The truth about FUE - read this - Dr. Armani, Dr. Rassman and my experience - nasty is the word

[hair_boy]

I've been thinking about getting a HT for a number of years and shortly before the new year decided to stop thinking about it and to get it done.

 

Of course like everyone, my goal is to find the best doctor and to locate the best technology out there. With that in mind, I immediately became interested in the FUE procedure. I mean, not having a scar running from ear to ear would be awesome.

 

Over the next couple weeks I narrowed down my doctor pick to Dr. Antonio Armani. My reason for selecting Dr. Armani was quite simple: He does extremelly high graft numbers in one session, his hairlines look nice, and he's has no ethics making it possible to put my hairline where ever I wanted. That might sound strange but those were my reasons.

 

I contacted the Toronto office for a quote and a few days later received a reply from one of Dr. Armani's 'yes men'... his name was Chad Cooper. To sum Chad up, one only has to think of a yes-man who will say absolutely what ever you want to hear so he can make the sale.

 

Chad told me that I need 3560 grafts and the price for Dr. Antonio Armani himself would be CAD$7 or CAD$5 per graft for an Armani doctor. Before making a decision I asked for some close up photos of patients who had the FUE procedure as the photos that were on his website were horrible. I mean they are nice photos, but there aren't any close ups or ones with good lighting so they in a sense are useless to help with the decision whether to do it or not. I mean, I want to see exactly what I'm buying...

 

Well, to my shock, Chad emails me a bunch of photos of various guys, including himself, Leonardo DiCaprio and Ewan McGregor. At first I thought... wow.. Leonardo DiCaprio had a hair transplant.. I would have never guessed .. and he used Armani... very cool I thought... but at the same time I was in misbelief. I mean I've worked in marketing for 20 years and I just couldn't believe that an A-list actor would agree to tell the public that he wasn't perfect. It just didn't make sense so I did a Google search.

 

Of course, I couldn't find any HT info for Leonardo or Ewan McGregor, but, what I did find out shocked me: It turns out that ALL the photos Chad emailed me were STRIP patients !!!!! This made me worry because I was wondering what the motive for emailing me ONLY strip patients was when I directly requested ONLY FUE patient photos. I mean, Dr. Armani had been doing FUE for more than a number of years and should have hundreds of patient photos available.

 

The proof is in the evidence ( a few of the photos that were emailed to me are on this site):

http://www.hairsite8.com/htdocs/alvi/main.htm

 

number 1): he's the main guy in the armani ads (STRIP patient 3329 grafts)

 

number 6): I think this made me extra sick. This guy is on the Armani videos and yes it does say he had both Strip and FUE however check out his picture after ONLY the Strip session. He looks exactly how he does in the video.. I mean where did Armani put the FUE grafts and what's the FUE relevance?

 

number 11): they passed him off as a FUE patient as well, however it says STRIP Grafts 1900...

 

Okay at this point I was really concerned. I started to really look at the before and after photos of FUE patients and one thing I noticed was FUE results was like gambling... odds better than roulette but worse than craps. For example:

Check out this guy's temple area which hasn't at all had much growth - I would say less than 20% if that and it's at the 7.5 months: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_kWLu...h/7.5+months+006.jpg

 

 

Here's another one with way less than 50% growth at 6 months: (you can totally see the two hairlines - looks horrible) http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4AMW...th+hair+pics+009.jpg

 

 

I mean sure the above will grown in a bit more but if you compare the above results with Strip results there is simply no comparison.

 

Check out this FUE blog, I actually feel sorry for the guy: http://superpanda-fue.blogspot.com/

 

Now my number one concern was the follicle survivor rate if I did the FUE. I asked what the follicle survivor rate was. Chad (the yes-man) replied that it was between 97-98% or better. I asked what the worst case scenario was and he wouldn't reply. Instead he said that all the patients are happy with their results and that he couldn't comment further. Okay, you are thinking what I'm thinking right.. .run.. well, that's exactly what I did.

 

Now at this point I felt quite a bit of stress as I really didn't want a scar from ear to ear. I mean there is no other way to put it... no matter how good of a scar it's still a scar and it will run ear to ear. For this reason I continued my research...

 

One thing that kind of baffled me at first was the FUE naming conventions. I mean most of the doctors that do the FUE procedure have different naming conventions. For example, FUE, FIT, CIT, FUE IM, FUEE, and FUE2 (second power) etc.. Well, I'm here to inform you that FUE is FUE... all these doctors use their own naming convention to appear that they are doing something that no other doctor can do... it's just marketing and it reminds me when I was a kid... every time I went on a date and got lucky, my friends would ask and I'd say, "yah, I john-ed her"... so instead of saying "I fuc#ed her" I made it sound special by putting my name in the sentence and adding "ed"... I was technically marketing my image like a dumb kid would.

 

Continuing with my research regarding FUE. After looking at doctors like Feller, Cole, Woods, Ilter etc.. I came to the conclusion that all of them no matter what they call their procedures, are doing the exact same procedure. Sure they might use different size punches, they might all say different prayers, but, all in all what they are doing is the same. Of course there is a person's natural ability that may change the outcome or provide a more consistent outcome but again,all in all, it's just FUE...

