N/A

[hairbank]

Originally posted by radgav:

Hairbank,

 

I would like to give my apology for not responding to this quote earlier. I was caught up on my own defense from all the attack and harsh comments. I am on everyone's side, This is my passion and what I love to do. Going back on your concern if you do look thin for having 5000 grafts? in my experience of 12 years surgical tech, seeing results from the patients, you shoul have more coverage. given you did take the photos outdoors, were all grafts mostly 1's, 2's. 3's or maybe 4's will give you more fullness. What I also know is that outcomes are very individualized. Give it a little over a year,you may not have all full grown just yet.I think that's the hardest part of hair transplant is "waiting".

 

 

radgav-

 

Before responding to you earlier I did review your threads and believe your initial posts on this forum were intended solely to defend and promote Dr. DeYarman.

 

As for my HT, I'm not unhappy with it in the least. If it thickens no more I believe my results are great so while I appreciate your concern it's not necessary. I was a diffused thinning NW 5 before any surgerys, and, when the average person sees me today I do not look like I am loosing my hair..........plenty of coverage. Pics in extreme sunlight, which are the MOST REVEALING, there are a few areas that show thin. I guess what blows me away is that you think I should have more coverage than I do. Unless I've been lied to by ALL forum members here, YOU are the only one to say this. If this doesn't make you wonder about why you are truly making this claim maybe it should................and by the way, I'm not trying to be covert about this in any way shape or form, I'm telling you straight out that I believe your first post which was in reply to my mention of Dr. DeYarman recently having been removed, had the ultimate intention of discrediting me and Dr. Wong, who performed my 2nd HT and gave me my "thin" results. Then, your mention of the whole "1's, 2's, 3's & 4's debacle..............are you sure there's nothing you want to just come out and say. Here was your first post after my reply to "Not to bald yet":

 

Quote by Not to Bald yet: "I noticed Dr. De Yarmen is mentioned in various places on this site. However, I do not see him on the recommended list. Is he Officially recommend by the HTN

 

If anyone else has comments on Yarmen or Reed your comments good or bad would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thank you in advance for your assistance"

 

My reply to him: "NTBY-

 

Dr. DeYarman used to be recommended here but is not at the present time. You can read this thread if you'd like further details.

 

I don't know much about Dr. Reed but would encourage you to search the site using its "find" feature to obtain information. There are many excellent surgeons recommended by the site's coalition........the link is at the top left of this page.

 

Any details you can share regarding your loss? Are you doing anything to prevent further loss?

 

Hairbank"

 

Your first reply: "I have great experience and excellent feedbacks from most recent patients of Dr. Deyarman, and from those feedback includes Dr. DEyarman only does one procedure a day and he is not tied up to doing multiple procedures.This ensure the quality work will be provided to his patients. Dr. Deyarman is also a member of IAHRS.Don't know much of Dr. Reed. "

 

AND

 

Your second reply: "I have one curiosity for you. After reviewing your history and looking at your before and after and totaling over 5000 units/ grafts I expect more coverage than what you have now. Now excatcly what is the rate of growth you've had since the last procedure from DR Wong? because from the look of your photos from first to last procedure and after 5000 or so grafts you should have at least 50 percent more coverage. your hairline basically looks the same if not still receding. and the crown and the back not much there." THE END

 

My point is this.............I believe you took offense to my mention that Dr. DeYarman was no longer recommended by this site and then you further chose to redirect the thread to my "poor" HT from Dr. Wong. Do you still maintain that I only have 50% growth??

 

From my prospective, no one was attacking you. You repeatedly ignored requests to identifiy yourself as being affiliated with Dr. DeYarman.........you were asked several times.

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If you think I received 50% growth from Dr. Wong, that's your opinion and you're welcome to it. I will say that if you have the experience you do, and you REALLY believe I only had 50% growth, that you're not very good at what you do......IMO.

