FUT is more popular than FUE

[lileli]

Dr Feller,

 

Despite these obstacles, there are still many doctors,including Dr. Bhatti and Dr. Vorris, getting consistent results with FUE. How do you explain that?

[TakingThePlunge]

David,

I posted a reply to Dr. Bhatti around 3:00 yesterday but it is not up. What words triggered the auto moderator?

 

Dr. Feller,

 

I found one of your posts late last night in the moderation cue and approved it. I also found your email advising me of the post quite late as it had gone to my spam folder. I apologize for the delay. I could not find any trigger words in the post so I'm not sure why it was filtered.

 

Hi David,

 

Its the same problem with my post made a couple of hours ago in response to Dr Feller's last post!

However moderation is welcome.

 

Best.

 

Dr. Bhatti,

 

I don't see any posts currently in the moderation cue. Perhaps Bill has already approved it? Please let me know if you made any posts that are still not active.

[voxman]

Looks like Post #573 answered post #576. Odd. Wait.

 

Actually #573 was in response to #559, which was then re-posted as #576.

 

Ops - sorry. I shouldn't be posting here, which for the record is #579.

[matt1164]

all this talk doesn't matter.... Its all about preference... if you can get a good looking result with FUE and not have a linear scar. why wouldn't you? that is the bottom line. I have had two consultations with dr feller and he is a likable fellow. But I prefer FUE for me. Just like I prefer coke and he wouldn't be able to sell me pepsi no matter how much better he thinks it is...

 

this is cosmetic surgery so if you get a good cosmetic result from FUE why not go ahead and do it. I don't care about torsion compression velocity transection rates or where the sun sets. I only need about 1200 grafts so I am not a big job and I would want fue so I could wear any style of haircut I choose.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

all this talk doesn't matter.... Its all about preference... if you can get a good looking result with FUE and not have a linear scar. why wouldn't you? that is the bottom line. I have had two consultations with dr feller and he is a likable fellow. But I prefer FUE for me. Just like I prefer coke and he wouldn't be able to sell me pepsi no matter how much better he thinks it is...

 

this is cosmetic surgery so if you get a good cosmetic result from FUE why not go ahead and do it. I don't care about torsion compression velocity transection rates or where the sun sets. I only need about 1200 grafts so I am not a big job and I would want fue so I could wear any style of haircut I choose.

 

Thank you for the kind words. I appreciate it.

 

Unfortunately the difference between FUT and FUE isn't the same as between Coke and Pepsi. I failed you if I let you leave our consultation without you understanding this.

 

You may not care about the injurious properties now, but you will if you actually do FUE and find that your growth yield was low. Even more if/when you go for a second procedure and find out that your donor area has been hammered unnecessarily.

 

Between the two procedures you will always get the better result with FUT because the grafts from FUT are not nearly as traumatized as that from FUE. This all seems ethereal and background noise to patients UNTIL they are ready to go into the operating room. Then the nagging reality becomes extremely hard to ignore. This explains why so many former FUE patients are so testy on this thread. That's my belief anyway. It is certainly true for the patients who've had FUE in the past and come to my office for repair or fill in with FUT.

 

I'll post more to educate the general public as to the detriments of FUE in terms of photos and videos. Stay tuned.

 

Best,

Dr. Feller

[Dr. Alan Feller]

You are very welcome but I am not certain why this is a significant development to acknowledge this.

 

There are many forces applied on our bodies during surgery and these are simply common sense concepts. However, I believe that by my "acknowledgement" of these every day forces it somehow validates your position that these are problems that cannot be avoided and this is why we disagree.

 

Myself and many MANY other FUE physicians have a strong track record of excellent growth which flies in the face of your entire argument. The details that you wish to debate are one thing but I feel you are too encumbered by these details to recognize that many have overcome them, indicating that they are not as problematic as you would have the readers to believe.

 

Debating details is one thing, but debating what we see with our very eyes and how our patients respond positively is another altogether.