 

At this point I don't think any doctors opinion about FUE is very accurate.

 

Okay, this only leaves Dr. Rassman and his enhanced FUE procedure which according to his website appears like a completely different procedure: http://www.newhair.com/fue2/

 

Well, I'm about to save you a lot of time with regards to Dr. Rassman and the procedure he refers to as FUE to the power of 2. You know after wasting my time going to his office I can tell you he made a big mistake with his naming convension. He should have put the 2 in front and change the spelling to: "TOO FEW"... yup, "too few" refering to the survival rate. Too few will survive.

 

I have to be honest that Dr. Rassman does appears on paper to be a top quality "all ethics" kind of doctor. So needless to say I was completely shocked after meeting the snake oil seller. This is a pretty strong statement, however there is no mistake after he wasted my time with his bait and switch routine.

 

Starting at the beginning - I arrived at Dr. Rassman's office just before 2pm. My appointment was for 2pm. He ran late seeing me at 2:35pm... I actually didn't have a problem with this because I was lost in a book I was reading.. When I meet Dr. Rassman he introduced himself. I then explained that I was really interested in finding out the follicule survival rate for the new FUE2 procedure. Dr. Rassman said word for word, "Compared to the strip procedure it's not very good. A lot of doctors really make the FUE procedure out to be what it's not."..

 

Well, you can say I was shocked... thinking that he was talking about the old FUE procedure I reminded him that I was talking about the new FUE2 procedure he explained online. Dr. Rassman then said, "Our website doesn't explain all, I'm sorry about that"... he went on: "what don't you like about the strip procedure? Are you worried about the scar? Well, you don't have to worry because we do what you call a trichophytic closure. It isn't like it was years ago. Nowadays you can hardly even see the scar.. I wouldn't worry about it at all". I can't remember the exact words but he continue to say "trichophytic closure" about 10 times in the next two sentences like it was some sort of magic pill... simply he was trying to sell me a strip procedure and trying to close the deal by selling me this magical closure which will leave me virtually scarless. Personally I was completely disgusted by the lack of professionalism using the bait and switch on me.

 

We talked about the FUE procedure for a good solid 15 minutes and 100% of the stuff Dr. Rassman said is completely contrary to what he says on his marketing website. Online he makes it sound like this new FUE2 procedure is the best thing since slice bread. You know, it's not like he looked at my donor area or anything.. instead this was just his opinion on the FUE(FUE2) procedure. My problem with this was, why on earth would Dr. Rassman promote FUE2 on his website - have me come through his door, only to tell me how horrible the results are and try to sell me a strip procedure? mmm... bait and switch marketing - to make money$$$

 

You know, everything is marketing... if you don't believe me take a good look online and you will see guys that were sold doll hair plugs back in the day. I mean why on earth would anyone with fair logic decide to have doll plugs... well, it was all marketing and selfish doctors.

 

Just so we are clear about my view on the FUE procedure as I'm not saying it's a bad decision. It's just that we need to understand the results are no where near a survival rate of 97-98%: I think what I found out is, a select few doctors seem to maintain a 80% survival rate (if that) but not any better. I think that's closer to the truth. One thing is, it's not at all consistant with patients - some unlucky ones seem to just have horrible results....

 

 

In closing, I would like everyone to be cautions of these forums. The majority of stuff you read has either been posted by the doctors or their staff. These proffession posters sole purpose is to neutralize any negative comment and make sure the doctors that they work for are left in a favoriable light. Sure a lot of their comments appear to be neutral and sometimes I believe that they are, however, in the end they do control your opinion of what you are going to decide upon. It's scary that so much is controlled...

 

Sorry for the long post... had to get this off my chest...

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Hair_boy,

If you read my posts concerning FUE since 2001 you will see that I have been saying exactly what you just wrote all along.

 

FUE is FUE no matter what it's called. If the graft has to undergo the following three major detrimental forces then it is generic FUE no matter what it is called:

 

1.Torsion- Twisting force

2.Traction- Pulling force

3.Compression-Twisting force

 

The hype surrounding FUE reached unethical levels the day it was introduced to the western hemisphere and I have been outspoken against these clinics since the beginning.

 

FUE has it's place. It is not a way to replace strip surgery, but rather a way to SUPPLIMENT it. Make no mistake, yields are CONSISTENLY lower, graft for graft, when compared to strip surgery. However, in smaller surgeries the yields are higher because physician fatigue is at a minimum.

 

Can megasession FUE be done? Sure, there have been some notable success, but the consistency of this success is far lower than strip. For some people it's worth the risk, for others it isn't. That's why I think it's important for a modern day HT physician to be proficient at BOTH procedures to be able to offer the patient the best advice and guidance for their hair restoration plan.

 

A major problem that we face today is that FUE "only" physicians deride Strip surgery and even resort to fear-mongering to literally scare patients away from strip doctors and into their offices. On the other hand we have many Strip "only" doctors who deride FUE simply because they haven't had the training or the time to perform it successfully.