 

However, I cannot believe that you did not initially come here with a COVERT agenda to defend Dr. DeYarman. At this point..........you are the ONLY poster here who is affiliated with a clinic that seems to only be interested in pushing their clinic. Jotronic(H&W), Spex(Feller), Janna(Shapiro), Ailene(Cooley)...........not to mention the many Docs that continue to contribute, all post on many threads with the end goal being to help those suffering from hair loss. It's not required, but I can personally tell you that if all I'm ever going to hear from you is "this is the great work Dr. DeYarman produces" it's going to get old pretty quick.

 

To my fellow forum members: I apologize in advance if this post seems out of character for me. I seldom get disgusted as I have in this post...........however, if I feel a person is lying to me or to others on this forum, it really ticks me off.

[radgav]

Hello everyone and thank you for all the support. I do understand how you guys feel. I would like to express my apology, remaining quite was not intentional.I join DeYarman Group on October 2006,and learn about the Coalition and his status.I needed a break to absorved and understand the situation and find a solution.I did realize one thing, after having old patients come for check up, I found out that it wasn't because we have a bad Dr. it was because he didn't have the right technicians. My apology goes out to everyone. On that note,I had set up a protocol and replace our surgical technicians as soon as I was able to find excellent ones. Given what I know now and reading all the comments from his past patients gives the drive to work harder. That is, making sure this doesn't happen again to any patients. I was saddened by this because I do know how patients feel from the start,having a few of my own friends and family have done hair transplant. This is really a big deal not just for the patients but also for me. I know I'm in a tight position, I see this as a challenge and a strenght.I would like to see excellent returns and well satisfied patients. Lastly, I also feel the outcome comes majority from the technicians, we are the hands that cut, place and care for your grafts. I do have a lot on my plate right now, and I will give my extra time to really get involve (Bill). For now I appreciate everyone's support and patience. We will be following up with patients results and I will be updating our photos. Thank you to all. Rebecca (radgav)

[hairbank]

Rebecca(radgav).......

 

So, you're not admitting you initially came to HTN's forum in a covert attempt to defend Dr. DeYarman? I guess I'm wondering why when repeatedly questioned directly about this you did not respond?

 

Additionally...........your comments about my "poor" HT coverage from Dr. Wong were in your 2nd post here, which followed my reference to Dr. DeYarman no longer being recommended here............have you reviewed other posters HT work on HTN and made comments or just mine because of my mentioning Dr. DeYarman?

 

Later that same day - after your post............I received an email from you regarding my Hair Loss Blog asking if I had some sort of "deal" with Dr. Wong because for the # of grafts received I should have had twice the coverage..............was this "deal" supposed to mean that hopefully I got a reduced price because it was a bad HT? What did you mean? Then you said you hoped that I was happy but that there was not much to be happy about..........Are you sure you weren't just mad at me for mentioning to a new poster than Dr. DeYarman was no longer recommended here? By the way, if you'll look at my signature attached I only received 3886 from Dr. Wong, plus another 1200 elsewhere, for a total of 5086 grafts.............they didn't all come from Dr. Wong.

 

Guess I'm wondering at this point how we're supposed to believe that your deception was not intentional. I believe it was. In case there's any doubt, yes, I'll be skeptical of your posts and furthermore of the things you are representing here due to this.

[radgav]

Hi Hairbank

 

Well I guess I'm not making myself clear with you hairbank.I'm confused, when you ask me directly and did'nt respond I did say I'm learning the situatiion and the site,did you not read my apology? or do you really and intentionally want to keep bringing it up.I did join HTN on Dr. Deyarman's defense at the same I am new to the site. I am learning at the same time. All I'm trying to do is to fixed the problem. I am also disappointed considering we have not seen the patient for check up to take our own after photos.On the other hand,my comments made to your outcome were sincere. my last note if you do read it, I did mention it should look more, and you may have more to yet grow and should wait next year see what happens. The "deal" I mention ws about money, "you do get what you pay for and if not then q#2 you haven't had an answer for me is what type of hair graft, 1's,2's, 3,'s or any 4's? that could also be the factor. if all single and 2's then that would explain the slight thinness.I really want to be part of this site and give my help.I hope my 13 years experience working for different surgeons from Chicago, Houston,seattle and California and what I have learned now and then can contribute to the forum. I'm not here to get into debate or shouting match, besides I'm a quite shy girl.I just want to do good to the community not make enemies. . Thanks. Rebecca(radgav)

Originally posted by hairbank:

Rebecca(radgav).......