 

I realize now after having engaged you that you are going to do whatever you can to discredit my points in this "debate". I have to again apologize to respected members following this debate for my English as I may not be conveying my points as I should but it is the best that I can do. Furthermore, it is my opinion that no matter how logical my responses may be, regardless of how well I may or may not express myself, you will still disagree and we will not have any movement forward on this issue. You have your opinions, which you are certainly entitled to have, but they do not reflect the reality of what I observe in my practice and those of countless other FUE speciality clinics. Besides, every point you have made about the three forces that are exerted on FUE are your opinion and cannot be proven one way or the other- therefore we only have demonstratable results achieved on a consistent basis to formulate our opinions. These results manifest through years of trial and error and allow me and others the luxury of stating as fact that we know what we are doing.

 

FUE is a procedure that does have a higher threshold of entry compared to Strip. We do have to be more careful with our patients and we do have to consider more factors when planning the procedure but because we know that we have to be more selective we are setting the stage for a success that would not have been possible ten years ago.

 

The success of an FUE procedure has evolved beyond the three problems as you see them. Patient selection, tool selection, having the right touch from experience and simply using judgement that can only be effective from having performed many many FUE sessions, that is how we know that what you are claiming to be three major obstacles are nothing more than issues to be aware of, not necessarily feared.

 

Dr. Bhatti,

 

It's disappointing that you are conceding so early on and leaving so many questions unanswered.

 

I must honestly disagree that my responses have simply been contrarian as you claimed in your last post. I believe my willingness to parse your statements and respond to each one in great detail is evidence of my sincere understanding of what you are trying to communicate. I just demonstrably believe you are wrong or unaware of the significance of what is actually happening during each phase of the FUE extraction procedure.

I can only come to this conclusion because you have yet to demonstrate in detail where anything I've written has been incorrect. You have made sweeping and generalizing statements, you have been dismissive, and you have offered no analysis nor explanation whatsoever. The few actual details you have included, objectively, were either misapplied or non sequitor. Some contained gross errors which you simply refuse to address when pointed out.

 

Please remember it was you who insisted on this debate and that you would easily sway me. This has not happened, and now you are conceding defeat or just quitting (same thing). Not due to my personal intransigence, but because you have not proffered any substance other than to say "the ends justify the means", "trust your eyes", and other hollow bromides.

 

The issue we are trying to explore in this discussion is not that FUE grows, which you and others constantly try to reframe it as, but does the growth it produce come at a higher physiological price when compared to the FUT procedure. And the answer is an unqualified YES. Are patients being made aware of this prior to their procedure in writing in the form of Informed Consent? The answer is NO. Is it the legal obligation of a doctor to so inform their patients? YES. At least in the United States. I don't know about the rest of the world. Is it the ethical obligation of a doctor to so inform their patients? YES. And that goes for the whole world. Could you possibly disagree?

 

If a patient is fully informed in writing that the FUE procedure causes more injury to the graft in every instance compared to an equivalent FUT then I have no problem with its performance in place of the FUT procedure to an extent. In the end it is up to the individual to make the choice, as long as that choice is informed and governed by the doctors own good judgment.

 

If this long thread has taught me one thing, it's that the general public has no idea as to the rigor the FUE surgery puts grafts through as compared to FUT. Perhaps I have taken too much for granted as far as the general public is concerned.

 

So despite your resignation and concession of the official debate I will continue to post pictures, videos and commentary as to what actually happens when a graft is extracted from the skin via FUE and FUT. You are, as always, invited to comment.

[hairshopeing]

Dr feller

You talk a good game I'll give you that, and the 3 forces you continually bring up may well exist but you are only answering what you choose to answer you continually avoid questions which are very clear and concise which is very telling that you only want a debate on your terms which sums you up perfectly to be frank!

 

So I am going to ask one question very clearly and would appreciate and very clear answer!!

 

Why if these 3 forces which you so describe in such detail exist and you believe that no evolvement has taken place with fue are Dr's like lorenzo,feriduni,reddy,erdogan and maras producing amazing results over multiple surgery's of 2 or 3 passes! How is it they can do that? Please answer this question it is clear and very strait forward!! Why are other surgeons able to get great results with fue and perform 2 or 3 successful surgeries on the same patient producing high yield and shaved down barely marked donors? How if the donor is so bad after the first session as you desribe in great technical detail it would be!

 

I look forward to you answering how your other well respected peers are getting theses results with this type of procedure!

[tommygun]

He doesn't respond to the Peanut People....aka...potential future clients.