 

Dr. F

[PLEASE GROW PLEASE]

Thank God you didnt go to Armani.

They are a bunch of ridiculous clowns over there.

I was told they are struggling to get clients lately. I hope thats true.

That fue2 is no different then what anyone else is doing .

Dr Bisanga is the ONLY surgeon I would even consider if I was looking into fue of more then 1000 grafts.

Believe it or not unlike that other sorry site this one does a good job of making sure people know who works for who.

Ive personally emailed Bill probably 50 times about certain people and docs trying to make sure this site says as legit as possible.

Its good to see a guy like you do your research and sift through all the bullcrap.

Thats why my advice to everyone is stick with the clinics that have shown consistency for years.

Stay with the ones that have a clean history.

Thers only 3 or 4 clinics I would even consider touching me .

[TheEmperor]

I did my research and went to an ethical strip clinic doing tricho. The scar is worse than i had hoped and is about the width of a matchstick through the length. I have to keep the hair at 1" to cover it, so I can use clippers, that sucks, but its not a deal breaker.

 

However, most of the transplanted hair grew I believe. Its not as thick as I would hope, but it is cosmetically significant and I am not bald.

 

Glad I didnt go FUE. Armani had just stared doing batch FUE a year ago and it wasnt proven, so I went strip.

 

If the alternative is being bald or having a scar that can be covered by hair, I choose the hair w/ scar. I think with strip, there is a chance the scar will be pencil thin, but I wouldnt bank on it. Maybe 50%.

[Dr. William Rassman1530037930]

The FUE2 procedure utilizes a 'water jet' principal which is used with the extraction. This facilitates that the dissection is both mechanical with a punch and this is assisted by the water jet which sets up about half of the extraction (estimate). This principle reduces the damage associated with FUE. I have filed US and International patents on the details of how this is done so I am not willing to expand upon this here at this time. The FUE2 technique reduces the transection rate and the damage to the extracted grafts. The machinery to exploit the water jet cost about $45,000 so until I can get the costs down, I doubt that it will take off in the marketlace even if I released it today. The pictures of the FUE2 which is shown on my web-site (newhair.com and http://www.newhair.com/fue2/) demonstrates a superior graft that is equal to a graft taken by the strip method. Although these are the usual results from the FUE2 technique, sometimes the damage that is seen in the standard FUE occurs. There is obviously some difference in the 'tissues' of those patients that get damage. By damage I mean that the dissection of the traditional FUE leaves the distal follicular units skeletonized close to 100% of the time and this reduces the size of the hairs that are generated when compared to non-skeletonized FUE grafts. Also, transection of some hairs occurs in a few patients, even in the FUE2 technique.

 

With the strip harvesting method, dissection if 100% in quality and the variations that we see, even in the FUE2, does not occur. For this and other reasons, I believe that the strip method of harvesting is far better because it is 100% predictable and replicable. When one looks at the results of double trichophytic wound closures in strip harvesting, even the FUE2 can not compare in the degree of scarring as shown in my recent post on baldingblog.com http://www.baldingblog.com/200...-grafts-with-photos/ . With such quality of the scar and with predictability of the strip harvesting in better than 95% of patients, the strip is superior to the FUE or the FUE2 providing that the patient is not an unusual healer and the scar, if it formed from the strip, can not exceed 3-4 mm maximize width. Stretching of the incision beyond 3-4mm will produce a scar, even in the double trichophytic wound closure. The scars from FUE are not trivial and after seeing the scars in the many patients who visited my office after they have had FUE, I detect significant scarring (punctate scars) which would not allow a patient to shave their head. As the official 'inventor' of the FUE, my obligation is not to exploit a procedure that may be inferior and has problems with it, so unlike some other doctor who promote FUE surgery heavily as scarless with great yields, I call it like it is.

 

With regard to gimmicks, I hope that the above clearly supplies you enough information (which is far more than I have even released to date) on the FUE2 technique and how it differs from the FUE. I ask that you respect the proprietary nature of the technology which I have discussed here while it works its way through the US and European Patent office.

 

I have asked for an opinion by the most prominent doctors who do successful FUEs in their practice, and on viewing the FUE2 grafts that are shown on my web-site and were shown to them privately, every doctor shown these photos agrees that the FUE2 quality graft is superior to their FUE graft in their hands. They too were skeptical and probed how this was accomplished. I am not nor have I ever been into gimmickry nor have I misrepresented myself or what we do.

 

I appreciate your inquiry and hope that I adequately answered your questions. I would welcome further inquiries on baldingblog if there any more open questions.

 

William Rassman, M.D.

[hair_boy]

Dr. Feller - yes, I have read your posts regarding your thoughts on FUE. However you always seem to include neutralizing comments and for that reason, I interpreted your comments to be part of your brand of "ethical marketing".

 

Here's an example, you start of saying, "The hype surrounding FUE reached unethical levels..." And then you neutralize it by saying, "I have been outspoken against these clinics.."