 

So, you're not admitting you initially came to HTN's forum in a covert attempt to defend Dr. DeYarman? I guess I'm wondering why when repeatedly questioned directly about this you did not respond?

 

Additionally...........your comments about my "poor" HT coverage from Dr. Wong were in your 2nd post here, which followed my reference to Dr. DeYarman no longer being recommended here............have you reviewed other posters HT work on HTN and made comments or just mine because of my mentioning Dr. DeYarman?

 

Later that same day - after your post............I received an email from you regarding my Hair Loss Blog asking if I had some sort of "deal" with Dr. Wong because for the # of grafts received I should have had twice the coverage..............was this "deal" supposed to mean that hopefully I got a reduced price because it was a bad HT? What did you mean? Then you said you hoped that I was happy but that there was not much to be happy about..........Are you sure you weren't just mad at me for mentioning to a new poster than Dr. DeYarman was no longer recommended here? By the way, if you'll look at my signature attached I only received 3886 from Dr. Wong, plus another 1200 elsewhere, for a total of 5086 grafts.............they didn't all come from Dr. Wong.

 

Guess I'm wondering at this point how we're supposed to believe that your deception was not intentional. I believe it was. In case there's any doubt, yes, I'll be skeptical of your posts and furthermore of the things you are representing here due to this.

[Bill - Seemiller]

To my fellow forum members: I apologize in advance if this post seems out of character for me. I seldom get disgusted as I have in this post...........however, if I feel a person is lying to me or to others on this forum, it really ticks me off.

 

Hairbank and Rebecca,

 

I believe hairbank has no reason to apologize....his voice (even when raised) is valuable here. I certainly do understand why he was/is upset, and I think by reading the past posts, that things appeared deceiving.

 

Personally, however, I don't think Radgav is trying to deceive anyone...I'm honestly just not sure she is/was paying much attention. I don't mean that as an offence to Rebecca...but it does seem that everytime she replies many of the issues are not addressed. That could be for one of two reasons:

 

1). She is avoiding them (my guess is this is not the case)

2). She missed it or forgot about it by the time she started to reply

 

I think perhaps a starting over may be in order. I'd personally like to give Rebecca the benefit of the doubt that she was NOT trying to deceive anyone...but I do think for whatever reason (maybe reading too quickly or being extremely busy), she wasn't very "with it" (no offense intended) when replying to the posts. This is why I suggested that she spend the extra time to really read and reply to everything honestly and sincerely (noted in my post above).

 

I DO have some reservations however, like hairbank, why Rebecca asked if he was compensated by Dr. Wong in some way after she already stated her opinion that there should be more coverage. Firstly, I want to add that I totally disagree...I believe hairbank's surgery looks great for the amount of grafts he received. Secondly, I'm not sure why the hair per graft count issue came up...if this is an attack of some kind of Dr. Wong or just a general speculation. My best guess, without reading minds is that it was a general speculation. BUT may I caution that criticizing another doctor's work from anybody representing a clinic is dangerous...treading on thin ice so to speak, especially without any credibility already established on the site. So I'd keep that to a BARE minimum if I were you Rebecca. I say that to HELP you...in no way is that intended as a threat. It just comes accross that you have one agenda....to promote your doctor and disregard other valuable clinics. I sincerely HOPE that you don't intend to just do that...but you have made it clear that you are mainly here to FIX a problem.

 

Rebecca,

 

I found out that it wasn't because we have a bad Dr. it was because he didn't have the right technicians. My apology goes out to everyone. On that note,I had set up a protocol and replace our surgical technicians as soon as I was able to find excellent ones.

