trick alone.

 

I am and I guess no one from LLLT group is saying that LLLT is sufficient alone. What I want to convey is that if LLLT is giving only 10% improvement I would use it. Would you allow 10% of grafts to be lost in your hair transplant procedure....NO, neither would I. SO why not to welcome this 10% benifit.

---

 

I am a medical advisor to Lexington International and Hairmax. What ever I say is my personal opinion.

 

Dr. Mohmand is recommended on the Hair Transplant Network

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So who precisely are the "reputable" and "ethical" doctor's that prescribe laser therapy to their patients?

never got an answer (?)...

 

Bill,

 

do you have a doctorate degree in any of the sciences, or are you speaking merely from a balding blog moderator point of view? Im still on the fence as to which side to choose and am currently evaluating both camps credentials.

 

Respect to all, very interesting discussion.

 

Capt'N Mop,

 

I don't have an exclusive list. But two reputable surgeons who offer laser therapy as a small part of their practice include Coalition members Dr. Charles and Dr. Williams.

 

I do not consider myself to be an expert in laser therapy or medical science. I have a bachelor's degree in education and at the end of the year, will have a Master's degree in counseling.

 

I do however, spend a lot of time researching surgical and non-surgical hair restoration. I figure the more I know, the more I can help to educate the hair loss community.

 

You should understand that my personal position on laser therapy is much closer to Dr. Feller's camp. But I'm also not willing to dismiss claims made by credible doctors. That's why I'm not as dogmatic as Dr. Feller about it, but still won't be recommending laser therapy as a viable treatment unless I see the visual proof we are all after.

 

I hope this helps you clarify my position.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. Mohmand,

 

I stated this on another thread that you may have missed, but....

 

Please check and respond to your email that Pat and I sent you on an entirely unrelated topic. Have you received anything from us? The email we have for you is humayunmohmand@hotmail.com. If not, please provide an alternative email address on this thread or email me at help@hairtransplantnetwork.com.

 

Thanks,

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Regular Member
Originally posted by Dr M Humayun Mohmand:

Let suppose you are loosing hair with 200 per day and you have 219000 hair present, in that way lets calculate that in 3 years you would be 0nly left with 500 hairs.

 

Now if you use any product XYZ and in 3 years instead of 500 hair you still have 150000 hair.

 

What does that mean?

It means that the hair loss was contained due to that product... I call this that product is working. Reducing loss is as important as improving the condition.

 

 

this is weak and fallacious at *best*.

premise: patient loses 'x' # of hairs per day and is projected to lose 'x' # of hairs in 3 years.

 

NO ONE in their right mind will tell you that hair loss is predictable in ANY patient; let alone calculating a formula to know precisely how many hairs they will lose per day, per year, and how many hairs left at the end of three years.

 

Conclusion:

 

"it means that the hair loss was contained due to *that* product...I call this that product is working"...

 

so the fact that the patient has lost slightly less hair than your voodoo equation calculated somehow proves *that* product is working?...

 

I think Feller should be insulted you use the word "Colleagues"...

I am zee capt'N!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Regular Member
Originally posted by Bill - Associate Publisher:

 

I don't have an exclusive list.

 

Bill

 

Are you saying you don't know what all members of the COALITION are offering as forms of services to their patients? As far as the two COALITION members you are aware of offering this practice goes: if your still undecided and not fully convinced of the efficacy of laser therapy, how do you support and reccomend those doctors who practice it for a monetary exchange? I don't mean to be so blunt, but I hate to see patients being treated as guine pigs. If your not convinced, then why support and reccomend them?

 

 

Either way, thank you for the response; much appreciated as this discussion has me quite concerned as I'm a patient advocate and am very adverse to seeing those already suffering from hair loss being squandered of money for snake-oil type products and ponze schemes.

 

Thank You Kindly Sir,

 

look forward to hearing more on this stimulating discussion.

I am zee capt'N!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you saying you don't know what all members of the COALITION are offering as forms of services to their patients?

 

Because we recommend hair transplant surgeons based on surgical hair restoration criteria, we learn all about what they offer and include it in their physician profile.

 

When it comes to non-surgical treatments, some physicians have informed us whether or not they offer prescriptions for Propecia. But we haven't interviewed them on their specific view on non-surgical treatments. We also don't have any criteria in recommending surgeons for non-surgical treatments.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Regular Member

So, wait---

are you NOT sure how many of your reccomended surgeons offer this practice that Dr. Feller (one of the Coalition members) says is bogus? If your not sure *who* does, then why do you keep referring to them as "ethical physicians"? If you don't know who they are, how do you know their ethical?

 

 

I can't trust ALL of the methods a coalition dr utilizes and sells are reviewed and ULTRA REFINED? Some of them might try and sell me snake oil non-scientific products like that guy who said he can predict how many hairs someone will lose in a day, year, etc etc?... icon_confused.gif

do you agree w/that docs premise, that one can asses how many hairs patient 'x' is losing in a day, a month, and project it into 3 years?...seems contrary to everything I've read on here.

So basically don't buy anything other than grafts from a Coalition dr (?)...

 

is that right?

I am zee capt'N!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

Dear Captain

 

The problem is that some times we fail to open our mind to undestand the other person point of view.

 

DO you think the treatment really means to improve...what about to stop the further damage.

 

I guess if nothing LLLT is a choice that a person can use to reduce the hair loss.

 

I am not saying all this just cause I am on this side ofthe debate, but because over the period of 4 years, I have seen my patients (majority of them) saying that the hair loss has reduced.

