FUT is more popular than FUE

[gbhscot]

Dr Feller,

 

You have argued your case well and have pretty much convinced me on what course of action I want to take, I am comparing different surgeons at the moment with a view to going for surgery in November of this year if possible. Originally, I had been set on getting FUE given quicker recovery times (I play a lot of sport) and given the lack of scar (I would like the option of shaving my head if baldness progresses - I am 25, NW5)

 

I am very concerned about scar size, and would be interested to hear your input / reply to what Dr. Bhatti has posted above. How likely is a result like that? In your opinion/experience, how short can the hair be kept whilst still disguising the scar? From pre-op consultation/ photo consultation, are you able to estimate the scar length & predict how it will turn out in the end?

[Swooping]

This is with full hair-

 

Man. Reminds me why I never opted for FUT. It's a brutal procedure and old fashioned.

[1978matt]

Man. Reminds me why I never opted for FUT. It's a brutal procedure and old fashioned.

 

Is that the best you can add to the discussion?

 

Punching out hair from the back of the head has been around since the late 1950s. It's just in the last 50 years it has evolved from 4mm plugs to punching out single follicular units, thanks to the use of magnification loupes and smaller punches. There is virtually nothing high tech about it.

 

I saw your thread of your own FUE results. Very nice. Glad it worked out so well for you but what about the 3 or 4 guys on here who went to the same Doctor and ended up with miserable results? One guy seems very distraught.

 

Maybe you can tell us where it all went wrong for them? Just bad luck or could it be that FUE is less reliable?

 

As you can tell I do not like comments like yours. All they serve is to frighten people off FUT and walk aimlessly into an FUE procedure. I've noticed that happen a lot the last few years.

 

No problem if they eventually opt for FUE, as long as they are presented with all the facts and able to make a rational decision that is not based on 'fear' of having a strip of skin removed from the back of their head.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Fue2014,

 

Follicular unit transplantation or strip surgery can still be the gold standard while FUE is increasing in popularity. The bottom line is that people are always searching for continued improvement despite any current gold standard or state of the art procedure. Strip surgery comes with a set of risks as has been discussed, primarily a widened linear scar that would be difficult to cover and conceal with existing hair. But this is uncommon and typically scars are pencil thin. Subsequent procedures have a tendency to increase the risk of a slightly wider scar then a pencil thin one, so that's also important to know. But despite its risks and the fact that people are drawn to FUE simply because of the lack of linear scar associated with this donor harvesting technique, strip surgery is still considered the gold standard because yield is generally considered to be more consistent overall. How much more consistent at this stage is up for debate but given the blind dissection factor associated with FUE, strip includes the potential to harvest more viable grafts and thus, produce better and more consistent yield.

 

Darlinglocks.

 

Who exactly do you think is criticizing you for being a fan of Dr. Bhatti? Frankly, it sounds like you are accusing the publishers and moderators of this community of stifling your and other Dr. Bhatti comments as if we have something against him or FUE as a technique. And neither of these are true. Some facts to consider. For starters, Dr. Bhatti is recommended by this community because we believe he is producing world-class FUE results. Secondly, our very own forum co-moderator David is a patient of his and speaks very highly of him and his experience. Last but not least, this community believes that FUE is here to stay and encourages physicians who are not yet utilizing this procedure to get on board and begin offering and perfecting it to the best of their ability. So I'm not sure what you continue to imply with your negative posts. But now that you have been corrected, I expect to begin seeing a change in your presentation of how you think the publishers of this community view both your doctor and FUE. You are welcome to share your opinion, however, peddling false information that we are somehow against your doctor or FUE is inappropriate and a violation of our terms of service because you will now be posting knowingly false information.

 

Best regards,

 

Bill

[Melvin- Admin]

Is that the best you can add to the discussion

 

I saw your thread of your own FUE results. Very nice. Glad it worked out so well for you but what about the 3 or 4 guys on here who went to the same Doctor and ended up with miserable results? One guy seems very distraught.