 

I do have some concern over your statement above. Since the doctor is inevitably responsible for overseeing the technicians by personally training them and making sure they do quality work, it is ultimately the fault of the doctor for keeping on staff technicians who didn't do a good job. Unfortunately, no matter how anybody wants to see it...it DOES reflect negatively on the doctor. This was actually just recently discussed in another post...basically, just how important the technicians are in the process. They have EXTREMELY important work to do and even if there is one bad apple, the end result could be poor quality work.

 

BUT, if there is some good news here...it's that Dr. Deyarman and you are working to rectify the problem. IMO, however, this could have been avoided if they were properly monitored, supervised, trained, etc.

 

I intend not an attack on you...I sincerely am trying to help...but I do think your approach with hairbank from the beginning was a bit brisk in some areas and avoidant in others. That's why it's extremely important to use caution on how you present yourself...MUCH more so because you represent a clinic. BUT, please try to clear your mind of being here JUST to FIX a problem...clearly...the problem isn't here on the community to be fixed - getting him reinstated on the recommended list or coalition should be the LAST of your concerns. Getting new techs and training them into veterans should be your primary concern.

 

Bill

[Gorpy]

what type of hair graft, 1's,2's, 3,'s or any 4's?

 

Uh Oh

[Bill - Seemiller]

LOL Gorpy

[hairbank]

Rebecca-

 

I don't accept ignorance as an excuse for not responding to repeated requests as to whether or not you were affilitated with Dr. DeYarman. First you apologized for not responding to my earlier request, then you apologized but I'm not really sure for what. The ONLY reason I initially brought this up was so you would answer posts regarding your initial intention when first posting on HTN. I'll point out again...........your comments on my hair loss blog stating you "hoped I got a reduced price for the HT and that you hoped I was happy but that there was not too much to be happy about". Again, I will ask you, are you sure you were not saying these things to make Dr. Wong look bad because I mentioned to another poster that Dr. DeYarman was no longer recommended here? That's a pretty cynical statement for someone merely commenting about another poster's HT and the FIRST negative comment I've received out of tons................so I believe I'm justified in being suspicious of your intentions. You may want to respond to this question so we can put it to rest.

 

I'm merely looking for the truth, Rebecca. No more, no less. If ANY new poster represents themselves in the same fashion you have, it would be no different. We don't tolerate covert posting here and in my opinion you had a hidden agenda when you first started posting............and, it's obvious you're here to bring Dr. DeYarman back to a level of good standing with the site. If he deserves it, Pat is very fair and I'm sure he'll be restored. I would ask that if you want to continue posting pics for Dr. DeYarman that you at least try to contribute to help others here in some way. You don't have to, but it would be a nice gesture.

 

Anyone on this site can tell you that I'm not one to "shout" or "pick fights".......really for much of any reason. I'm just here to help others deal with hair loss. To me, it's plain that you said what you said about my results because I mentioned to another poster that Dr. DeYarman was no longer recommended by the site. If you don't want to admit it, I can't make you. Continually referring to the fact that you were new and didn't understand the forum just doesn't wash................if you can read and understand questions, you can answer them like anyone else.

 

IMO you have continually blamed anything but yourself for neglecting to respond to the earlier questions about your affiliation with Dr. DeYarman..............and trying to tarnish an accomplished surgeon such as Dr. Wong for which you still are trying to dance around.

 

I'm not a mean-spirited person at all................just honest. I don't tolerate deception in my personal life nor will I tolerate it here.

 

It's your choice, Rebecca, you can reply to my earlier questions or not. I won't bring them up again.

 

Bill- I truly appreciate the wisdom in your post, brother. As usual, you have an eloquent way of dissecting posts and getting to the heart of the matter.

 

Gorpy- LOL!!! 1's, 2's, 3's..............will we ever forget???

[YoungGuy]

I thought long & hard about whether to reply here, with so much anger in the air Still, it looks like radgav is now pretty transparent about her affiliation with DMG and has no hidden agenda anymore. She's trying to pull for her doc and is posting a lot of photos. We can make up our own minds. It's as it should be.