[hairshopeing]

I think the question is very strait forward and he will answer it or it will make all he had written irrelevant!

[adonix]

I think the question is very strait forward and he will answer it or it will make all he had written irrelevant!

 

Dr. Feller will not answer to any relevant questions. He is too scared of being sued, so he only likes to talk about FUE.

 

I mean the guy does not bother measure the surface area of the mFUE punch, yet he claims it produces "FUE like scarring". If that is not a total negligence, then I don't know what is..

 

Dr. Feller, is it ethical to advise a patient to do a 1500 grafts FUT? Is it good for a patient to get FUT scar for only 1500 grafts?

[matt1164]

Thank you for the kind words. I appreciate it.

 

Unfortunately the difference between FUT and FUE isn't the same as between Coke and Pepsi. I failed you if I let you leave our consultation without you understanding this.

 

You may not care about the injurious properties now, but you will if you actually do FUE and find that your growth yield was low. Even more if/when you go for a second procedure and find out that your donor area has been hammered unnecessarily.

 

Between the two procedures you will always get the better result with FUT because the grafts from FUT are not nearly as traumatized as that from FUE. This all seems ethereal and background noise to patients UNTIL they are ready to go into the operating room. Then the nagging reality becomes extremely hard to ignore. This explains why so many former FUE patients are so testy on this thread. That's my belief anyway. It is certainly true for the patients who've had FUE in the past and come to my office for repair or fill in with FUT.

 

I'll post more to educate the general public as to the detriments of FUE in terms of photos and videos. Stay tuned.

 

Best,

Dr. Feller

 

 

Hi Doc,

 

I understood everything you said. I believe you when you say I will get a better yield with FUT and I don't doubt that I might get a better result.

 

All I am saying is that it's cosmetic surgery and I like to wear my hair short so I would get an FUE procedure for that reason. If I can get a FUE good result with no linear scar I will go for that option every time. Honestly its a no brainer to me.

BUT if you are telling me in a year or two my FUE hairs will fall out for some reason or I will have major problems then I might change my mind. As of right now though it looks like a very good option and I think I will be happy with the procedure.

 

Information is power and I do value your opinion so please post up your videos about the detriments of FUE.

[Melvin- Admin]

Hi Doc,

 

I understood everything you said. I believe you when you say I will get a better yield with FUT and I don't doubt that I might get a better result.

 

All I am saying is that it's cosmetic surgery and I like to wear my hair short so I would get an FUE procedure for that reason. If I can get a FUE good result with no linear scar I will go for that option every time. Honestly its a no brainer to me.

BUT if you are telling me in a year or two my FUE hairs will fall out for some reason or I will have major problems then I might change my mind. As of right now though it looks like a very good option and I think I will be happy with the procedure.

 

Information is power and I do value your opinion so please post up your videos about the detriments of FUE.

 

The only reason transplanted hair would ever fall out be it FUE or FUT is if it was taken outside of the donor zone, now Dr. Fellers argument is that many times FUE is taken outside of the "universal safe zone" thus the potential of the grafts falling out due to progressive balding increases. However just to debunkt this train of thought, there is no such thing as "universal safe zone" in Norwood 7 extreme cases even the donor area is severely depleted, therefore if you were to do a strip surgery on someone destined to be Norwood 7 with a completely depletes donor area not only would the transplanted hair thin and fall out, but the hideous scar would become muchorr apparent. Now let's discuss the flip side not every man who balds becomes a Norwood 6 or 7 there are plenty of men who live their lives maintaining a Norwood 3 or 4, so technically these men if you were to extract grafts out of the "universal safe zone" the grafts would survive through out their whole lives. The notion that one particular area is safe for everybody is absolutely flawed, some men their whole heads is a safe zone other men end their life with no hair on the sides of their head and only an inch thick of hair on the back of the head. Patients need to be assessed on a case by case basis their individual hair loss and family history must be examined, this idea of a one size fits all is extremely disturbing and will inevitably lead to a lot of unhappy men, if you have never worn your hair long on the sides why would you start? It makes no sense to get a cosmetic surgery and not be able to wear a hairstyle you enjoy that's a waste of money.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Hi Doc,

 

I understood everything you said. I believe you when you say I will get a better yield with FUT and I don't doubt that I might get a better result.