 

Maybe you can tell us where it all went wrong for them? Just bad luck or could it be that FUE is less reliable

 

Ok I have to ask the miserable results is this your opinion? Because you said the same thing about my results even though I'm thrilled with my results. Results can be subjective, there are a lot of variables that need to be considered, current hairloss, hair characteristics, goals need to be realistic with either procedure, your not gonna be a Norwood 6 and expect to end up a Norwood 2 with one procedure. I really hope you're not just blasting other guys results for sake of argument.

[gilgamesh]

To clarify, the "truth" I speak of that is staring us in the face

 

Honestly, I wouldn't trust either of you till you let an independent observer judge your results in a controlled trial. It is quite easy to believe your own hype when profit is to be gained. Doctors are no different than anyone else in that regard.

 

Sumerian doctors thought beer cured illnesses, in the dark ages leeches, in the 1900s colloidal silver, and today in some parts of the world physicians advise patients to drink their own urine. Most of these physicians believed honestly in the treatments they were prescribing.

 

If FUT was really better than the newer FUE techniques, and a study came out proving this, the physicians practicing strip would make amazing gains.

 

If FUE was really better than FUT, and they were verified by independent research, the influx of business FUE doctors would gain would be staggering.

 

The resistance of the forum to the basic scientific method, and reliance on internet marketing is amazing and disappointing.

 

Thank you to whoever posted the Beehner data. I haven't seen any work since then. Until something better comes along, that is the closest thing to evidence that we have.

 

Everything else is just marketing.

[lileli]

Honestly, I wouldn't trust either of you till you let an independent observer judge your results in a controlled trial. It is quite easy to believe your own hype when profit is to be gained. Doctors are no different than anyone else in that regard.

 

Sumerian doctors thought beer cured illnesses, in the dark ages leeches, in the 1900s colloidal silver, and today in some parts of the world physicians advise patients to drink their own urine. Most of these physicians believed honestly in the treatments they were prescribing.

 

If FUT was really better than the newer FUE techniques, and a study came out proving this, the physicians practicing strip would make amazing gains.

 

If FUE was really better than FUT, and they were verified by independent research, the influx of business FUE doctors would gain would be staggering.

 

The resistance of the forum to the basic scientific method, and reliance on internet marketing is amazing and disappointing.

 

Thank you to whoever posted the Beehner data. I haven't seen any work since then. Until something better comes along, that is the closest thing to evidence that we have.

 

Everything else is just marketing.

 

I want to caution the thinking that the Beehner study is absolute. In science a consensus of multiple studies must happen before something is considered concrete. As we know, there are multiple ways doctors do these surgeries and therefore it makes it impossible to judge based on a standard. A good study would randomly select 100 FUE doctors and 100 FUT doctors and compare their results for an entire year. Then you can break down the doctors by reputation etc. There may never be true scientific consensus since studies of this scale would be very expensive.

[Rawkerboi]

@ Swooping yes the procedure is old fashioned but at present its not brutal. Like FUE even FUT has improved lot

There are still Top class FUT results produced by Dr. Hasson and Dr.Wong, Dr.Rahal Etc...

 

@1978Matt you are absolutely right!!

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

@ Swooping yes the procedure is old fashioned but at present its not brutal. Like FUE even FUT has improved lot

There are still Top class FUT results produced by Dr. Hasson and Dr.Wong, Dr.Rahal Etc...

 

@1978Matt you are absolutely right!!

 

"Rawkerboi"- There is no dispute on your statement.

There are great FUT surgeons like Dr Wong, Dr Feller and Dr Rahal who give great results as are great FUE doctors around the world.

 

What is being stressed here is-

 

1. FUE today is safe effective and reproducible in experienced hands since it has overcome the 3 forces of traction torsion and compression.

2. It is today a standalone procedure in its own right and a patient need not be stripped out before knocking on the FUE doctor's door.

3. Hair transplant patients are today embracing the FUE technique in ever increasing numbers.

4. This is because it is a minimally invasive procedure.

5. FUE scars are almost indistinct as compared to FUT scars.

 

The latter point is being presently stressed by showing day-to- day strip scars which I come across in my practice. (If you observe I show each patient with the day's newspaper). I have asked Dr Feller to do the same for FUE scars but he has not taken up my challenge. I am not insulting the intelligence of respected members by picking up scars from the internet. They know they just have to search the phrase "hair transplant scars" and the images will start to load.

