FUT is more popular than FUE

[Swooping]

What a relief to find somebody who abides the scientific method here and has a voice of reason. My hat is off to you Dr. Bhatti. Enjoyed your posts and they are spot on.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Dr. Bhatti,

I'm sorry sir, but quitting in the middle of a debate is conceding defeat.

 

In reality, however, even though you claimed you would engage, you never actually did. You made response, but they were generalizations, platitudes, and personal attacks.

 

I've made my claims and supported them in detail.

 

I have refuted your comments and supported it in detail.

 

And I have answered all your on-point questions in detail.

 

I have stayed on point, and you could or would not.

 

The issues here are not ones of opinion. They are ones of fact. The reality that you and your fellow FUE megasession colleagues don't see this or acknowledge this is the most disturbing issue of all. Maybe you'll begin to think about what I've written and conclude that what you have thought to be true about FUE megasessions to this point actually isn't. And don't be offended sir, you are a relative newbie to FUE, I've been doing them since 2001. Take some advice from someone senior to you and has already been down the road.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Dear Mr "Hairthere",

 

 

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

 

 

Regards,

 

We are going in circles here. The whole point of the debate in particular was for you to demonstrate HOW these problems were surmounted by FUE practitioners such as yourself. And after many long and off topic postings you have not answered that question nor responded to the points I made. Thus, you quit.

 

Perhaps a photo or a video of your heretofore unknown or new instrumentation or technique would be helpful. But to date you've only mentioned the Safe Scribe system which is not new nor addresses the three detrimental forces.

[lileli]

I think the point they are trying to make us that despite these forces, if proper care and handling of the grafts is taken, it doesn't affect growth or final outcome.

[hairthere]

"I think the point they are trying to make us that despite these forces, if proper care and handling of the grafts is taken, it doesn't affect growth or final outcome."

 

I think the point is that despite all efforts of even the best surgeons, those forces do irrefutably still exist. No tool today has rectified this problem and Dr. Bhatti hasn't suggested he has a new tool or technique that can eliminate the issue. So you are taking a gamble, especially with a FUE megasession, where each and every graft is subjected to these forces. Since donor grafts are finite, I would choose not to gamble mine away.

Edited August 12, 2015 by hairthere

[Mick50]

Actually I have just looked at a you tube posting by a former poster on this site can't mention his name as he's persona non grata for whatever reason, all seems a bit childish to me to be honest that his name can't be mentioned but that's another story ,I'm sure you will guess his name he has his own hair-loss website ,well anyway in the video he interviews Dr Ron Shapiro and asks him his views on the FUE versus FUT, Dr Shapiro seems to acknowledge the short-comings of FUE but actually seems to agree with Dr Bhatti that in the right hands these problems can be over-come and that includes large FUE sessions, this guy actually raises the points raised by Dr Feller on this thread directly to Dr Shapiro

Edited August 12, 2015 by Mick50

[FUE2014]

"I think the point they are trying to make us that despite these forces, if proper care and handling of the grafts is taken, it doesn't affect growth or final outcome."

 

I think the point is that despite all efforts of even the best surgeons, those forces do irrefutably still exist. No tool today has rectified this problem and Dr. Bhatti hasn't suggested he has a new tool or technique that can eliminate the issue. So you are taking a gamble, especially with a FUE megasession, where each and every graft is subjected to these forces. Since donor grafts are finite, I would choose not to gamble mine away.

 

Yes and you could choose to gamble on strip and gamble on your scar hopefully not stretching (you have said yourself that your own FUT scars have stretched), but its a roll of the dice, and you could be unlucky:

 

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/172754-scar-stretching-2.html

 

As you work in the SMP business I assume part of your business is dealing with strip scars, and I assume they are not all that irregular?

[FUE2014]

Actually I have just looked at a you tube posting by a former poster on this site can't mention his name as he's persona non grata for whatever reason, all seems a bit childish to me to be honest that his name can't be mentioned but that's another story ,I'm sure you will guess his name he has his own hair-loss website ,well anyway in the video he interviews Dr Ron Shapiro and asks him his views on the FUE versus FUT, Dr Shapiro seems to acknowledge the short-comings of FUE but actually seems to agree with what Dr Bhatti that in the right hands these problems can be over-come and that includes large FUE sessions, this guy actually raises the points raised by Dr Feller on this thread directly to Dr Shapiro

 

Yes I actually made the same point, but my post was deleted because I used his initials to identify him. Well worth checking out those videos, Dr Shapiro is more supportive of Dr Bhatti than Dr Feller.