 

All I am saying is that it's cosmetic surgery and I like to wear my hair short so I would get an FUE procedure for that reason. If I can get a FUE good result with no linear scar I will go for that option every time. Honestly its a no brainer to me.

BUT if you are telling me in a year or two my FUE hairs will fall out for some reason or I will have major problems then I might change my mind. As of right now though it looks like a very good option and I think I will be happy with the procedure.

 

Information is power and I do value your opinion so please post up your videos about the detriments of FUE.

 

Thank you so much for your civil and constructive comments. If you tell me the date you visited perhaps I can find a photo of you and can direct my comments more accurately.

 

You can still very much wear your hair short with FUT. I have patients who use fade cuts regularly. Military patients and police do it regularly. We just place the line higher in the scalp and problem solved. Now they have as much hair as possible available for the future should they need or want it, AND the donor area above and below the scar perfectly intact unlike with large FUE cases.

 

You are thinking of the now. Trust me, I've been in the business for 22 years and am a patient myself and if you need/want more hair up the road and don't have it because you needlessly threw grafts out the window you will never forgive yourself.

 

Graft survival and "success to attempt ratios " have shockingly not been discussed on this site. I can see why considering the viciousness of so many FUE advocates who engage in wishful thinking and simply don't want to hear it. I have engaged two FUE practitioners and both retreated. Doesn't that tell you something is up here?

 

FUE has it's place, but not in megasessions. If you wish to do the least amount of damage to your donor area and maximize the result in the recipient area FUT is the hands down winner.

 

Sure, anyone can point to successful megasession cases of FUE, but what was the price in grafts available for future procedures that these patients paid for their FUE now? And I know for a fact there are more failed FUE megasessions as a percentage of the number of FUE procedures performed as compared to FUT procedures. Just look on this site alone. In this same section there are no less than FOUR negative posts from patients about their FUE megasession experiences on the very same page this topic shares at this very moment. Check them out. It's astonishing to me that so many posters, especially the loudest ones, simply ignore it. You shouldn't. I don't.

 

Also, the number of impressive FUE megasessions isn't even a molecule of a drop in the bucket. Again, this site has shown me how a few loud vociferous advocates can sway public opinion even when the very opposite of what they are advocating is what's real, which is why I have taken the barbs and the attacks to educate the public. I'm a singular voice on here and look at how they have decended. But truth is the truth and wishful thinking is wishful thinking.

 

No matter what. No matter how good or bad an FUE procedure looks, an equivalent FUT WILL look better with less damage. This is immutable fact and FUE practitioners know it, even if they try to tap dance around it as you've seen.

 

In reality, and I'm not saying it's you, it's not the scar that people fear, it's the thought of the FUT procedure itself. But it really is a misplaced fear. FUT is literally no more painful to perform than FUE and it takes a lot less time. I know because I do both. I just did an FUE today as a matter of fact. FUT is safer for the grafts. And that's where the argument begins and ends. And as you can see from this thread, absolutely no valid opposition from the FUE megasessionist camp itself. The silence is deafening don't you think?

 

I do this to help all of you patients out there. I can do both procedures. But I didn't even have FUE performed on my own head. That should raise quite a few flags.

 

Start your hair restoration with as many FUT procedures as you can , then jump to FUE to finish it up. Bill the moderator of this site agrees with this and so do most of my colleagues.

But make sure to start with a well known and respected FUT clinic. It doesn't have to be mine. Most of the unhappy FUT patients posting on this site who now laud FUE as the second coming have had poor and substandard FUT and just condemned the entire procedure instead of their choice of FUT clinic. There are huge variations even to this day. Unfortunate, but it's the truth. You should see what comes through my door.

 

Thank you very much for participation and civility. A pleasure on this thread.

Dr. Feller

Edited August 12, 2015 by Dr. Alan Feller

[tommygun]

Great post Dr Feller. In my opinion, that was your best post in this thread. Good stuff.

[fortune11]

As I said before, Dr Feller deserves a big thank you in my book for provoking this intellectual discussion between experts. I mean seriously , how many threads do you need to read where everyone is congratulating and hi-fiving everyone else ( that has its place too btw) . FUE vs FUT debate generally devolves into a shouting match at some point down the road so no surprise there but Dr Feller managed to get some significant points across in between. Now we do need to open up a new thread to discuss that crown stretching topic as it relates to FUT !

