How much is the sponsorship fee recommended doctors pay?

[RCKHair]

I know recommended doctors pay a sponsorship fee to help run this site but how much exactly do each pay?

[Mickey85]

The figure has never been divulged to my knowledge.

[socates123]

Curious about the intent of this question...

[RCKHair]

What intention do you think I have?

[Calgacus]

Serious question:

 

Does such sponsorship compromise the integrity and impartiality of the forum's purpose of providing unbiased critique?

 

I understand that the HT surgeons and clinics must meet the HRN high standards. However, hypothetically speaking, would the forum no longer accept sponsorship from a clinic or surgeon that no longer met those standards?

 

What's the policy on this issue?

[Mickey85]

The forum has removed a few surgeons for not meeting quality standards in the past. Epstein is one that I know of. Would be nice to see a list of former recommended surgeons?? They have also turned down a few(Keser, Bhatti) surgeons who did not meet requirement standards. I do personally feel that some should not have been inducted and a handful should be removed but that is merely one person's opinion.

[Calgacus]

I do

personally feel that some should

not have been inducted and a

handful should be removed but

that is merely one person's

opinion

 

Care to divulge? Your opinion is as valid as anyone's.

[Mickey85]

Sure, I just don't want to be going off topic too much hehe. I really did not agree with Dr. Diep's induction and make it vocal prior to him being recommended. Issues with using a dual blade scalpel to extract a strip in under 3 minutes with no care for scalp tension or graft transection and the brute force in removing it were red flags for me. Also his FUE technique is anything but precise and certainly not gentle. I'm an advocate for FUE but certainly would not recommend anyone to go to Diep for FUE.. Prior to Diep's potential recommendation here I would often find his videos on Youtube and they were very amateur. Certainly a far cry from H&W, Lorenzo and other high end clinics. Again this is just my opinion.

 

In regards to the Doc's I think should be removed, I will PM you about that as I do not want to cultivate that sort of topic as Bill and the guys have been more then supportive and tolerant of my often controversial viewpoints and I wish to maintain the harmony that exists here.

[Calgacus]

Cheers, Mick.

 

Thanks for sharing.

[Blake Bloxham]

Hi Guys,

 

Let me see if I can address a few of these concerns:

 

1. The sponsorship fee, in my opinion, is reasonable. While we usually don't like to divulge numbers, most physicians agree that the fee is very fair compared to the benefits of being recommended at our community. What's more, the sponsorship fee is necessary for keeping the site running, paying staff, etc. Additionally, keep in mind that the sponsorship fee does involve the financial dealings of physicians in private practices. Although most doctors probably wouldn't have a problem with members knowing this information, others may view it as private information (akin to asking a doctor how much money they make a year), and we want to respect this sentiment.

 

2. As far as the fee affecting the integrity or ethics of the forum: I disagree. As someone "behind the scenes" I can confirm that we receive a very large number of requests for recommendation on a monthly basis, and only a very select group of individuals meet our standards and are brought to the community for consideration (and trust me, your guy's opinion on new physicians counts just as much as mine, Bill's, or David's). Altogether, the site could easily generate much more revenue if we simply allowed all these physicians to be recommended, but that isn't our primary goal, nor is it how we've built our reputation thus far. I think mostly everyone will agree that we've established an impressive reputation as a patient advocate source in the hair restoration community, and we believe helping patients find information about the most ethical, talented hair transplant surgeons practicing today will help maintain this status.

 

Additionally, like Mickey stated, we have (in the past) parted ways with surgeons we felt no longer met our rigorous recommendation standards.

 

3. Finally, though the subject of removing physicians/clinics is a sensitive topic, if any member does have specific examples of why they believe a group is not meeting our recommendation standards, I do ask that they collect the information and send me a private message. Once received, the moderators will review the content, discuss the issue, and provide the member with a reply.

 

Thank you for the questions, guys! I hope this helps. Again, we strive to run a very open, honest, transparent community, and if there is anything I can do to clarify additional issues, please don't hesitate to ask.

[Mickey85]

Blake, would it be possible to post a short list of those that have been removed? I know Esptein is one, even if it's just from memory that would be really cool.

[RCKHair]

Thanks Blake, your post was very helpful. Keep up the good work!

[Blake Bloxham]

Blake, would it be possible to post a short list of those that have been removed? I know Esptein is one, even if it's just from memory that would be really cool.

 

Hi Mickey,

 

I'll discuss it with Bill and see what he thinks. Frankly, I don't think I can list (from memory) the physicians who we've parted ways with in the past (especially because a few were "before my time"), but I think each situation was discussed publicly when it occurred (though finding each of these on the forums would be quite a task).

Edited April 12, 2013 by Future_HT_Doc

[Blake Bloxham]

Thanks Blake, your post was very helpful. Keep up the good work!

 

RCK,

 

No problem! Again, feel free to ask any additional questions.

[Mickey85]

Hi Mickey,

 

I'll discuss it with Bill and see what he thinks. Frankly, I don't think I can list the physicians who we've parted ways with in the past (especially because a few were "before my time"), but I think each situation was discussed publicly when it occurred (though finding each of these on the forums would be quite a task).

 

That's totally fine. Even if it is via private message and without the specific reasons. Would be interesting to see who has come and gone.

[Calgacus]

No problem! Again, feel free to ask any additional questions.

 

Apologies if this has been done to death, but where can I find info regarding the requirements HT surgeons must meet in order to have their sponsorship approved by HRN?

[JohnnyDrama]

Apologies if this has been done to death, but where can I find info regarding the requirements for HT surgeons to be approved HRN sponsorship?