 

Hairbank, if I may, leave her alone To a neutral observer it looks like she dissed your HT and you're pissed about it. I can understand, but let's focus on helping each other and not on grudges.

 

Don't mean to be out of line, apologies in advance if I am!

[Jotronic]

Rebecca,

 

I've been following your posting style since I first saw your "opinion" of Hairbank's results after his work with Dr. Wong. As Hairbank stated, he already had work with another doctor and his second session with Dr. Wong put him in the 5000 graft club.

 

Some of the forum members are a bit more forgiving than I am but I've been around a long time and I am pretty adept at knowing when something doesn't smell right and your posting style is nothing like someone that is simply new but more like someone that is making excuses after they've been busted. Can anyone of the seasoned forum members tell me when someone that was simply new made so much of a fuss about someone's results not looking great when the results obviously WERE great then went on to make excuses about their posting style being because they are new to the site? Please. It's good to give someone the benefit of the doubt now and then but I think this is a little too obvious to treat as a "mistake".

 

Rebecca, I'll leave my logical point vs. point posts for another thread and simply ask you two very easy questions.

 

If Hairbank's results are "thin" as you say for the given number of grafts can you show me ONE result from your clinic, with photos taken outside in a cloudless sunny day , that match it, graft for graft, for density and coverage?

 

Second question, you posted the results of a clear NW6 at nine months post op. He had 2816 grafts in one session. How do you explain the possible poor growth for this man? To compare I am using my photos after one session with Dr. Wong FIVE YEARS AGO last month with 410 LESS grafts on the same sized area as I too was a NW6. Note that my pics too are outside during the middle of the day and my results in this photo are at only SEVEN months. I was in the Arboretum park off Capitol Hill in Seattle, you should know the place.

 

 

Me...2406 grafts at 7 months. Pic taken outside.

Him...2816 grafts at 9 months. Pic taken inside.

 

Btw, my hair is fine and my donor density is average at best so hair characteristics do not play a factor in this.

 

Did your patient receive a discount because the growth at nine months is less than spectacular? How do you explain the difference? Surely it's not because my grafts were only 1's and 2's is it?

 

No need for more apologies or sidestepping. Just answer the questions to gain any sort of credibility. If you cannot then I think you should apologize to Hairbank and admit that your past experience of twelve years do not include experience with doctors (especially any in the Seattle area since you stated you worked here) that can deliver results like Hairbank's courtesy of Dr. Wong in less than twelve sessions much less two or God forbid even one.

 

I eagerly await your rebuttal.

[Hairfree]

This is an excellent track of postings on this forum. It lets everyone know that people here will not tolerate those who are promoting a particular's doctors work. I hope that all the new members on this forum come across this one to help them understand that this forum is not for advertising purposes but rather to offer support and help people. I am glad that I did!

 

I look forward to RADGAV's response to Jotronic.

[the B spot]

This is like watching David and Goliath.

 

Poor, Poor Radgav....... I tried to tell you to "be cool" and now you have incurred the wrath of Jotronics, who has watched every Bruce Lee movie............. TWICE.

 

I am very interested in hearing Radgav's response.

 

(For some reason the rock anthem "Final Countdown" is playing over and over and over and over and over and over and over......... in my head of course)

[hairbank]

Originally posted by YoungGuy:

I thought long & hard about whether to reply here, with so much anger in the air Still, it looks like radgav is now pretty transparent about her affiliation with DMG and has no hidden agenda anymore. She's trying to pull for her doc and is posting a lot of photos. We can make up our own minds. It's as it should be.

 

Hairbank, if I may, leave her alone To a neutral observer it looks like she dissed your HT and you're pissed about it. I can understand, but let's focus on helping each other and not on grudges.

 

Don't mean to be out of line, apologies in advance if I am!

 

No apologies necessary YG, I've enjoyed getting to know you here. NEVER shy away from posting your thoughts, that's what makes it work . We challenge each other to learn more and see things from another prosepctive.

