Cost of FUE, increasing or decreasing?

[Michael Vories, MD]

Now that I have started posting on this thread I just can't stop!

 

I have not seen concrete evidence from any US state medical board concerning who can or can not extract or place grafts during hair transplant surgery. (Please show me if there is such evidence)

 

The closest I have seen is from operating lasers, in which some boards (mine included) have stated that technicians can perform laser procedures if under direct (physician is present) supervision.

 

My belief is that most medical boards would support either argument if a case supporting the position is made, and the board would issue an advisory position statement. Likely whomever makes the argument first would set the precedent. So I make the question to this forum:

 

The physician performing the FUE procedure at $4.00 per graft (my rate), or a technician performing the procedure under my supervision at say $2.00 per graft. Which would you prefer?

[Blake Bloxham]

Dr. Vories,

 

I know! I can't stop either. Haha.

 

You probably have more info about this because of the NeoGraft, but won't the NeoGraft company send technicians out to clinics to perform the procedure?

 

Here's an excerpt taken from a recent thread: I should add, my cost was $11,500. The doctor supervised the procedure but didn't do much other than the planning and the before/after procedure discussion. I'm not sure if that is normal or not but I did feel the nurse doing the procedure was very good and has a lot of experience.

 

This was in the US and performed with a NeoGraft.

[Michael Vories, MD]

The supervising physician assumes liability, not NeoGraft (or the technician). Believe me, this goes on without medical board input. To put this in perspective, a couple of years ago I hired a licensed physician assistant to help with procedures, and when I presented her credentials to my state board, they were reluctant to accept her performing the procedure. They eventually accepted her, but I left with the distinct impression that they would have a problem with unlicensed technicians doing the same.

[Michael Vories, MD]

She left a couple of years ago due to the travel between my two clinics, so I now perform all procedures myself.

[1966kph]

If the results were very similar people would IMO go with the cheaper 2 dollar per graft why would they pay twice as much for the same results?

Its all about results for the sufferers and if the results can be obtained for less thats were people with and are going.

I always believed artas and such devices were aimed primarily at the US due to laws surrounding techs doing extractions and this was a window of oppotunity that the manufacturer's saw to take advantage of.

The technique, The size of the procedures offered,And the cost is what's enticing people to places other than the US and the US ht industry needs to recognise these factors if it is to compete.

And I think dr vories is making the right moves to address this and hopefully others will follow for the sake of sufferers.

Have a good day

 

Now that I have started posting on this thread I just can't stop!

 

I have not seen concrete evidence from any US state medical board concerning who can or can not extract or place grafts during hair transplant surgery. (Please show me if there is such evidence)

 

The closest I have seen is from operating lasers, in which some boards (mine included) have stated that technicians can perform laser procedures if under direct (physician is present) supervision.

 

My belief is that most medical boards would support either argument if a case supporting the position is made, and the board would issue an advisory position statement. Likely whomever makes the argument first would set the precedent. So I make the question to this forum:

 

The physician performing the FUE procedure at $4.00 per graft (my rate), or a technician performing the procedure under my supervision at say $2.00 per graft. Which would you prefer?

[Michael Vories, MD]

I agree entirely with KO. The Artas system (as it currently exists) is more of a practice management tool than a surgical tool that improves the FUE procedure.

[Michael Vories, MD]

Make that 1966- my apologies! Gotta go, UK is getting ready to play. Go Wildcats!

[scar5]

Scar,

 

There may be some who discuss both procedures with a patient but still push one procedure...

 

..to really figure out which states "could" have technicians extract....It would take a lot of work..... you'd probably have to do some deep research as well.

 

...the argument that US docs all push strip because technicians can't extract grafts in the US is false....Because it's a state-by-state case....

 

This then begs the question: why hasn't this model taken over here?

 

I'll lay off this technical jargon.

 

Blake,

 

No chance, no chance you believe it!