 

Link at the very bottom of the site.....

 

Hair Transplant Surgeons, Doctors ands and Physicians selection criteria

[Blake Bloxham]

Apologies if this has been done to death, but where can I find info regarding the requirements HT surgeons must meet in order to have their sponsorship approved by HRN?

 

My bad! I should have shared this earlier in the thread: How We Recommend Hair Restoration Physicians.

 

PS: Johnny's above link is a good reference as well.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Mickey,

 

We prefer to focus on the positives, which is why we don't keep an ongoing list of physicians we've removed and/or rejected from being approved for recommendation.

 

However, members and guests are welcome to use the search feature which accounts for over 10 years of topics, some of which include information regarding some (but not all) of the physicians who have been removed.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

[Mickey85]

I can understand that notion Bill. Thanks.

[Bill - Seemiller]

RCKHair and all,

 

This community prescreens and recommends doctors based on a set of high standards that are publicly listed on our website. We've also written and published our process for recommending physicians on our discussion forum. See "How We Recommend Hair Transplant Surgeons".

 

If anything, the process and criteria for recommending hair transplant surgeons have gotten more strict over the years. And while we may approve new physicians for recommendation on the Hair Transplant Network and membership in the Coalition of Independent Hair Restoration Physicians if this community feels they're doing top notch work, we also regularly turn down dozens of physicians privately who we feel do not meet our demanding standards.

 

Before being invited to present examples of their work on this forum in consideration for potential recommendation, physicians must undergo private prescreening. Thus, I'm often in touch with prospective physicians for months or even years before they're presented on this community. Recently, many of the behind the scenes processes have come to fruition with several surgeons which is why you're seeing more physicians being presented for potential inclusion.

 

Once physicians present enough examples of their work and results on ths forum, we create a new forum topic to garner input from our community. Members are then invited to weigh in on each physician we're considering for recommendation. Additionally, physicians currently recommended by our community are asked for their private and/or public feedback about the prospective physician.

 

We present very specific details about each physician we present for potential recommendation which includes information regarding their experience, skill, technique and tools. Furthermore, if a physician is approved for recommendation and/or Coalition membership, this information is added to their profile on the Hair Transplant Network and/or Coalition Hair Loss Learning Center.

 

In several cases, we've received private and/or public genuine and specific feedback against a particular doctor's inclusion and a particular doctor was not approved for recommendation. Furthermore, many physicians never make it as far as the public prescreening process and their application for membership is privately rejected.

 

The fact that physicians approved for recommendation pay a sponsorship fee to support this patient based community is no secret and is referenced on our physician selection standards page. However, just like a top notch university only admits the brightest students based on their grades, GPA and other criteria, this community only recommends those doctors with a proven ability to perform world class hair transplants with excellent results. Likewise, students who choose to enroll in a top notch university pay a tuition to keep the educational institution running just as physicians who we recommend choose to pay a sponsorship fee to help with the costs of maintaining this community. Sponsorship fees equal approximately the cost of one moderately sized hair transplant per year.

 

This community is always on the lookout for highly skilled and ethical surgeons to recommend, which at the end of the day, benefits everyone. This large and popular community freely provides hair loss sufferers with a venue to share their genuine opinions and experiences. We recommend only surgeons who have met our high standards and are regularly producing excellent results. And this community continues to operate thanks to those we invite to sponsor it.

 

I hope this helps address your questions and concerns.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

[gillenator]

The forum has removed a few surgeons for not meeting quality standards in the past. Epstein is one that I know of. Would be nice to see a list of former recommended surgeons?? They have also turned down a few(Keser, Bhatti) surgeons who did not meet requirement standards. I do personally feel that some should not have been inducted and a handful should be removed but that is merely one person's opinion.

 

Mickey,

 

There are multiple Epsteins and was wondering which one was removed?

[Calgacus]

With regards to:

"[surgeons must have] A reputation for high ethics and quality amongst colleagues and former patients."

Could someone clarify what is deemed as "high ethics" in this case?

Very subjective terminology. What may be highly ethical to one person, could be of dubious moral value to someone else.

I dont intend to be a pain in the behind, it's just that I have heard about various ethically questionable surgeries performed by HRN recommended surgeons yet they did not get removed from the list while other surgeons DID get removed for similar misconduct.

What justification is there for ostresizing one but continue accepting sponsorship from another?

Of course, I cant prove any of this because it is 2nd hand info which I have gathered here and elsewhere in other hairloss social networks and forums, but where there is smoke, there is the possibility of fire.

 

I would never name them in an open forum for libel reasons but I'd be more than happy to PM them to an administrative moderator if it is of concern.

[Mickey85]

Mickey,

 

There are multiple Epsteins and was wondering which one was removed?

 

Jeffrey, for reasons unknown. Actually i was told this through a forum patient of his who weeked repair at the surgeon i went to(and funnily enough my procedure failed). I had no idea Epstein was part of this forum whatsoever prior to that. I really would prefer it if the reasons behind the parting of ways were made public as it would raise awareness for individuals to avoid going to those surgeons but alas, it is not my forum and there surely could be legal ramifications involved if that info was publicly revealed.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Calgacus,

 

I think the term "high ethics" speak for themselves and doesn't require a detailed explanation from the publishers of this community.

 

Instead of debating terminology, I suggest that if you have a specific complaint about how a situation was handled regarding one of our physicians that you send me a private message with the details. If you have a legitimate concern with one of our surgeons and I happen to agree with you, I'm certainly willing to investigate the issue. But keep in mind part of an investigation means discussing any case with the surgeon to garner their side of the story.

 

Best Regards,

 

Bill