[tommygun]

As someone that has had one FUT I was convinced that my next procedure would be FUE until recently. Now I am much more open to the thought of another FUT before going FUE.

[mav23100gunther]

Thank you so much for your civil and constructive comments. If you tell me the date you visited perhaps I can find a photo of you and can direct my comments more accurately.

 

You can still very much wear your hair short with FUT. I have patients who use fade cuts regularly. Military patients and police do it regularly. We just place the line higher in the scalp and problem solved. Now they have as much hair as possible available for the future should they need or want it, AND the donor area above and below the scar perfectly intact unlike with large FUE cases.

 

You are thinking of the now. Trust me, I've been in the business for 22 years and am a patient myself and if you need/want more hair up the road and don't have it because you needlessly threw grafts out the window you will never forgive yourself.

 

Graft survival and "success to attempt ratios " have shockingly not been discussed on this site. I can see why considering the viciousness of so many FUE advocates who engage in wishful thinking and simply don't want to hear it. I have engaged two FUE practitioners and both retreated. Doesn't that tell you something is up here?

 

FUE has it's place, but not in megasessions. If you wish to do the least amount of damage to your donor area and maximize the result in the recipient area FUT is the hands down winner.

 

Sure, anyone can point to successful megasession cases of FUE, but what was the price in grafts available for future procedures that these patients paid for their FUE now? And I know for a fact there are more failed FUE megasessions as a percentage of the number of FUE procedures performed as compared to FUT procedures. Just look on this site alone. In this same section there are no less than FOUR negative posts from patients about their FUE megasession experiences on the very same page this topic shares at this very moment. Check them out. It's astonishing to me that so many posters, especially the loudest ones, simply ignore it. You shouldn't. I don't.

 

Also, the number of impressive FUE megasessions isn't even a molecule of a drop in the bucket. Again, this site has shown me how a few loud vociferous advocates can sway public opinion even when the very opposite of what they are advocating is what's real, which is why I have taken the barbs and the attacks to educate the public. I'm a singular voice on here and look at how they have decended. But truth is the truth and wishful thinking is wishful thinking.

 

No matter what. No matter how good or bad an FUE procedure looks, an equivalent FUT WILL look better with less damage. This is immutable fact and FUE practitioners know it, even if they try to tap dance around it as you've seen.

 

In reality, and I'm not saying it's you, it's not the scar that people fear, it's the thought of the FUT procedure itself. But it really is a misplaced fear. FUT is literally no more painful to perform than FUE and it takes a lot less time. I know because I do both. I just did an FUE today as a matter of fact. FUT is safer for the grafts. And that's where the argument begins and ends. And as you can see from this thread, absolutely no valid opposition from the FUE megasessionist camp itself. The silence is deafening don't you think?

 

I do this to help all of you patients out there. I can do both procedures. But I didn't even have FUE performed on my own head. That should raise quite a few flags.

 

Start your hair restoration with as many FUT procedures as you can , then jump to FUE to finish it up. Bill the moderator of this site agrees with this and so do most of my colleagues.

But make sure to start with a well known and respected FUT clinic. It doesn't have to be mine. Most of the unhappy FUT patients posting on this site who now laud FUE as the second coming have had poor and substandard FUT and just condemned the entire procedure instead of their choice of FUT clinic. There are huge variations even to this day. Unfortunate, but it's the truth. You should see what comes through my door.

 

Thank you very much for participation and civility. A pleasure on this thread.

Dr. Feller

 

Sorry Dr, you haven't addressed the stretching of the crown area point that was raised by Dr Bhatti, surely you are not dancing around that one are you Dr Feller? Your silence on that specific point is also deafening!

[hairshopeing]

Your silence on my 1 simple direct question is also deafening! No wonder no fue practicioners are bothering to debate with you as you are only prepared to answer what you want to answer!! You can quote your facts and reasons all day long but they are your reasons and opinions that doesn't make them right!