I've consulted HT surgeons since 1983, so many I can't remember the number, lost count.

 

Every single one of them, without a single exception, presented with a package of views - like a set of default arguments - by rep then doc, or just doc. And they pointed clearly in the direction of a particular procedure they were keyed up for. It started with 'I can do t all' and finished with 'I recommend this' - and guess what 'this' was? Their 'default' procedure.

 

Now, if I took the initiative (read: responsibility) many would happily oblige and that included certain procedure changes. But the key point is that you get a 'default' set of options that you either go with or fight against them.

 

As time changed it would have been hilarious to observe their 'opinions evolve' except it was sad to realize that the same docs had told me a different story (since forgotten by them) and that what they were telling me would/could be different five years on.

 

....next point.......

You said that techs extract in the states. Now you say, it would be difficult to tell and that it would take deep research. So which is it? They do or they don't, or we don't know?

 

(Thanks KO for the tip about Michigan)

 

 

I suspect that techs don't extract because it could expose them to the predatorial instincts of the litigation industry in the states, which is famous!! You even suggest, or allude to the notion that some states are lax - so right there you are admitting that vulnerabilities or cracks exist. Enter litigation!

 

Strip does not persist because US docs are kinder, more honest. It persists because of momentum, economics and legal factors- it can't be anything else. Arguing that it is state by state isn't enough. California and New York are at the cutting edge of most trends in the states. The momentum they create influences everything else.

 

So many states are strict and malpractice charges await, others are lax and so malpractice awaits like a time bomb there- even more so!

 

Just imagine the insurance premiums you guys will be paying to cover a bunch of techs accidentally drilling into some ones melanoma? Imagine creative insurance brokers calculating your risk? The disclaimers the industry is notorious for could be threatened if the media in the states got hold of a story like that!

 

 

..another point..

We love the jargon, no problem.

 

And you will get very tired of doing manual FUE. All the best do.

Edited March 20, 2015 by scar5
Insurance bit

[Blake Bloxham]

Scar,

 

Here's what I'm saying: I know some states are more lax than others and I know it does happen. You asked for specific states. I said that in order to figure out which states it's allowed in, you would need to either a. dig through the state laws, or b. find clinics offering FUE in each state and question their policies and/or the legality in that state. Did you see the example I showed Dr. Vories above? I took out some info about the doctor, but it's a patient who underwent FUE in the US saying the doctor came in and spoke in the beginning, but a "nurse" operating a NeoGraft performed the surgery. So there is proof that it happens.

 

As far as the medicolegal environment goes. Yes, it's tense. However, it, again, varies by state. Also, it's not going to keep some from doing things. History shows us this.

 

It's also funny you bring up CA and NY. Those are two states I know for a FACT only allow physicians to puncture the skin with anything larger than a needle. So these are two states where FUE via anyone besides a physician won't happen.

 

Also, sorry to hear about your past experiences. Like I said before, I can't speak for all doctors. However, this doesn't meet the definition of true "informed patient consent." I'm a big proponent of this.

 

And, I don't really understand the arguments about how the economics of strip propagate its use in the US. Strip is more expensive to clinics. You need a bigger procedural suite, more tools, more staff, and it provides far less gross compared to FUE. What's more, there is likely a bit more legal risk with the more invasive nature. Why don't all these doctors buy a machine, fire 95% of their tasks, move into a smaller office, sell off their tools, and make 3x more per procedure? Better yet, move to the state I referenced above and have non-physician personnel knock out a few a day while they "supervise?"

 

Is it really so hard to believe they may not think this is best for the patient or have some slight ethical objection to it? They took those oaths at medical school graduation as well? Hahah.

 

Also, I'll keep the jargon rolling ; )

[britboy]

Sigh .....

 

Britboy,

 

Brit, I hope you don't take my statements as antagonist or personal. I know you underwent poor work via strip in the "dark ages" so I understand your passion for FUE and for tech clinics that offer the procedure at a lower price. However, I don't think it's "fear mongering" or agenda-driven to say that some people will still get more "bang for their buck" from the strip procedure.