I have till now restrained myself from tapping into my 100s of pictures of scar repairs. It is not fair since both FUE and FUT will have complications in the occasional patients.

However if we do not come across these complications in day to day practice, they are insignificant.

 

FUT is still the gold standard; but FUE surgery has come of age and is almost there to claim the title.

 

That is why FUT surgeons become shifty and start threads like this with the preconceived disingenuous invention with a mischievous intention- " FUT is more popular...##*%#@$$^!!...... mFUE."

Edited August 21, 2015 by Dr. Tejinder Bhatti

[MAGNUMpi]

If FUE was really better than FUT, and they were verified by independent research, the influx of business FUE doctors would gain would be staggering.

It seems like that has been starting to happen in the last few years. There are FUE doctors popping up all over the place. (I'm not implying FUE is "better" here)

 

Thank you to whoever posted the Beehner data. I haven't seen any work since then. Until something better comes along, that is the closest thing to evidence that we have.

Everything else is just marketing.

But we have lots of people giving their own personal experiences here, good, and bad (with photos). So it's not all just marketing. Some doctor results sometime seem a bit tilted but usually a forum member will call it out.

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

Minimally invasive procedure with minimal downtime of recovery.

This Caucasian patient received 2876 scalp grafts for type 3 MPB yesterday.

Jim Harris' Safe Scribe system for harvest.

(8 hour procedure).

The donor area is shown.

Note the ability to harvest large graft counts keeping strictly in the safe permanent donor zone.

Lower the "out of body time" for grafts, better the growth.

Speed is essential to a well done FUE procedure.

 

Patient will be going for a week long holiday in the Himalayas tomorrow where he wishes to trek.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Dr. Tejinder Bhatti
to add more pictures- for pictures are worth a 1000 words.

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

FUE hair transplant donor site in the immediate post procedure period in the clinic.

This Indian origin patient received 2453 scalp grafts for type 3 MPB yesterday.

8 hours procedure.

The patient is going back home to Brooklyn tomorrow evening.

The benefit of FUE- low downtime,

[1978matt]

Ok I have to ask the miserable results is this your opinion? Because you said the same thing about my results even though I'm thrilled with my results. Results can be subjective, there are a lot of variables that need to be considered, current hairloss, hair characteristics, goals need to be realistic with either procedure, your not gonna be a Norwood 6 and expect to end up a Norwood 2 with one procedure. I really hope you're not just blasting other guys results for sake of argument.

 

I never said yours was miserable. I picked out a couple of concerns I had with it as you had presented it to us a great example of FUE. That's the whole point of the forum - to look at work and comment on it. Some people even commented on mine I seem to recall, saying they thought it was average. That's life, you can't please everyone.

 

There is one guy who went to his doctor who was a fairly low NW. Maybe a NW2.5 or a 3. Now he absolutely hates his hairline and does not know what to do next.

 

Other members will know who I mean but I'd prefer not to mention his profile name. He could be found fairly easily with 2 or 3 minutes searching.

[gilgamesh]

FUT is still the gold standard; but FUE surgery has come of age and is almost there to claim the title.

 

 

Based on what data? You just ignored my post. Unfortunately, I've seen too many of your patients with poor outcomes post on the various hair loss forums to take what you say that seriously. The same unfortunately goes for Feller. Both of you will in turn say, 'well of course the unhappy patients are the ones that go online to complain about their results,' and 'some bad outcomes are inevitable and have nothing to do with the procedure'. And while this may be true, of course the human mind will favor the explanation that absolves them of blame -- both the patients and physicians are guilty of this at inverse times.

 

Speaking with the elites in either field (Konior, Lorenzo, Feriduni, etc) they have all ultimately said about the same thing, none of them are as polemical as either of you. That is the hallmark of an insightful perspective. Donald Trump, as entertaining as he is, will never be taken seriously by the American people, let alone the rest of the world.