 

Here's another example, you write: "Make no mistake, yields are CONSISTENTLY lower" and then you neutralize it by saying, "However, in smaller surgeries the yields are higher because physician fatigue is at a minimum."

 

If people don't know what I mean by 'neutralizing a comment'... in the first example, Dr. Feller acknowledges the problem but then at the same time tells you, it's okay, don't worry because the problem is only with "these clinics".

 

In fact, the problem is basically with all doctors. I mean, how many doctor websites have you seen that say: On average the FUE procedure follicle survival rate is much lower than strip, and there is a risk that some patients results will be considerably lower, very unsatisfactory results may occur. At all times, patients should be aware that donor grafts are limited and you may not have enough to achieve satisfactory results when the follicle survivor rate is low.

 

Of course, no doctor would ever say such a statement and I provided the reason for this in my original post.

 

So if you are following along, Dr. Feller's ethical marketing is telling the public. Don't go to "these clinics" and when you do go, make sure you go to a clinic that does smaller surgeries. At this time, please go back and read what Dr. Feller wrote in his post above... you'll see what I mean because ever single paragraph has the negative and then the neutralizer. It's called "ethical marketing" and nothing more.

 

Don't get me wrong with my statement. Ethical marketing is a positive aspect and helps the public find the truths to areas where we still haven't found solutions. It's true that we all want FUE to be the answer. The problem is, nobody has the technology to extract the follicles one by one and maintain a high survival rate. Sure we want to believe the doctors that are telling us they have the solution... however in the end, if a doctor isn't telling you the survival rate is considerably lower, and there is a higher risk of poor results then that doctor is selling you snake oil...

 

You know doctor Feller I do think you are top notch doctor so don't get take my comments the wrong way. I do like your marketing and it suits you. Using the word "marketing" might not be attractive however in a simplistic nature that's what it is. And that's okay...

 

Unrelated to the above subject I would like to comment on why we don't see people posting their bad results on this forums. Well, I know the reason for this... we all know they are out there because we see them at work, at the gym and out in the public. And I'm not talking about old HT either...

 

Here's the reason: we don't see postings of poor results for one reason and one reason only: People simply blame themselves for the poor results. I mean if you are seeing nothing but great results, great photos from the doctors' office it certainly can't be the doctor. People would rather blame themselves than put the doctor in any negative light.

 

You can confirm this because when you do read that people had a bad HT, they never write who the doctor is. They protect the doctor like they are family... And you know what, it may not be the doctors' fault however it's certainly not the person's fault with the bad HT. Instead it's just part of the odds. Unfortunately because of this, we the public, never get to read about what the true results are.. we only see the good. It is sad more people with bad or unsatisfactory results don't come forward.

 

PLEASE GROW PLEASE:

 

Dr Bisanga follicle survival rate is no different than any other FUE doctor. I say this because my post has nothing to do with whether one doctor is better than another. If you believe a particular doctor is the solution to the problem of the low follicle survival rate, then you are a victim of their marketing - my post is instead a cautionary note to people thinking about FUE and to help them see past all the BS by the posters and doctors...

 

TheEmperor:

 

I don't think doing a strip procedure is considered an 'ethical choice'. Ethics have nothing to do with your decision.. instead it's just simply the choice that worked for you. I do agree with you that hair with a scar is better than no hair, however, I still haven't decided what decision I'm going to make for myself. It boils down to: no scar and considerably less hair now and in the future with unpredictable results, OR a scar from ear to ear with more consistent results and more hair.

[Franklin]

I still haven't decided what decision I'm going to make for myself. It boils down to: no scar and considerably less hair now and in the future with unpredictable results, OR a scar from ear to ear with more consistent results and more hair.

You need to go out and get in contact with former patients no matter what you choose strip or Fue. See the results in person hear there story's away from all the online marketing. I can tell you not all strip results are the same and not all Fue results are the same. I am a long time poster of this and other hair forums and can tell you it is the only way to do your self the proper research you deserve. Good luck to you and take your time.

[Topcat611]

I agree, people who were butchered do blame themselves in a way. As far as not seeing their bad results on the forums. The few that do post get labeled as disgruntled patients who bring negativity to the boards. They burn out quickly after several weeks of ranting.

 

I have also experienced doctors who refused to either work on me or answer my inquires. I believe this is directly related to negative posts. So this is also something to consider.

 

The numbers don't lie. Happy HT patients probably number less then 5% of the surgeries.

[hair_boy]

Dr. Rassman:

 

I just saw your post... talk about pathetic. You are a complete snail oil seller. FUE2 is nothing but a gimmick. After all, you confirmed this when I sat in front of you and you wasted my time telling me how poor the results are. Your sole goal when I was there was to sell me a strip procedure and now you are trying to do damage control.

 

Don't anyone believe that this silly water jet idea that sprays water at your scalp is the answer to anything but bringing in more clients for Dr. Rassman to switch over to strip. I mean, if Dr. Rassman did believe FUE2 did work then he wouldn't have spent the entire time I was there, telling me how bad the results were and trying to talk me into a strip procedure. He also wouldn't have apologized for his own website misleading me!