 

In my mind, it's all about informed consent. If a patient is aware of the reality of the linear scar - which can be unpredictable - and is more concerned about growth yield and session size, then I have no problem with them opting for a strip procedure. If a patient feels strip is antiquated, knows the scar will be an issue, and understands that yield is more variable, I have no problem with them opting for FUE. Really, this is all I'm trying to say.

 

I like FUE. I think it's a solid procedure for a lot of patients. However, I think a lot of people are still well-suited by strip as well. Like I said before, I don't think strip is going to disappear. From my first-hand experience, most of the patients I see are more interested in moving as much hair as possible in one sitting and have no intent on shaving their parietal/temporal scalp to a level where the scar would be an issue.

 

Is this really that outrageous or controversial? I think patients should have both procedures fully explained to them and both the doctor and the patient should pick a surgical plan that best suits the patients needs. Period.

 

Altogether, Brit, I'm very happy for you. At the end of the day, this community is about patients and you've clearly undergone an impressive transformation with FUE. I thank you for sharing your experiencing.

 

Blake, I appreciate yours and the communities support. Throguh this forum i found what i deem as a good first rate clinic. as you have acknowledged above, "an impressive transformation" has occurred in my case through my clinic.

 

I am not on a campaign or any other reason, except, I dislike unfairness, as of late regarding my clinic who have clearly come up with exceptional results, and I have spent years searching for a good clinic which now I have found.

 

I too need to sigh....I don't like bullies and the bashing by members, the banning of my clinic and surgeons name is nothing short of what appears to be a conspiracy against the clinic for no good reason. I am also disturbed that, you would not allow my very good friend to post his procedures from the same clinic which with respect, concerns me regarding transparency and openness for all clinic good or bad. I have previously expressed my concerns in the strongest terms privately also to you in the past regarding this. especially about the banning of my clinics name when they have been nothing but professional and capable of coming up with the results.

 

Do you know ay clinic with a 100% SUCCESS RATE? I doubt you do, as all surgeons and clinics fall short on occasion.

 

A review on my clinic with regards to contributions of thier work should take place by moderators of this forum on the grounds of "transparency"

 

I speak plainly and currently see an intentional campaign against my clinic by this forum which needs to be addressed.

 

Thanks for your support as I have already said, i would not be in such a healthy hair state had it not been for this forum. The petty destructive attacks on my clinic need to be addressed in order for the FUT v FUE saga to ebate to a more fair and reasonable discussion without having to ban post from new patients mentioning who they have been with and good, well founded clinics for spurious reasons.

[britboy]

Britboy,

 

1996 - 500 micro/mini grafts - hairline and crown - Lathams Huntsville Alabama - Dr Schory

1994 - 500 micro/mini grafts - Lathams Huntsville Alabama - Dr Schory - repair to Slit grafts

1991 - 500 slit Grafts front hairline - Dr May UK aka Dr Frankenstein - Bad Operation

__________________________________________

The surgeons listed above are not world leading surgeons performing state of the art work in 2015.

 

edit;

So in your words and effect, in your previous post of 08.32, it appears that I now would have had to have searched and found a worlds top surgeon, with possibly outrageous prices 3 or 4 maybe 5 times more expensive than which I have paid to achieve the same results .........."Do you think you would have had the results you gained via strip if you went to a top recommended surgeon using state of the art work in 2015 having had no surgery previous?".......... the same results as I have have achieved by my clinic who have had many attackers on this forum and the clinic now banned I believe from posting along with any other patients who may want to post their results using the Surgeons or clinics name... How do you work that out? I'm sure many potential patients would love to see more posts from my clinic along of course with other surgeons and clinics.