 

So I'll answer my own question here for you

 

The reasons the Dr's I mentioned perform regularly successful high yield fue procedures on multiple passes is because the 3 forces you continually revert back to that can't be overcome are overcome by these and several other fue Dr's bur you Dr feller are not on that list so those restrictions don't allow you to procure regular high yielding fue results! So in short you can't answer my question because you don't know the answer because if you did you would be doing what their doing not preaching to the peanut gallery you would be producing RESULTS and filling your day with patients! Oh and if you need a procedure with fue scarring and strip yield It isn't mfue it's the above mentioned Dr's fue! It's already available just not in your clinic it seems!

[Raj Jayukdht]

Dr Feller if you were never to offer your head for an FUE procedure why do you do it on your unsuspecting patients? Is this not an ethical issue!

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

Dr. Bhatti,

 

It's disappointing that you are conceding so early on and leaving so many questions unanswered.

 

I must honestly disagree that my responses have simply been contrarian as you claimed in your last post. I believe my willingness to parse your statements and respond to each one in great detail is evidence of my sincere understanding of what you are trying to communicate. I just demonstrably believe you are wrong or unaware of the significance of what is actually happening during each phase of the FUE extraction procedure.

I can only come to this conclusion because you have yet to demonstrate in detail where anything I've written has been incorrect. You have made sweeping and generalizing statements, you have been dismissive, and you have offered no analysis nor explanation whatsoever. The few actual details you have included, objectively, were either misapplied or non sequitor. Some contained gross errors which you simply refuse to address when pointed out.

 

Please remember it was you who insisted on this debate and that you would easily sway me. This has not happened, and now you are conceding defeat or just quitting (same thing). Not due to my personal intransigence, but because you have not proffered any substance other than to say "the ends justify the means", "trust your eyes", and other hollow bromides.

 

The issue we are trying to explore in this discussion is not that FUE grows, which you and others constantly try to reframe it as, but does the growth it produce come at a higher physiological price when compared to the FUT procedure. And the answer is an unqualified YES. Are patients being made aware of this prior to their procedure in writing in the form of Informed Consent? The answer is NO. Is it the legal obligation of a doctor to so inform their patients? YES. At least in the United States. I don't know about the rest of the world. Is it the ethical obligation of a doctor to so inform their patients? YES. And that goes for the whole world. Could you possibly disagree?

 

If a patient is fully informed in writing that the FUE procedure causes more injury to the graft in every instance compared to an equivalent FUT then I have no problem with its performance in place of the FUT procedure to an extent. In the end it is up to the individual to make the choice, as long as that choice is informed and governed by the doctors own good judgment.

 

If this long thread has taught me one thing, it's that the general public has no idea as to the rigor the FUE surgery puts grafts through as compared to FUT. Perhaps I have taken too much for granted as far as the general public is concerned.

 

So despite your resignation and concession of the official debate I will continue to post pictures, videos and commentary as to what actually happens when a graft is extracted from the skin via FUE and FUT. You are, as always, invited to comment.

 

I concede nothing except that I realize this is a waste of my time.

 

Do not confuse the two points.

 

You have not only dismissed the evidence that surrounds you that contradicts your position, but have gone so far as to invest two years of your time (if I remember the announcement correctly) to develop a "new" procedure to supplant the very procedure you are damning.

 

What argument, facts or common sense can I present that will discredit your financial and personal investment for your business?

 

Are we to believe that there is a chance you will recant your position and toss away your investment, all based on my words?

 

What else are we to do aside from trusting our eyes?

 

I believe you are assuming too much, Dr. Feller, as it would follow the scientific method in which for you to make a claim it is you that must prove such a claim and it is not up to others to disprove your claims. You claim that torsion, traction and compression create an environment that prevents FUE from being as effective as Strip, yet you only have words to present your case.

 

Logical? Yes. Verifiable? No.

 

I agree with you that these forces exist but it is up to you to prove they are detrimental to the procedure as a whole. We have dozens of specialists that show their excellent results on a daily basis and you cannot prove that your "facts" have impeded these results in any way. It is simply your opinion based on your experience but I think we have learned a long time ago that the experience of one does not dictate reality for the masses.

[hairshopeing]

Your above statement is spot on bhatti!!

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Sorry Dr, you haven't addressed the stretching of the crown area point that was raised by Dr Bhatti, surely you are not dancing around that one are you Dr Feller? Your silence on that specific point is also deafening!