 

If anything my trip to your office will save a lot of people time. I say this because there is no need to contact you regarding your FUE2 procedure when you've already confirmed that the results aren't very good and you are going to just try and sell a strip procedure anyway. Everyone, save the time and run from this doctor...

 

You know, it wasn't even the bait and switch that made me uneasy about your practice. The thing that I was most upset about was, the scare tactics you choose to use. Sketchy salesmen use these type of scare tactics to instill fear into their clients into making the decision that will make the sale. There is a big difference between informing a client of the facts, and instilling fear. You choose to instill fear to make the sale...

 

Without even looking at my donor area, you told me that if I took a chance and did the FUE2 procedure, you still might not even be able to even get a 1000 grafts, even if the procedure was over a number of days. Now if you looked at my donor area and said such a comment it would be accepted as receiving a factual point. Instead, you kept saying this over and over. This is a "blind fear sales technique" as again you didn't even look at my donor area. It was simply said to fear me... I remember your closing sales line was: "we might not be able to even get 1000 grafts if we do FUE2. It's really hard to say. What would you say to agreeing to the strip procedure, I'll get you to sign the permission forms and if we don't think we can get the number of grafts doing the FUE2, we'll just do a strip".

 

I responded, "I'm not really interested in doing a strip, and how do you know if you'll get more grafts from a strip procedure vs. the FUE2 procedure". You said, "you don't have to worry, you have good scalp laxity, we can get as many grafts as we need". Well, I was completely surprised by this comment as you never had even touched my scalp,... I said, "how do you know what my scalp laxity is?". At that point you got up and walk over to me and for the first time ever you touch my scalp !!!! You then said that I had good scalp laxity and I should have around 6000-7000 donor available grafts in total. (I believe you were referring to my total lifetime amount vs. the first session).

 

At this point you tried to make the strip sale again by asking if I would sign a permission form allowing you to do a strip procedure if the FUE2 didn't seem possible.

 

Instead of answering, I changed the subject and I asked you about the survival rate percentage different between Strip and FUE... You replied that both Strip and FUE had the exact same survival rate. You said there was no difference between the two procedures. You then explained that the problem with FUE was that the follicles just didn't grow very well, where as with the strip procedure the hair was very robust. I thought you were contradicting yourself because earlier you told me that the FUE survival rate wasn't very good and now you were saying that the hairs were just smaller etc..

 

You know, I have a pretty good sense about people, better than most I think. I believe your motive for even publishing such a gimmick as FUE2 in such a fashion only to tell clients it has poor results when they visit your office, is because you like to be the person who discovers stuff. I don't think you are so money motivated and instead just get off on the idea that people believe the tale that you are the creator.. the god of hair... what-ever, you may have done some good stuff in the past for the industry. But since that is in the past, you are now only selling your honesty for an inflated imagine.

 

By the way, doctors won't pay $45,000 for equipment that will work, is an oxymoron !

 

 

Franklin: You are 100% correct and I have - unfortunately it won't change the highs and lows of the result which are possible.

 

Topcat611: your suggestion sounds like a form of blackmail... don't talk because no doctor will work on you... come on... I think we are all fair minded. If a doctor explains all the risks and I unfortunately don't have great results well it's surely not the doctors fault. It is true though that a doctor would surely not want to accept a patient they believe will promote poor results.

 

And I think 5% isn't even remotely close. That sounds like a really harsh number and not at all close to being correct. Just from the people I know the majority are happy. None are 100% happy but for the most part they are satisfied.

[Bill - Seemiller]

hair_boy,

 

Whether you like it or not, FUE is a procedure many physicians are performing, many with great success.

 

There is no doubt that FUE has been overhyped by marketing, as have many products seen regularly on TV. However, I believe doctors like Dr. Feller and Dr. Rassman (among many others) have stood against the deceptive marketing tactics that oversell the benefits of FUE.

 

I too was initially concerned that Dr. Rassman's FUE2 procedure was marketed too heavily, hence his response above that was written as a response to my email. However, after discussing this with him, I believe one should take it for what it's really worth, an attempt to continue to improve and evolve the FUE technique to a higher level of success. I believe until Dr. Rassman releases all that's proprietary, he will most likely continue to receive some level of criticism.

 

I do think it's strange however, that you are angry with Dr. Rassman for being honest with you up front that he believes strip is still superior, even to his new FUE procedure. Would you rather him have performed it on you without going over the risks?

 

And why is it your last two posts are contradictory?

 

First you said,

 

I then explained that I was really interested in finding out the follicule survival rate for the new FUE2 procedure. Dr. Rassman said word for word, "Compared to the strip procedure it's not very good. A lot of doctors really make the FUE procedure out to be what it's not."..

 

Then you said,

 

You (Dr. Rassman) replied that both Strip and FUE had the exact same survival rate. You said there was no difference between the two procedures.

 

Which one did he say? Or is it possible that you are making this discussion too black and white when hair transplant surgery has plenty shades of gray?

 

The bottom line is that FUE is not a perfect procedure, either is strip for that matter. There are benefits, limitations, and risks to each. Thanks to doctors like Feller and Rassman, they continue to work on improving their techniques to increase maximum yield and naturalness.