 

I believe (incidentally I think I have already found a world top clinic!), to boot, my surgeon, technicians and clinic have had to make a silk purse out of a sows ear without having the luxury of a virgin head to operate on, working around the massive FUT scars, limited donor area and bad previous ops by previous FUT Surgeons my clinic has done rather a fine job....as good as if not better than so called "top recommended surgeons" I believe the clinic takes care of all patients the same way as myself, with the best results and intentions in mind.

Edited March 20, 2015 by britboy

[britboy]

Blake,

 

I suspect that techs don't extract because it could expose them to the predatorial instincts of the litigation industry in the states, which is famous!! You even suggest, or allude to the notion that some states are lax - so right there you are admitting that vulnerabilities or cracks exist. Enter litigation!

 

 

 

I said that earlier:-)

[scar5]

I said that earlier:-)

 

Thanks for reply,Blake.

 

I didn't think so..rather u said u suspect that some members think so, which is quite differerent.

 

And to re-iterate, you said that US clinics employ techs for extraction - quite catergorically.

 

And yet when asked to explain which and where, you said it would be very difficult to poove. And would take extensive research.

 

You said that rules are lax in some states.

 

You also said that US docs preference for strip cannot be grounded in the economic or legal considerations because laws vary from state-to-state.. (and yet notably, details are vague anddifficult to determine-which undermines the force of your reasoning IMO.)

[chrisdav]

Well well well... Seems like FUT is drowning.......some great scaremongering there Blake..keep it coming...who'd have though it... Giant linear scars are better than FUE... thats without the deep sutures, removal of stitches, the pain, the ever disheartening visual aspect scaring and of old outdated FUT :eek:. the damage caused to donor area and potential grafts while being cut through with a blade the full length of the scare top and bottom. With FUT you can "microscopically dissect them into perfect follicular unit grafts" hahahhahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Im choking... and finish up with dolls hair just like me and still after 3 FUT and corrective surgery by FUT, still remains dolls punching 4,5,6 hairs from one graft, great keep that FUT going, love it..... of course much of this depends upon the surgeon and clinic as with FUE, painless, no meat slicing here....... perfect extraction, perfect transplanting and perfect results if a good clinic is found and used with great technicians led by an excellent surgeon.... and folks, they are out there, you just need to look!

 

I'm sorry but a picture paints a thousand words....If anyone is thinking of HT look at FUE and forget Picasso linear scars created from the artists FUT surgeons.

 

Thank God we don't see Strip IN turkey because FUT is outdated and barbaric at the least, as for cost, Ive experienced a 80% reduction in the cost of my surgeries in Turkey and 3-4 times the results, thank you.

 

Good luck to all you choosing FUT, you will need it! Lol if you're interested take a look at my journey you will see its a miracle thanks only to FUE and as it happens in Turkey!

 

 

You are missing the point. I am not criticising you for using your most recent surgeon.

 

You are implying above that modern day follicular unit transplantation is terrible, what you had done could not have been achieved with this method and using your experience of work performed close to 25 years ago as a basis for your opinions which quite frankly is absurd. I had the choice of what I wanted, chose FUT and was happy with the decision made in recent years.

 

I am glad you are satisfied with your most recent procedure as that is what is most important thing at the end of the day.

Edited March 20, 2015 by chrisdav

[Blake Bloxham]

Scar,

 

I wrote an extensive reply, but for some reason it was tagged for moderation and I couldn't approve it myself. Will have to look into this. Regardless, let me briefly address your points:

 

Yes, there are clinics that use non-physicians in the US. KO gave 2 examples, and I gave another above - where a US clinic with a NeoGraft has a "nurse" do extractions. I'm not trying to be vague when I say it would take extensive research to figure out which states allow non-physicians to puncture or cut skin. You would have to go through law on a state-by-state basis. To figure out which clinics use techs, you would need to find the FUE clinics in the states you previously identified and ask them about their practices. I don't have access to easy info regarding state practice laws and individual practices. However, there are at least 3 examples of it happening in N America in this thread.