[lileli]

Actually I have just looked at a you tube posting by a former poster on this site can't mention his name as he's persona non grata for whatever reason, all seems a bit childish to me to be honest that his name can't be mentioned but that's another story ,I'm sure you will guess his name he has his own hair-loss website ,well anyway in the video he interviews Dr Ron Shapiro and asks him his views on the FUE versus FUT, Dr Shapiro seems to acknowledge the short-comings of FUE but actually seems to agree with what Dr Bhatti that in the right hands these problems can be over-come and that includes large FUE sessions, this guy actually raises the points raised by Dr Feller on this thread directly to Dr Shapiro

 

I know exactly what you are talking about and it was very helpful.

[hairthere]

"Yes and you could choose to gamble on strip and gamble on your scar hopefully not stretching (you have said yourself that your own FUT scars have stretched), but its a roll of the dice, and you could be unlucky: As you work in the SMP business I assume part of your business is dealing with strip scars, and I assume they are not all that irregular?"

 

Hey FUE2014,

Yes my scar is a tad wider than pencil thin, although I would challenge people to find it. I also have 2 strips scars because my first "doctor" took it too low. Yet I can still buzz down to a number 3 without issue. And yes, I have seen/worked on stretched strip scars in my SMP clinic. I will say that the scars I've seen were all accompanied by a great head of hair. And isn't that the point of getting a hair transplant? It was for me anyway. I'm attaching two pictures of my hair as it is now. The third picture shows me about 2 years before having any HT work done. I would be a full-blown, slick-bald NW5/6 by now. Also, I have had clients ask about covering up poor FUE scarring and have seen some pretty bad FUE scars, too.

Edited August 12, 2015 by hairthere

[adonix]

Dr Feller, is this one of your pencil thin scars?

 

[hairshopeing]

Hair there

Firstly thanks for answering a question you weren't asked! I asked Dr feller not you! Vox man was asked to not speak on behalf of Dr bhatti and I think Dr feller is big enough to answer my strait foward direct question himself! And for the record the strip procedure results you see are just the same the clinic showing there best just like the fue examples you are talking about so no difference! Also you have had strip and are happy, that's great I'm not against strop if you want or require it!! But iv had fue and I'm also very happy with my result and my donor allows me to shave down to a 1 guard which I have done until recently with no body noticing anything and my yield was high and it's given me exactly what I hoped for! So strip worked for you fue for me we both took our own gambles and are both happy!! Lucky us!! but also he never answered my question I neither did you, lorenzo has hundreds of results in HD quality video and iv yet to see a poor result or unhappy patient of his and let's remember strip may or may give you great yield but it may not so why it's discussed about on this thread as if strip always yields high which is simply untrue yes strip CAN yield high and fue CAN yield high abd both can have poor yield! So it's a choice I see strip in the hands of hassan and rhal koniour and it's superb but so is lorenzo erdogan feriduni and maras etc at fue with more and more up and coming Dr's producing regular excellent cases!!! So no offence but my question wasn't answered if you think it was read it again because it wasn't! ! Good luck with the smp by the way your producing some nice work!!!

[lileli]

Dr.Feller,

 

Do you find it irresponsible of the hair loss network to recommend a number of fue only surgeons that engage in mega session FUEs?

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

Dr. Bhatti,

I'm sorry sir, but quitting in the middle of a debate is conceding defeat.

 

In reality, however, even though you claimed you would engage, you never actually did. You made response, but they were generalizations, platitudes, and personal attacks.

 

I've made my claims and supported them in detail.

 

I have refuted your comments and supported it in detail.

 

And I have answered all your on-point questions in detail.

 

I have stayed on point, and you could or would not.