 

If you are considering hair transplant surgery, regardless of the technique, you are going to have to accept the risks and limitations along with the benefits.

 

Bill

[hair_boy]

Bill:

 

To be honest when you write stuff on the board I usually skip it. My reason for skipping what you write is because it's just paid words. Your only job is neutralize any comments, you constantly praise other doctors work and they praise yours... it's like you all understand that there is enough to eat if you just stick together.

 

With that said. No doctor is performing FUE with great success compared to strip. Sure there are some doctors which I already acknowledged are probably getting an 80% survival rate which is pretty decent for FUE. But at the same time there are poor results as well where I've seen some people getting results in the 25% survival range.

 

If you think I'm upset with Dr. Rassman because he's warned me that the results aren't great with FUE you should go back from the very beginning and give my post another read. I wasn't complaining about that at all.... but then you know that, I will take that comment of yours as just a paid reply. After all, this is one of the doctors that falls under your umbrella.

 

It's fraudulent or at least unethical to promote something online, say how great it is... only to have the client come into the office and then do a bait and switch... that's the problem !~!!! I mean hello ! BAIT & SWITCH... and bad blind sales fear tactics. My god, Dr. Rassman himself apologized for his own website when I was there. Can't get more correct with what I'm saying that !!

 

You mentioned that my posts are contradictory - again this is just your paid silly comment meant to discredit me... and one that makes me question your reading ability. You see.... it was Dr. Rassman who was contradicting himself. In fact, I wrote so... it just seems funny that you somehow missed the sentence I wrote. I'm referring to the following: "I thought you were contradicting yourself because earlier you told me that the FUE survival rate wasn't very good and now you were saying that the hairs were just smaller etc.."

 

Like I said at the beginning. I usually skip the paid stuff that you and your fellow workers write because it has no worth.

 

Topcat611: you know I was thinking about it, and I think if got a bad HT I don't think I would ever mention the doctor's name unless I felt tricked. If I thought the doctor wasn't up front and honest I would probably never mention them as they didn't play a factor in the poor HT. However I would definitely post my results minus the doctors name but only in the effort to make sure we all know there is a chance of poor results and to what degree.

[Topcat611]

Actually I believe the number to closer to 1/10 of 1% of happy patients. The number of patients that have had work done don't even come close to the available pictures all the clinics combined can offer.

 

Obviously you are not familiar with anyone who has ever been blacklisted.

 

 

GENEVA, IL. - June 20, 2007. Approximately 225,800 hair restoration procedures were performed worldwide in 2006, up 34 percent from 2004, according to statistics released today from a recent member survey conducted by the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery (ISHRS) - the world's leading medical authority on hair loss and hair restoration.

 

This large increase in hair restoration procedures coincides with a significant jump in the total number of hair restoration patients worldwide - from 361,077 patients in 2004 to 645,281 patients in 2006.

 

"The tremendous growth in hair restoration can be attributed to the continual refinements in modern day hair transplants and proven medical therapies that produce natural-looking results that are virtually undetectable," said Paul C. Cotterill, MD, president of the ISHRS. "Increased public awareness about hair restoration procedures and the range of treatment options now available to both men and women are driving this increased demand around the world."

[thanatopsis_awry]

lol, so snippy....I agree with most of what you are saying (at least that which is rooted in fact) but some of your ensuing assumptions/interpretations are just going to detract from your central point(s) on FUE itself.

 

I mean, what is your problem with "80%" survival when the doctor performing it is doing it with total transparency to the patient and putting the choice in their hands, after equipping them with all of the information and options available?

 

And what is wrong with a "neutralizing comment" when the neutralizing comment is rooted in fact, and is being said for the purpose of informing the patient? (e.g. in smaller surgeries the yields are higher, primarily due to significently less fatigue).

 

Also, "Of course, no doctor would ever say such a statement and I provided the reason for this in my original post.", regarding FUE's stark inferiority to strip regarding yield.....you are actually dead wrong on this, and if you looked at Feller's consistent body of talk *and* walk, you would know this.

 

Feller isn't the only one, either, but he is certaintly the most visible and regarded. Cherry-picking statements to beef up your righteous crusade against (FUE) doctors is just going to alienate you and your valid points from the very people who are actually in the trenches fighting *for* your points.

[lost my swagger]

i appreciate hair_boys views... its refreshing to see somone warnig against HTs, especially FUE... i think hes spot on about clinic tactics as well.... im hoping he tones it down a tad and sticks around, cause his words of caution are needed in this endless sea of lies, false promises,and sleezy marketing known as the HT industry. not to mention the countless lives damaged by the lackluster results being produced every day.... his voice is needed GREATLY, IMO, im hoping those in charge here can see this also, even if they dont agree with him.... this place is not about agreement right??

[Bill - Seemiller]

Hair_boy,

 

Since you clearly feel that this community and the words written by its Publishers (Pat and myself) are worthless, why are you even here?

 

You're lucky we're very tolerant of members like you who feel it's ok to come to this community and then piss on our Wheaties.