 

Don't know if I buy the legal thing. It's clearly a gray area, and history shows us many have attempted much more in an attempt to earn a buck. I think the fact that this model hasn't taken over here has far more to do with doctors not believing in it and not wanting to put their rep on the line like this.

 

Keep an eye out for my longer post later.

[KO]

scar,

 

i wrote an extensive reply, but for some reason it was tagged for moderation and i couldn't approve it myself. Will have to look into this. Regardless, let me briefly address your points:

 

 

 

rofl.

[1966kph]

Blake.

So are you saying employing the buisness model employed by Erdoğan or Lorenzo is less ethical than their US counterparts? Because this sounds basically what you are saying blake.

That Lorenzo and Erdoğan are in it for the money.This may well be the case but at the end of the day they are giving some of the best results going.

I think most people applying a little common sense would say most ht drs are primarily concerned with profit.

Its the profit margin I don't agree with.

I have seen with my own eyes what working on a smaller profit margin can do for both customers and the buisness and it was good for both.

Allowing a small profit margin increases numbers of customers coming through the door and overall the companies profits increased and more importantly the consumer is happier having paid less.

65% of US Drs admitted they talked a fue customer into fut now were else would this happen? You go to buy a BMW does the rep just sell you the car thankful of the sale and knowing you have bought a very good car or does he try and sell you a car that you were not interested in when you were browsing the forecourt?

Even if the US employed the techs to do extractions they are 10 years behind the techs in europe and turkey in speed,skill,efficiency, knowledge they've been doing it day in day out for so long their skill set is unparreled even by drs.

If a tech has been doing extractions on multiple patients a day ( say 2 a day) doing on average 3000 grafts thats 30.000 over 5 days, over 50 weeks is 1.5 million and over 10 years thats fifteen million.

And those figures are probably very conservative.

Do you think there is a dr in the US that has extracted anything close to these figures with fue?

The buisness model is so successful because of the skill gained by their years of experience of the whole team that provide the results that people see then thats were they go.

The US is playing catch up big time and with the head start I don't know whether it will ever be able to catch up.

Have a good day

[KO]

I don't understand why you use Lorenzo as a model for technician involvement. Lorenzo only has techs extracting grafts, and even there he also does extractions to some extent. The insertions are always done by him. It seems you are arguing a slippery slope here....if some tech involvement is OK, then it's just a matter of degree?

 

 

Furthermore, when questioned, Lorenzo is quite cagey about the level of tech involvement, suggesting that perhaps he does not like to admit it publicly.

[1966kph]

Thats correct ko but as Lorenzo has always been held in such high esteem and rightly so if he thinks that he can hand off the extractions to a tech I read into a great deal.

Some people including Blake and dr Karadeniz to name just two that are adamant that a dr can do extractions better than a tech and I would argue the opposite based on the persons experience for one.

It would be very interesting to pose the question to Lorenzo or Erdoğan why they use technicians as much as they do and whether they think the results have differed.

If they say results have not differed then this would lead me to the conclusion they think the tech is as capable as they at extractions.

Jimbo one of Lorenzos patients thought the tech in his second op was actually quicker that Lorenzo who is known for his speed.

Lorenzo technique with the pen is less labour intensive for him also rather than cutting the recipient incisions and then manually placing grafts is far more work than having techs load the pens.

In the end it all leads to top results and his crown work is off the scale.

Its a team effort and I trust the top clinics that their protocol is the best for the patients and if the results had dropped off they would have been pounced on here but they've not.

You have a good day

[scar5]

Scar,

(1) ... a "nurse" operating a NeoGraft performed the surgery. So there is proof that it happens.

 

 

(2) ...It's also funny you bring up CA and NY. Those are two states I know for a FACT only allow physicians to puncture the skin with anything larger than a needle.

 

(3) ...Strip is more expensive to clinics.