 

My frustration with Rebecca isn't so much that she dissed my HT..........I have thick skin and can deal with it. Her ONLY point in doing this was ultimately to smear Dr. Wong because he's the one who performed the surgery. AND, it was in defense of Dr. DeYarman whose Coalition membership was recently revoked. Rebecca chose to be overly critical (unjustly so, in my opinion) of the results I was provided courtesy of Dr. Wong, I believe due to the fact that I mentioned Dr. DeYarman's status to another poster.......also, she repeatedly ignored questions about her affiliation. That's just deception and it seemingly would have been swept under the rug had I not posted my thoughts. Other posters have been called out and, with occasional hidden agendas by covert posters, likely will be again. As I mentioned, I'm done raising questions.............I just wanted the truth to come out. I cannot make Rebecca answer my questions.

 

Joe-

 

You've summed up my thoughts EXACTLY, my friend. I hope Rebecca will respond!

[Bill - Seemiller]

Well if we haven't scarred Rebecca (Ragdav) away at this point, I do look forward to her rebuttal.

Hello everyone,

 

I think ultimately the debates in this community make for a good learning environment. I do admit, however, I do kind of feel bad for Rebecca, but at the same time, she did make her own bed and now she has to lie in it.

 

I will agree with Joe that something doesn't smell right, but I'm not convinced that there was purposeful deceit, but more of an ignorance (not to say this is acceptable, ESPECIALLY of someone who has been employed as a lead tech for 12 years, who should by education and experience alone be more knowledgable than most here, including me). I'm also guessing (though I can't be certain) from her posts that there is a language barrier issue.

 

The reason I think this rather than a purposeful deceit is this:

 

1. Her messages to hairbank about compensation were private. They weren't meant to be seen by anyone except hairbank. So what would her motivation be to do this? Well, she certainly wasn't trying to get everyone involved on that...maybe in some strange way, she was reaching out to hairbank to offer what she thought was insight? Again, possibly ignorance. However we can't ignore that she did post publicly her dissatisfaction of hairbank's results. I tend to think that her reasoning (though done in poor taste) was to put a positive focus on Dr. Deyarman without consideration of the harm it would cause. I'll explain further below...but again, this is just my theory...either way, it doesn't mean that it's acceptable.

 

2. Her responses to many posts have been half winded...which could mean a couple things:

A. She is purposely avoiding them as to not get "caught" which obviously didn't work

B. She forgot to address them (sadly, I even have friends I have to ask the same question to 3 times in an email before I get a response...but I do get one eventually)

C. Language barrier (if someone doesn't understand everything being posted, they certainly aren't going to respond to all of it)

D. Logic and Intelligence (can related to B above): I hate to say it this way but am failing to come up with a better way to say it. But some people's minds are not able to comprehend nor lay out their thoughts in logical and meaningful ways (therefore by default, a lot is forgotten)

 

3. She is apologizing for her actions: This could be genuine (I actually believe she is sorry) - however, I'm not sure she knows what she is apologizing for...or at least, she hasn't directly stated it. Again, she could see negativity in general, be apologizing for it because she simply didn't mean anything to turn "ugly", but not exactly sure what she is apologizing for or maybe even what to apologize for first.

 

All that to say, I'm not foolish enough to rule out purposeful deceit...I just don't think it is. But as I said, ignorance still isn't an excuse.

 

All that to say, a logical debate is good...I just hope Rebecca is strong enough to stay the distance and fight the "good fight", as opposed to the bad one!

 

Bill

 

Oh, and one more thing....quote from Joe

 

Can anyone of the seasoned forum members tell me when someone that was simply new made so much of a fuss about someone's results not looking great when the results obviously WERE great then went on to make excuses about their posting style being because they are new to the site? Please. It's good to give someone the benefit of the doubt now and then but I think this is a little too obvious to treat as a "mistake".