 

The ironic part is, I actually agree with most of what you are saying regarding FUE. However, your approach is very negative and hostile. The bottom line is it sounds like you've drawn some false conclusions and are making faulty assumptions, as pointed out by a few members of our community above. It also seems like you have a bone to pick with anyone who works in the hair transplant industry.

 

Your genuine experience and opinions are welcome. But if you don't start showing more respect for this community, you're not going to last long here.

 

Bill

[Bill - Seemiller]

Swagger,

 

I agree it's refreshing when people take a stand against deceptive marketing tactics, which I and many of the members of this community have been doing for years.

 

However, we will not allow poision to seep into our well.

 

"Hair_boy" doesn't necessarily need to tone it down, but I expect him to start respecting the hard work we've put into building this community that allows patients to have a voice.

 

Stating that he ignores everything the Publishers say is a high disrespect since we work hard to keep this place open for patients to share genuine concerns.

 

Why else are we spending a bucket of money on lawsuits against this community that threaten free speech and the credibility of our community?

 

Frankly, I'm tired of the occasional new member coming here thinking they can get away with pissing in our Wheaties.

 

If hair_boy doesn't start showing some respect quickly, he can find another forum to post on.

 

Bill

[TheEmperor]

 

TheEmperor:

 

I don't think doing a strip procedure is considered an 'ethical choice'. Ethics have nothing to do with your decision.. instead it's just simply the choice that worked for you. I do agree with you that hair with a scar is better than no hair, however, I still haven't decided what decision I'm going to make for myself. It boils down to: no scar and considerably less hair now and in the future with unpredictable results, OR a scar from ear to ear with more consistent results and more hair.

 

The reason I called it an ethical strip clinic was because they did not promise that the scar would be pencil thin and mentioned that a wider scar is possible. I knew it was a possibility.

 

There is evidence that he cna get pencil thin scars with tricho, I'm just not one of them. I suspect the occurence of pencil thin is less than many patients believe.

 

Rassman said scars typically 3-4mm. I havent measured mine, but it is the width of a mtachstick. What is that 4mm? Is that good? It sounds small, but with my hair it cant be hidden unless hair is 1" or longer.

 

I guess we shouldnt be preoccupied on actual dimensions of scar, but how long a patient needs to wear his hari to hide it.

 

I am going to go out on a limb and say that any patient with fine hair is going to lose the ability to use clippers with strip. His scar might be 3-4mm, but that will be visible thru fine hair.

[PLEASE GROW PLEASE]

Dr Bisanga follicle survival rate is no different than any other FUE doctor. I say this because my post has nothing to do with whether one doctor is better than another. If you believe a particular doctor is the solution to the problem of the low follicle survival rate, then you are a victim of their marketing - my post is instead a cautionary note to people thinking about FUE and to help them see past all the BS by the posters and doctors...

 

Are you an Armani victim . Its ok if you are.

To say all FUE doctors yield is the same is like saying MHR strip is the same as a Shapiro or H@W.

Oh and by the way I actually agree with 95% of what your saying

[Franklin]

To say all FUE doctors yield is the same is like saying MHR strip is the same as a Shapiro or H@W.

This has to be said over and over. Good post!

[hair_boy]

Topcat611: I can't really agree on the percentage of happy HT patients as it's impossible to find stats on that. I would think according to the number of people that you quoted you are saying that over a million men are walking around upset about their HT. This doesn't make sense to me as it's hard to imagine over a million men are upset. That's a real high number - again I have a few friends that have had HT's. I admit that each one has a complaint which is negative however all are happy they had it done. If they weren't I wouldn't be checking into this.

 

By the way, I checked out your blog - nice abs my man - way to go!!!! With abs like that who is looking at your hair. I do feel for your hair situation though... by the way, how did your last session results turn out? You wrote about having the FUE but you never mentioned anything after.

 

thanatopsis: there is a difference of neutralizing a situation that is out of control and neutralizing a situation to take away creditability. Bill unfortunately was attempting to take away the latter.

 

As far as Feller's ethical marketing statements, I don't disagree that Feller's consistently makes the same comments about FUE - I know he does because I've read them. But again because the comments always neutralize themselves, in the end they just don't have the same punch. They are in fact, part of his ethical marketing structure for sales. After all, all doctors have to market themselves and I find nothing wrong with that. And like I mentioned earlier I prefer his approach..

 

Also, you are misreading my post as I'm not at all against FUE doctors. I simply believe all the doctors want the best of both worlds and aren't telling the whole truth when it comes to FUE.

 

BILL: You write: "Since you clearly feel that this community and the words written by its Publishers (Pat and myself) are worthless, why are you even here?"

 

And you also write: "Stating that he ignores everything the Publishers say is a high disrespect since we work hard to keep this place open for patients to share genuine concerns."