 

(the numbers and dots are mine, Scar5)

 

 

 

(1) Neograft is one thing.

Artus is robotic FUE, lets call it RFUE

 

We must be careful not to lose sight of the goal of discussion. Let us capture and ensnare the very object of it. It is groups or teams of techs welding hand-held devices and the doctor in 'the other room'. And this arrangement can work! I am living proof of it. But how well? I can't tell you.

 

Footnote

No one trusts Neograft, rightly or wrongly. Let's assume that techs can weld the extraction gun (or whatever they call it) but my ignorant ass suspects that docs won't allow Neo to do anything but extract - perhaps I'm wrong. The whole dig it, suck it up and place it routine - well, who knows, perhaps it is nobel prize in the waiting, and cudos if it is, perhaps it is a croc of sh&T. Will we ever know?

 

(2)

Of course CA and NY. Why not? They influence not only the States, but the world.

Even the Red Hot Chilli Peppers say so. If a case goes down in California, some strip surgeon in Iowa contemplating tech-FUE will listen, and so will her/his insurance company.

 

(3)

What a load of absolute garbage!!

Strip costs more?

How much will it cost you in rehabilitation of your fingers and wrists - not to mention lost income you could have been making doing 90 minute strips (40 minute strip extraction) + (50 minute - and that is generous- incision sites?

 

You must be joking, except, unfortunately you are not. You know these punks here are desperate and they will listen to you - a young star doctor - more than a poor lonesome little twat like me, pat his prime, over 50..oh, how I cry! lol

 

Folks...never, ever, ever let docs tell you manual FUE is cheaper than strip for a clinic.

[britboy]

Well well well... Seems like FUT is drowning.......some great scaremongering there Blake..keep it coming...who'd have though it... Giant linear scars are better than FUE... thats without the deep sutures, removal of stitches, the pain, the ever disheartening visual aspect scaring and of old outdated FUT :eek:. the damage caused to donor area and potential grafts while being cut through with a blade the full length of the scare top and bottom. With FUT you can "microscopically dissect them into perfect follicular unit grafts" hahahhahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Im choking... and finish up with dolls hair just like me and still after 3 FUT and corrective surgery by FUT, still remains dolls punching 4,5,6 hairs from one graft, great keep that FUT going, love it..... of course much of this depends upon the surgeon and clinic as with FUE, painless, no meat slicing here....... perfect extraction, perfect transplanting and perfect results if a good clinic is found and used with great technicians led by an excellent surgeon.... and folks, they are out there, you just need to look!

 

I'm sorry but a picture paints a thousand words....If anyone is thinking of HT look at FUE and forget Picasso linear scars created from the artists FUT surgeons.

 

Thank God we don't see Strip IN turkey because FUT is outdated and barbaric at the least, as for cost, Ive experienced a 80% reduction in the cost of my surgeries in Turkey and 3-4 times the results, thank you.

 

Good luck to all you choosing FUT, you will need it! Lol if you're interested take a look at my journey you will see its a miracle thanks only to FUE and as it happens in Turkey!

 

 

You are missing the point. I am not criticising you for using your most recent surgeon.

 

You are implying above that modern day follicular unit transplantation is terrible, what you had done could not have been achieved with this method and using your experience of work performed close to 25 years ago as a basis for your opinions which quite frankly is absurd. I had the choice of what I wanted, chose FUT and was happy with the decision made in recent years.

 

I am glad you are satisfied with your most recent procedure as that is what is most important thing at the end of the day.

 

I'm implying a scar is a scar is a scar ... And that FUE is more refined and definitely cheaper in Turkey than USA.

[Sean]

I agree scar and I think the moves dr Karadeniz high lighted were the ishrs members voted that members had to sign up to extractions having to be carried out by drs just shows how desperate they are becoming.

As if the most successful fue drs that can utilise techs are going to revert back to their old ways to retain membership of a society that is obviously self serving of the US ht industry.