 

You know that's not true, Mav. I know you read these posts.

 

So called "stretching of the crown" was thrown in by Dr. Bhatti as a distractor to move attention from the questions he refused to answer and the claims he could not support. It had nothing to do with the subject we were debating. I didn't take the bait. And you shouldn't either. I mean really, how many post on here have you seen of patients complaining that their crown stretched 5 mm, or any distance at all? How many patients do you think are going to HT doctors offices to complain about their "crown stretching". To date, after 22 years of practice, I've had exactly zero. Want to compare that to the number of angry and disappointed FUE megasession recipients? No problem by me.

 

Now that Dr. Bhatti has conceded I will answer it on another thread. Would you be so kind as to start that thread for us? This way it doesn't dilute this thread.

 

Thank you.

[hairthere]

Hairshopeing,

Dr. Feller did answer your question. He is saying that the cases being presented on this and other forums represent a small percentage of the FUE cases being performed. You cannot simply go by what you see here or by what clinics are presenting. Once upon a time, not so long ago, there was a certain prominent strip doctor who was really the first to switch to and aggressively market all-FUE megasessions. His reps would come on to the forums and show these great results. But eventually torrents of failed cases started to pop up.

 

He is also saying that it's not simply a matter of what looks good at the moment. He is asking members to consider the long term of what a FUE megasession does to the donor. HT patients are often shortsighted. They see they can gain back their hair now, and they are being sold on FUE as a scarless, or less-scarring-than-strip, procedure. But you really must consider that most HT patients will need future surgeries. I myself had 3 strips and 1 small FUE, all with Dr. Feller. I was a NW 6 and I now have a full head of hair thanks to over 7k grafts. And guess what? My donor area is still healthy and has an abundance of more grafts to give. Plus the strip scar hasn't been an issue. I don't think this would be the case if my total donor area was riddled with scar tissue from FUE.

 

Mav23100,

Can you please point me to where Dr. Bhatti claimed strip surgery stretches the crown? I did not see that. I'm guessing the presumption is that the strip scar pulls the scalp lower after it is sutured? If that's the case, I highly doubt it would make a significant difference.

 

Raj,

As I said, Dr. Feller performed FUE (400 grafts into the temple points) on me. Again, his point is not that FUE doesn't work. He has, as Dr, Bhatti acknowledged, invented FUE tools that are used worldwide. His whole point is that FUE has its place, as does strip. And he feels the latter is best suited for patients that require big sessions and will need future surgeries down the road. Strip out and then FUE.

 

Dr. Bhatti,

There are laws of physics that are irrefutable. Gravity, for instance. Yet we have invented ways to soar into the sky. That doesn't mean that planes don't crash. I believe that you and other surgeons have come up with ways to mitigate the negative effects of torsion, traction, and compression in a FUE. I've observed a FUE surgery, and I saw how much care it takes. I'm sure you are a good surgeon and are having success. What's unfortunate about FUE is that many patients are being sold a false bill of goods. They are not being told that their donor can be severely compromised for future surgeries as Dr. Feller clearly illustrated. I also know for a fact that there are way too many FUE-only clinics that are not performing this surgical technique with the same care you do. Just recently I stopped by a cosmetic dermatologist who was offering robotic FUE. He was pretty clueless about HTs in general and had a tech doing everything. Scary. There was also a report done recently by a former well-known and respected member here who traveled to Turkey and went incognito to a FUE-only tech-run clinic. What he witnessed was extremely jarring.

Edited August 12, 2015 by hairthere

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

You know that's not true, Mav. I know you read these posts.

 

So called "stretching of the crown" was thrown in by Dr. Bhatti as a distractor to move attention from the questions he refused to answer and the claims he could not support. It had nothing to do with the subject we were debating. I didn't take the bait. And you shouldn't either. I mean really, how many post on here have you seen of patients complaining that their crown stretched 5 mm, or any distance at all? How many patients do you think are going to HT doctors offices to complain about their "crown stretching". To date, after 22 years of practice, I've had exactly zero. Want to compare that to the number of angry and disappointed FUE megasession recipients? No problem by me.

 

Now that Dr. Bhatti has conceded I will answer it on another thread. Would you be so kind as to start that thread for us? This way it doesn't dilute this thread.