 

There is a big difference between not listening to rules and not listening to an opinion. I'm simply choose not to listen to your opinion. There is nothing wrong with that - I think your opinion taints my view and here's why:

 

Just because a person has no interest in reading paid staff replies such as yours and all the doctors' blogger replies which make up the majority on this site doesn't imply any disrespect. I'm just a realist. If you want to find out the truth, listen to the people that aren't paying to tell it. For example, I believe my friends because they aren't being paid to sway my opinion. Like it or not, you and all the paid bloggers on this site are 'new world' sales staff. As a result of this, any reasonable person would agree that they should take less importance with regards to your opinion.. This is the same as when you go to buy a new TV... I'm sure you don't listen 100% to the salesman... I personally try to cut to the chase and try to gain a real look by taking out the paid portions. I do so, in the hopes to help gain a true picture of what is real.

 

TheEmperor: I now understand what you mean when you say ethical strip clinic -okay, that makes sense..

 

I've read that the scars over time stretch to about 5mm and I've met a few people where that seems to be about right. I have one friend and his scar is almost unnoticeable and another with a nasty scar and both did their procedures within the last 5 years....

 

When I met Dr. Rassman he said that only second procedure scars become larger. He said his "trichophytic closure" was the magic pill and I would be basically be scar free... he did really say, "trichophytic closure" at least 10 times like it was the magic solution... you'd have to have been there but I'm sure you get the picture....

 

Just so everyone knows, I'm not saying that Dr. Rassman is an unskilled doctor. I think he's a bit old which concerns me, because older people have less coordination, but, other than that I think he has had some really good results in the past. I met one of his patients from 6 years ago I believe in his office and he simply looked great. I never got to see his scar but Dr. Rassman said it was way too big and wanted to correct it.

 

PLEASE GROW PLEASE: What are you talking about... I'm not an Armani patient.. didn't you read my first post? I haven't even had a HT yet... I'm still trying to decide if I should go with FUE or strip... i might just have to flip a coin in the end... )

 

PLEASE GROW PLEASE & Franklin:

 

You both took my comments out of context. I'm thinking I didn't explain my point in enough detail as it was continual - I apologize but this has nothing to do with how good a doctor is, instead I'm talking about the range. For example here are the ranges I believe are pretty close to being true:

 

Strip doctors' follicle survival rate = 90-99% (this is what I believe)

FUE doctors' follicle survival rate = 25-80% (this is what I believe)

 

Think of it like cooking a chicken. I surely know it's going to take longer than 30 minute but definally under an hour. The range would then be 30-60 minutes... Now this range isn't going to every change no matter how good the cook is. As long as all the cooks have the same stoves with the same maximum temp settings... no one will fall outside of the range...

 

So if we go back to my FUE point... It doesn't matter which FUE doctor, they will always stay within the range. Of course, each of those doctors will have differences within the range, but that's not what I wanted to stress.

 

I hope I have explain the point a bit clearer.

[hair_boy]

I hope I'm not being marked for grammar...lol.. I usually forget to read what I write...

[Topcat611]

What I was really trying to say was that 1/10 of 1% of the patients get the results you see marketed. The rest get subpar results, yet they may still be content in the end.

 

Age is also a major factor in my opinion. As I would be happy with just a normal looking, albeit thin head of hair.

 

I decided to hold off on having any fue work done. I would like to see what develops. The longer one can wait the better their options. Although it would make sense for me to have something done in the next 2-4 years.

[Brian in KC]

HairBoy you need to adjust your meds dude. While we appreciate observations from you, your vicious lashing out particularly at Bill the moderator who has the best interest of the members in mind regardless of compensation is uncalled for.

[hair_boy]

Topcat611: Okay, I understand what you mean... regarding the percentages.

 

Brian in KC: Here's how you start your first sentence of: "HairBoy you need to adjust your meds dude."..

 

You see, you have the exact same rude starting post as Bill did... It's just that you're a bit more forward...

 

If Bill didn't start off the way he did trying to discredit me for no logical reason, other than because it's his job... then I would have never commented. Bill is totally entitled to represent the doctors and their well being. And if you want to believe everything said by the paid posters and staff at face value, that's okay, I have no problem with that. It's just I personally don't feel so secure putting my total trust into what the paid staff say. Isn't that okay, it's not a personal thing against Bill or anyone else. I would think it's just a fairness that I should and everyone else should have.

[thanatopsis_awry]

"I have asked for an opinion by the most prominent doctors who do successful FUEs in their practice, and on viewing the FUE2 grafts that are shown on my web-site and were shown to them privately, every doctor shown these photos agrees that the FUE2 quality graft is superior to their FUE graft in their hands."

 

"When one looks at the results of double trichophytic wound closures in strip harvesting, even the FUE2 can not compare in the degree of scarring..."

 

Pretty bold, important statements. For the latter, though, don't we have to distinguish between *visible* scarring, and that of the "invisible scarring" moreso associated with the increased trauma of FUE/FUE2? I can't imagine the practicality of the situation would ever leave a patient choosing strip over FUE/FUE2 if scarring is their #1 priority/concern.

 

For the former, I can't say otherwise, and it sounds like a true breakthrough. At the very least, in sound hands such improvement to the FUE process could exponentially expand the boundaries of what is and isn't a high-yield FUE session.