 

Approaching it from a theoretical perspective, I can see no way to consistently obtain 'chubby' grafts and preserve the surrounding stem cell at the follicle base when you are going in blind. Even when doing strip this is difficult. It's like trying to accurately cut the hair on the back of your head with no mirror.

 

I agree with the poster who said earlier that more studies need to be done. Yes, absolutely, I hope the Beehner story isn't the end of the road. It would be sad if it was. Even if they were small scale, at least they could be compiled into a meta analysis and a more up to date standard could be established.

 

Until then, your impassioned posts, even if you believe them, cannot by definition carry that much weight. Unfortunately the same goes for any physician in the hair loss community. Even if they do both procedures, there is always one that is preferred by a practice for whatever reason (economics, convenience, cheaper labor supply, cheaper materials, lest time investment, etc).

 

If the data were there, FUE advocates would publish it because of the insane boom in business it would portend. Especially with the lower 'worst case scenario' risk with the procedure. However until then, I can't take internet marketing that seriously.

 

There have been countless great medical theories over time that have resulted in countless consumer dollars spent. But as someone who appreciates the beauty of science, I'll believe it when I see at least some attempt at an objective consensus. Not just a single physician's personal experience in a specific patient population, as he guesstimates it. As in any business, the one selling the product will always downplay the negatives.

[mav23100gunther]

"

 

FUT is still the gold standard;."

 

Thanks for the honesty Dr Bhatti, this is the point that alot of the FUT haters don't get.

[mav23100gunther]

 

Donald Trump, as entertaining as he is, will never be taken seriously by the American people.

 

You sure about that mate? The polls are currently showing something different. Remember these are the same people who took George W Bush seriously - twice! and a chap named Obama (just the 2nd time, 1st time was fair game)

[gilgamesh]

You sure about that mate? The polls are currently showing something different. Remember these are the same people who took George W Bush seriously - twice! and a chap named Obama (just the 2nd time, 1st time was fair game)

 

He is essentially the Ralph Nader of the GOP and has the mental sophistication of a New York bar drunk/internet troll, but it was only an analogy -- let's not let this wander off topic.

 

The point is that I am tired of physicians, representatives and patient acolytes skirting the basic issue. We need to return to the scientific method, not this marketing hype and absurd hyperbole. The amount of research coming out on hair loss each year is still quite impressive, and the research funding is not insubstantial (go to the ISHRS website or search the NIH database, it is free), yet somehow everyone is still dancing around this basic study.

 

It reminds me of global warming -- 50% of the lay public is undecided, but 95% of the scientific community is certain. Why? They have to stick to the proven evidence, and most do not have an economic incentive to disprove it.

 

The internet revolution is providing us an opportunity to shine the light of reason on an issue that has long been in the dark, let us take advantage of it so that later we do not look back and say 'It's so obvious now, how did it take so long to figure this out.'

[fueBobby]

Congratulations Gilgamesh on your insight into hair transplant and hair loss. You seem to be knowing a lot and conversant with a lot of big names WHOM YOU CAN EVEN SPEAK TO IN PERSON ON THE PHONE!.

However what kept you out of this community for so long.

Why did you suddenly decide you must throw your hat into thIS POPULAR "FUE vs FUT debate" and start by denigrating the 2 honourable doctors who have at grave risk to their reputation been taking part in this knowledgeable debate.

How do we take your word for your statements extolling the virtues of science when you have no "name" to back up your claims.

Cowards like you come in like this and troll the forum. That is why we never have a fair debate on anything.

Who is the doctor you seek to promote; or are you a doctor yourself in the garb of a member?

Expressing your mind without being responsible for any remark you make.

Well I see your profile- you decided just yesterday to create your account and your profile does not even mention you are a hair loss sufferer.

Who are you, "GILGAMESH"?

Edited August 21, 2015 by fueBobby

[gilgamesh]

Who are you, "GILGAMESH"?

 

Your adolescent response and troll finger pointing is typical of reactionary internet clowns. The age of an account, or the quantity of its posts has little relevance to the content of its posts.

 

I have no one I am trying to promote, nor do I have any economic interest. I am simply a hair loss sufferer who has consulted with multiple physicians in search of my best option. Any responsible person on this forum should be doing the same. Nothing has kept me 'out' of this community, not even sure what that means.