When utilising techs in full as they do in turkey and europe more people are treated in a day and standards such as those produced by Erdogan and Lorenzo have IMO stayed top notch which is in my book a great thing for sufferers, not so great for the US ht industry and it knows it.

Dr Karadeniz said himself that he will utilise techs even though he has been belittling techs since he arrived here due to his high opinion of his skills but he realises you have to move with the times or sink.

Its dire straits for the US ht industry and it knows it.

I think any of us who have been about long enough have seen this coming in gradually but IMO it has escalated due to the financial climate over the last 6-7 years and people realising they have alternatives to paying the ridiculous prices which US drs have been charging.

The US used to have a monopoly on the ht industry and more and more sufferers are saying NO MORE.

Have a good day

 

An important variable to clarify, from what you mentioned :

 

What Will techs do in his clinic?

 

I thought he said they will never extract and they will not create recipient sites? So what will the techs be used for.

 

Because extractions and recipient site creations are done mostly by docs.

 

Thos clinics in US and Turkey that allow fue extractions by techs or recipient site creation by techs should be named and mentioned clearly.

 

Because there are a lot of docs that do their own extractions and recipients sites and still charge less.

[1966kph]

Sorry Sean but when you say his clinic who are you reffering to?

My procedure was done in its entirety by techs under supervision of the dr at times but although you wish to know the name of my dr the powers that be on this forum deem it fit to keep this knowledge secret by censorship.

Fewer and fewer of the leading clinics are having drs doing extractions and the same goes for manual fue extractions giving way to motorised.

Have results suffered I don't think so and this is nothing new its been happening for years and the fact you've not noticed any difference in the results shows its working well.

If you could please clarify what exactly you mean Sean and I will try to reply.

You have a good evening.

An important variable to clarify, from what you mentioned :

 

What Will techs do in his clinic?

 

I thought he said they will never extract and they will not create recipient sites? So what will the techs be used for.

 

Because extractions and recipient site creations are done mostly by docs.

 

Thos clinics in US and Turkey that allow fue extractions by techs or recipient site creation by techs should be named and mentioned clearly.

 

Because there are a lot of docs that do their own extractions and recipients sites and still charge less.

Edited March 20, 2015 by 1966kph

[Sean]

Sorry Sean but when you say his clinic who are you reffering to?

My procedure was done in its entirety by techs under supervision of the dr at times but although you wish to know the name of my dr the powers that be on this forum deem it fit to keep this knowledge secret by censorship.

Fewer and fewer of the leading clinics are having drs doing extractions and the same goes for manual fue extractions giving way to motorised.

Have results suffered I don't think so and this is nothing new its been happening for years and the fact you've not noticed any difference in the results shows its working well.

If you could please clarify what exactly you mean Sean and I will try to reply.

You have a good evening.

 

It was in reference to Dr. Karadeniz as post stated he now uses techs? But i was wondering what part of the fue process his techs take part in? What do they do , surgical action or assistance action and placement?

[britboy]

Amazing, every surgeon and clinic is allowed to be mentioned except ----- Klinik, not even posts from their clients... weird as hell don't you think...? If we mention the name we may be banned, I can only think of one TRUE reason ----- Klinik is banned from being mentioned is because it is a direct threat to all other clinics, surgeons and competition... I have written again to moderators expressing my disgust about this, but I am informed that once again the ----- klinik is not to be mentioned, if this is not a fantastic promotion for the klinik I don't know what is. This Klinik must have everyone runnign scared, and there are two reasons, maybe three, 1. Quality, 2. Price, 3. Throughput of patients, whilst the surgeons performing their own work directly have limited throughput.

 

Clearly transparency is not here on this forum. I'm damn annoyed... at the covert injustice and unfairness.

 

Ive just realized my signature has been hi-jacked by the moderators and my kliniks name has been removed... This is DUGUSTING... you cheating moderators