 

 

I certainly wouldn't call it a mistake...but I believe she most likely didn't realize the harm it would cause. That doesn't make it right, of course...but she probably was trying to use that to promote her clinic and didn't see but 2 steps ahead of her, that it was harmful to another clinc as a result. That must sound funny...but I think many people use tactics to try to promote themselves (even personally) without realizing the harmful effects it has on others. I don't believe this is excusable, however, I do believe it's forgivable! Purposeful deceit is harder to forgive - unless they admit it and ask for forgiveness.

 

And by the way...speaking of forgiveness....

 

Happy Resurrection Day! Jesus has risen and has forgiven all who believe

 

Bill

[Bill - Seemiller]

Oh...and one more extremely important thing:

 

Since motive cannot really be known with certainty unless someone admits it, it really doesn't matter which view we hold (ignorance or deceit).

 

What we should be focusing on is how to move forward from this stagnant place!

 

And in order to do that...

 

All the issues that hairbank and JoTronic raised above should be addressed by Radgav (Rebecca).

 

Rebecca,

 

And may I advise YOU that if you think JoTronic and Hairbank are making valid points and you realize you are wrong...it would be best to simply apologize and be specific to what you are apologizing for and admit you are wrong if you believe you are. Humility is a GOOD thing and would be much more commendable than arguing to try to come out the victor (especially if in your heart you realize you were wrong). However, if you believe you are right...I encourage you to back up your claims with pictures and concrete evidence or you will be stomped on...and this battle will never end.

 

Bill

[irish homer]

I had a long think about posting on this topic. I know that i can't speak as eloquently or as knowledgeably as the vets on this subject.

here's my 2 cents on the whole subject, Hairbank was the one poster here who took the time to follow my trends and answer all my questions and queries when i started out on my journey. I had great advice from others too ( Bill,B, etc ) what struck my about Hairbanks advice is that you get a feeling from his posts that he really cares and worries that new posters are steered in the right direction.

He has never appeared to be aggressive or argumentative to anyone and i feel that Rebeca is totally out of line with her attacks on him. I know he's a big boy and can look after himself and am only posting to voice my support of his well thought-out questions and the stance that he is taking.

Keep looking after us hairbank -)

IH

[its-only-hair]

Bill I think language is one of the main problems here, but not the only problem.

 

I asked Radgav if English was her first language, all she had to write was yes or no. If she had of said no, then I think everyone would understand half of the problem. But instead of saying yes or no, she wrote instead "I think it takes common sense to understand what you're reading".

 

Happy Easter everyone.

[Bill - Seemiller]

its-only-hair,

 

Hope you don't take offense brother, but your original post to her did come across in a way that could have been taken negatively...I know I would probably have been offended if I were in her shoes reading it. You actually didn't ask her if English was her first language, you told her that she should type in a more professional manner. Do take a look back at your original post and ask yourself if you might be offended if someone posted to you in that manner. Anyway...just wanted to point that out to you.

 

Hope you take the challenge well...it's meant to be to build you up...not knock you down.

 

Bill

[Bill - Seemiller]

I do want to point out one more thing before I'm done with this thread for the day:

 

Just a reminder of Pat's original comment and I think that should be considered since we trust his judgement. This will hopefully edge things down a little too so it's not the world against Rebecca:

 

 

From Pat the Publisher...

 

Guys,

 

Sorry for the confusion regarding Radgav who is Rebecca the lead medical tech for the DeYarman Medical Group.

 

I had a good conversation with her last week and I encouraged her to post photos of patients who have had their surgeries since she took over monitoring quality control in October of 2006. I believe she is very experienced and sincere about doing excellent work and that she has already made some significant improvements to the DMG's quality control process since she took over this responsibility in October of 2006. I expect to see these improvements reflected in the photos she and DMG patients will be displaying in the coming weeks and months.

 

She is also a real sweet heart but new to posting. Let's work with her to help show us what the DMG is now doing in terms of producing quality results. Perhaps they will be able to regain their recommendation on this community.

 

All the best, Pat

 

[the B spot]

Bill--- Happy Easter and Much Love Bro'

 

Happy Easter to you all!!!!!