 

When they come to me, I do not tell them that LLLT is a miricale treatment and would solve your problem ....acra ka Dabra, There is no magic vond.

 

What I tell them that if we use the LLLT it will reduce the hair loss and almost majority about 80% have acknowledge that when they stop using LLLT they tend to see more hair loss.

 

One must use LLLT for 30 to 45 minutes every other day, and for atleast 12 weeks before he can appreciate the effects.

 

ONE more thing WHY did FDA cleared this device for hair growth? do you think people who are sitting there are also stupid or have a financial interest in this device?

 

They must have seen some thing, it might be not enough to do FDA approval but enough to grant clearence.

 

Try to see the point.

 

As far as I am concern, I am ok with it and so are my patients. DOnt sell it for hair growth, sell it for reduction in hair loss.

 

One way of getting more profit is reduce your loss.

 

PLEASE DO SEE THIS ASPECT.

 

we are worried that 7 to 10% of grafts can be damaged without microscope but we are not willing to give a chance to a device which helps about 10% or more. There are studies that have shown.

 

YES those studies are not double blind control randomised trial but there are studies....make it a pre-liminary study.....but its there.

 

Dont be a hard liner

 

I think your comment about the insult for DR Feller if I use the word "colleague" is an insult to this forum, which issuppos to be a forum for educated enlightened people and not for extreemist who would not listen to people.

 

I thought freedom of expression is the right that Americans are so proud of....dont let them down with your comments. you are insulting the freedom of expression

---

 

I am a medical advisor to Lexington International and Hairmax. What ever I say is my personal opinion.

 

Dr. Mohmand is recommended on the Hair Transplant Network

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

Doctor M, are The 80% of patients who are having success with the laser using rogaine or propecia as well?, because I know some companies that overcharge clients give you rogaine to use along with the laser so any improvement can be put down to the combination of the two,and infact the only proven product for hairloss you are paying for is Rogaine and a very expensive electricity bill (laser).Also there is plenty of evidence that propecia works well on its own and you dont have to use it with anything else to get a significant improvement.This cant be said of the laser as there are no studies or photos that prove this, so it is usually used in conjunction with other meds and therefore it is easier to claim it is working and for clinics to keep pushing onto the unsuspecting patient.Can you tell us how you think the laser affects the hair and scalp in a positive way in your patients ?.I think the laser is the biggest scam out there personally and so do 98% of people here so far. Majority rule in my book!.

HT 2006/7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

I will not go down the junk science rabbit hole any further with laser healing studies. Even if it were true, which it's not, it doesn't lend itself to affecting organ structures like follicles. That's a stretch that LLLT proponents have made to justify their quack remediy. It's invalid. I don't see how so many people fall for this false premise and yet overlook the enourmous fact that there are NO valid before/after pictures.

There is nothing magical or special about light once it strikes a surface and converts to standard light. The only thing that happens is that the light is converted to heat. The change is instant and has no radiative or long lasting property. Any thought that it does, or any extension therefrom as you are attempting to make is exactly how junk science is born, Bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. Mohmand,

I see, NOW you sell your device only to keep the hair from falling out- not to grow it. A benefit that can NOT be demonstrated. How convenient.

 

Unforutnately, the studies you cited mention an INCREASE in shaft diameter and hair count. The rational inference is that such increases MUST translate to a perceptive change or improvement in apperance, NOT mere maintanence of what's already there. You have misinterpreted the studies to support your own agenda. In fact, you've taken a step backward Dr. Mohmand.Your logic is simply faulty.

 

Your post from yesterday demonstrates that you know little about how lasers work.

 

I corrected your errors but they seeemed to have no impact on your position. None of the common sense information I presented has impact for you. I gave you ten articuable reasons why your understanding of LLLT is wrong and you didn't address any of them.

 

Instead, you dogmatically hold onto the a few weak studies that are riddled with problems and then accuse ME of being a hardliner.

 

You made up the statistics you mentioned in your thread out of mid-air, yet you put them forward as if they are fact. The only fact you know is that you have NO evidence of the efficacy of the laser therapy you sell your patients work. You rely on other doctors studies. But even THEY have no evidence of clinical efficacy.

 

Don't you understand that if you have to take out a microscope to see the results of laser therapy that there are no results in the frist place?

 

Since you are a man in love with satistics, let's look at some REAL Dr. Mohmand statistical facts:

1. You have 0% before/after pictures

2. You have 0% demonstrable results

3. You have seen 0% before/after pictures from any doctor or laser clinic

4. You have seen 0% before/after results from the doctors whom studies you blindly cite.

5. You understand 0% about how lasers work

6. You learned 0% after you were given a lesson as to how lasers work even with a video demonstration.

7 You made up 100% of the statistics you cited in your recent post.

8. You made up 100% of the clinical theory you use to justify selling laser combs to your patient.

9. You ignored my last post 100%.

10. You have ignored 100% the fact that laser light collapes to standard light on impact

11. You have ignored 100% that a tissue stopped a laser beam 100% in its tracks.

 

Cite those statistics the next time you talk about laser therapy for hairloss.

 

Dr. Mohmand, you are a man with an agenda. You are making up justifications to continue selling laser combs for money in your pocket while all the while turning a blind eye to the facts before you. Your opinions about the purposes and uses for laser combs are useless if they are built on made up statistics, faulty logic, a complete lack of clinical evidence, and a total dismisal of the facts of physics. You have not debated well as you have failed to prove a single word I've written to be wrong. You still have that opportunity, but like all LLLT propoenents you will continue to fail to make your case, just like the other two doctors running from this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...