 

Thank you.

 

I repeat, Dr. Feller. I concede nothing.You have twice stated that I have conceded whereas I have stated exactly to the contrary yet you continue to insist on your interpretation. This is why it is not in my best interest to beat the proverbial "dead horse".

 

The volume at which one makes a claim does not make a claim to be true. I repeat to you sir, the scientific method demands that if a claim is to be made it must be proven by he who makes the claim and it is not up to the community at large to disprove that which has yet to be proven. This is the fundamental of science.

Edited August 12, 2015 by Dr. Tejinder Bhatti

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

Hairshopeing,

Dr. Feller did answer your question. He is saying that the cases being presented on this and other forums represent a small percentage of the FUE cases being performed. You cannot simply go by what you see here or by what clinics are presenting. Once upon a time, not so long ago, there was a certain prominent strip doctor who was really the first to switch to and aggressively market all-FUE megasessions. His reps would come on to the forums and show these great results. But eventually torrents of failed cases started to pop up.

 

He is also saying that it's not simply a matter of what looks good at the moment. He is asking members to consider the long term of what a FUE megasession does to the donor. HT patients are often shortsighted. They see they can gain back their hair now, and they are being sold on FUE as a scarless, or less-scarring-than-strip, procedure. But you really must consider that most HT patients will need future surgeries. I myself had 3 strips and 1 small FUE, all with Dr. Feller. I was a NW 6 and I now have a full head of hair thanks to over 7k grafts. And guess what? My donor area is still healthy and has an abundance of more grafts to give. Plus the strip scar hasn't been an issue. I don't think this would be the case if my total donor area was riddled with scar tissue from FUE.

 

Mav23100,

Can you please point me to where Dr. Bhatti claimed strip surgery stretches the crown? I did not see that. I'm guessing the presumption is that the strip scar pulls the scalp lower after it is sutured? If that's the case, I highly doubt it would make a significant difference.

 

Raj,

As I said, Dr. Feller performed FUE (400 grafts into the temple points) on me. Again, his point is not that FUE doesn't work. He has, as Dr, Bhatti acknowledged, invented FUE tools that are used worldwide. His whole point is that FUE has its place, as does strip. And he feels the latter is best suited for patients that require big sessions and will need future surgeries down the road. Strip out and then FUE.

 

Dr. Bhatti,

There are laws of physics that are irrefutable. Gravity, for instance. Yet we have invented ways to soar into the sky. That doesn't mean that planes don't crash. I believe that you and other surgeons have come up with ways to mitigate the negative effects of torsion, traction, and compression in a FUE. I've observed a FUE surgery, and I saw how much care it takes. I'm sure you are a good surgeon and are having success. What's unfortunate about FUE is that many patients are being sold a false bill of goods. They are not being told that their donor can be severely compromised for future surgeries as Dr. Feller clearly illustrated. I also know for a fact that there are way too many FUE-only clinics that are not performing this surgical technique with the same care you do. Just recently I stopped by a cosmetic dermatologist who was offering robotic FUE. He was pretty clueless about HTs in general and had a tech doing everything. Scary. There was also a report done recently by a former well-known and respected member here who traveled to Turkey and went incognito to a FUE-only tech-run clinic. What he witnessed was extremely jarring.

 

Dear Mr "Hairthere",

 

Your points are well taken since it perfectly illustrates how these forces that Dr. Feller insists are causing carnage and devastation are not nearly as consequential as he would have us all believe. FUE does indeed take a great degree of care, much more so than is necessary for Strip.

 

However, the problems Dr. Feller presents are obviously not insurmountable.

 

And I agree completely about some ways that FUE is being pushed on the unsuspecting patient. It is a travesty and only serves to affect all of us who strive to educate our patients and perform the best procedures we can. I am aware of the former well respected member of which you speak and his activities in discussing and exposing the truth about the technician only clinics where twenty patients per day have their procedures in the same clinic. This is not limited to Turkey but occurs in other countries as well. It is a blight on the industry as a whole as it cheapens our profession and threatens to turn this highly specialized procedure into a simple commodity that can be traded and bartered for, like produce. But the marketing of the procedure compared to the science of the procedure are two separate issues when considering this thread.

 

Regards,