 

I think this is the issue in a nutshell--- Dr. DeYarman feels his technicians are the cause of his "no growth" issues.

 

He brings in Rebecca to "fix things" in addition to having her help repair his obviously lessened reputation with us (the on-line community)

 

Instead of building a relationship with us, she attacks the results of Hairbank, in addition to using very poor spelling and grammar to "communicate" her points.

 

I share IOH's opinion about professionalism, (although I would have brought it to light in a different manner), you simply must understand the position you are in.

 

Radgav is in no position to offer any criticism of any work at this point.

 

I tried to offer some perspective in an earlier post, but I think her intial comments are too inflammatory to overlook.

 

I reiterate--- just post the work of Dr DeYarman and answer questions directed your way.

 

 

Take Care,

J

[its-only-hair]

Bill, no offense taken.

 

When I said "I'm not sure if English is your first language", it was meant as a question. Next time I'll ask it in a better way, not to Radgav though I think she has enough on her plate.

[Bill - Seemiller]

B-spot...good summary

 

its-only-hair...glad you weren't offended bro.

 

I won't post again on this thread until we hear from Rebecca!

 

Bill

[hairbank]

Irish Homer-

 

Hey, Bro, thank you so much for the kind words. I'm beginning to wonder if anyone remembers what I was like before my Jekyll/Hyde imitation here on HTN .........I'm really a nice guy in real life, uh, er, most of the time anyway . Glad to know I was a help to you......people like you are the reason I keep hanging around!

 

Bill-

 

I think we likely disagree somewhat on Rebecca's ultimate intentions. In reality, as I believe you mentioned, her true motive will not be known unless she admits it......that's the bottom line, it's up to her. I would still like to hear her response to my (and other's questions) but will not repeat them and if she chooses not to respond, that's her call to make and I won't be brining the questions to her anymore. I'm not one to hold "grudges", plan on treating her with respect and will move past this no matter what the outcome.

 

Yes, bro, Happy Easter...........Jesus arose from the grave all those years ago defeating sin and death for all who will believe. How can I continue "splitting hairs" with that in mind....tends to put my "molehunt" in prospective!

[radgav]

Hairbank,(Mike)

Accept apology about my comments on your HT.

I hope you understand. I did take offense about your comment about DMG.But that's behind me now.

I don't like getting into a debate. we all have opinions.(hope you understand).

 

Jotronic,

photo imaging?Gray?top of head combed and wet? Age plays a role, smoker?, lifestyle, diet? airbrush?look at your photo closely, do see what I see?I'm finish debating, and needs to focused on my work. By the way, You look familiar?hummmm?where(school,place?)?when?Anyway,I respect your opinion.(none taken on my end)

 

Bspot,Bill, Youngguy

Thank you for your support and word of encouragements.

 

I just have one last comment to say:

I have work to do, I will take this experience to it's full advantage in helping my patients.It's been great.

 

And for the rest who visits the site:

Thank you and goodluck on your Ht decisions.

Have a wonderful Spring/Summer!

[hairbank]

Rebecca-

 

The apology certainly wasn't necessary but thank you anyway. I really was just wanting to find out if your comments about my HT were due to me mentioning to another poster that Dr. DeYarman was no longer recommended here (apparently they were, as you mentioned) and wanted to see if you were affiliated with Dr. DeYarman. Thank you for answering my questions.

 

Debates push us to think "outside of the box" in most cases so don't shy away from them. Sometimes we engage in debates here with not much change in prospective from one side to the other, often times many are enlightened and views change. Honest input, along with integrity, is part of what this site provides and is about. Never be timid in stating what you think........just be sure your intentions are for the good of everyone and that there is no agenda other than to help those suffering with hair loss.

 

As for Jotronic's pic comparison...................he really has a valid argument. He received less grafts that the person he's compared his pic to and in two months less time has results that are far superior. Some of the things you mention.....age, smoker, lifestyle....may play a role in growth but there's really no comparison between the two. Just giving you honest input on the pic that were posted by you comparing it to Joe's pic.