 

It is a free forum, anyone may sign up as they please.

 

I think what may be unnerving to you is that I have no ulterior motive or angle I'm trying to promote. I am simply in search of the truth about a subject that has been mired in internet muck for far too long.

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

This healthy Caucasian patient received a strip surgery 5 years ago in East Europe from a lesser known clinic. Poor growth and a 10 cm long strip scar that is 2.0 cms wide is evident.

He has been wearing a hair piece ever since.

Due to a restricted residual scalp donor, only 1207 scalp FUE grafts were harvested as planned for the hairline alone. He has decided to wear a hair piece behind the natural hairline for life. "No shave" FUE technique camouflaging the strip scar was used since he returns to work on Monday.

[Shera]

I have no one I am trying to promote, nor do I have any economic interest. I am simply a hair loss sufferer who has consulted with multiple physicians in search of my best option. Any responsible person on this forum should be doing the same. Nothing has kept me 'out' of this community, not even sure what that means.

 

 

Hi Gilgamesh, why did you feel it so important to enter into this debate and not share your experiences with the multiple physicians you say you have consulted with.

 

Surely that should have been your initial intention if you wanted to offer your own experiences on this forum, to help others rather than jump head first guns-a-blazing into this thread and criticize the 2 respected doctors who are actually actively contributing to this thread as being untrustworthy.

 

Surely you can see that your actions are so so obviously leaving you wide open to be criticized as being a troll, so much that is quite laughable, that you have shown the same mental sophistication of the same Ralph Nader of the GOP you openly criticize in your post.

 

__________________________________________________

Dr Bhatti FUE Oct 2014 3305 grafts

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/178931-my-fue-dr-tejinder-bhatti-oct-2014-a.html

[Dr. Alan Feller]

I am simply in search of the truth about a subject that has been mired in internet muck for far too long.

 

I happen to agree with this statement. But can you expound on it, please?

 

And if you have a moment, can you tell us what it was in your consultations that either interested you or put you off HT?

 

Thank you,

Dr. Feller

[HairJo]

good question???

[Crockett]

The point is that I am tired of physicians, representatives and patient acolytes skirting the basic issue. We need to return to the scientific method, not this marketing hype and absurd hyperbole. The amount of research coming out on hair loss each year is still quite impressive, and the research funding is not insubstantial (go to the ISHRS website or search the NIH database, it is free), yet somehow everyone is still dancing around this basic study.

 

It reminds me of global warming -- 50% of the lay public is undecided, but 95% of the scientific community is certain. Why? They have to stick to the proven evidence, and most do not have an economic incentive to disprove it.'

 

I have to agree with this.

 

I have no earthly idea why top surgeons debate on a forum. Do they have a YouTube channel? The real question is how do they find the time to keep track and post here. I do appreciate their knowledge and contributions. I don't see how they gain a strategic advantage in the industry as an innovator.

 

The year is 2015 and we are debating FUT and FUE like it's just been discovered. Isn't that Wesley guy trying to develope a new technique?

 

No body wants a slab cut out of their head, a shotgun pattern or no growth.

[Sethticles]

FUT is still the gold standard; but FUE surgery has come of age and is almost there to claim the title."

 

looks makes no difference who is the gold standard,

100% of all FUE patients don't want to live with a 22cm scar its that simple making it the gold standard for them. FUT is the gold standard of more reliable hair in some patients.

 

Feller himself has had 3 FUT transplants, 2 unsatisfactory yet he goes around slamming FUE and wants to drag others into his stripped out logic.

 

Therefore this debate will never end because its a personal choice,

 

i choose FUE because i have my own doubts that surgery is forever, I also have doubts that transplanted hairs are DHT resistant, I am also unsure if i want to remain on meds for more than 5 years, I am also unsure if i want use foams oils every day for the rest of my life, both FUT & FUE rely on a daily boost to give yourself the best result, so if you commit to FUT you are committing to the rest of your life and if you commit to FUE you have the greatest back up plan,

 

the argument stops there,