 

The issues here are not ones of opinion. They are ones of fact. The reality that you and your fellow FUE megasession colleagues don't see this or acknowledge this is the most disturbing issue of all. Maybe you'll begin to think about what I've written and conclude that what you have thought to be true about FUE megasessions to this point actually isn't. And don't be offended sir, you are a relative newbie to FUE, I've been doing them since 2001. Take some advice from someone senior to you and has already been down the road.

Dear Dr Feller, One does not "quit" having a debate with a stone. One simply realizes the futility.

 

Thus far there have been great discussions and an immense amount of detail which is simply an opinion of one doctor. The forces of physics existing are not in question. A claim was made that these forces consistently create an atmosphere of failure for all FUE procedures from all FUE physicians in all FUE clinics compared to equal parameters applied to a Strip procedure. This claim is an opinion not a fact as the scientific method has not been followed, on a macro level much less a micro level. Therefore there is no debate because I cannot disprove something that has yet to be proven.

 

You have observed the consequences of these forces to such a degree that you have reversed your position on FUE (by your own admission earlier in this thread), of which I am not questioning which is the reason you obviously have a great passion about this subject. I however have not, nor have a long list of other FUE specialists. My point is not that these forces do not exist. My point is that for you these forces are detrimental but for me they are not. And I do not take offense, even when you resort to condensceding comments, calling me a "relative newbie". Sometimes it takes "newbies" to do things a bit differently than those that came before and through newbies we can learn how to handle things with a little more care. I believe Mike Tyson was a relative newbie when he won his first championship at the age of 20 so being a "newbie" is not necessarily a bad thing and in many cases can be an advantage. Best wishes.

[Raj Jayukdht]

The focus should be on RESULTS, not how a doctor takes out the grafts.

[Melvin- Admin]

Dear Dr Feller, One does not "quit" having a debate with a stone. One simply realizes the futility.

 

Thus far there have been great discussions and an immense amount of detail which is simply an opinion of one doctor. The forces of physics existing are not in question. A claim was made that these forces consistently create an atmosphere of failure for all FUE procedures from all FUE physicians in all FUE clinics compared to equal parameters applied to a Strip procedure. This claim is an opinion not a fact as the scientific method has not been followed, on a macro level much less a micro level. Therefore there is no debate because I cannot disprove something that has yet to be proven.

 

You have observed the consequences of these forces to such a degree that you have reversed your position on FUE (by your own admission earlier in this thread), of which I am not questioning which is the reason you obviously have a great passion about this subject. I however have not, nor have a long list of other FUE specialists. My point is not that these forces do not exist. My point is that for you these forces are detrimental but for me they are not. And I do not take offense, even when you resort to condensceding comments, calling me a "relative newbie". Sometimes it takes "newbies" to do things a bit differently than those that came before and through newbies we can learn how to handle things with a little more care. I believe Mike Tyson was a relative newbie when he won his first championship at the age of 20 so being a "newbie" is not necessarily a bad thing and in many cases can be an advantage. Best wishes.

 

 

Wow Dr. Bhatti what a fantastic response and spot on I might add, earlier in the thread I said that no studies have been conducted comparing the efficacy between FUT vs FUE, so the percentages that physicians give is based off of their own experience handling both procedures, but to state the claims Dr. Feller is stating as a scientific fact is absolutely wrong, because as you stated no studies have been conducted to approve or disprove those statements. The question is not do these three forces exist in FUE the question is have physician overcome these negative aspects and have they done so consistently. Also, Dr. Feller seems to be avoiding the concern regarding the crown expansion. It's become clear he is cherry picking the concerns he will address and ignoring the rest. He is quite crafty at alluding a question and throwing clinical jargon at an attempt to confuse laymans, im surprised he chose medical school over law school he'd make a fantastic lawyer.

[shanson]

This thread just seems to be going on and on without getting anywhere. I am perfectly happy with my FUE. I do not know if this thread is meant to be telling me that my FUE should be bad or inferior to FUT. I have been trying to keep track for a while but like i said it just goes on and on and on...

[mav23100gunther]

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.

 

Dear Dr Feller,

 

I think it has everything to do with this topic. The last I heard, this was a two way debate over both the advantages and disadvantages of both procedures. You have made some claims as to what you believe are advantages of FUT over FUE, and seem to be putting the burden on Dr Bhatti to refute those. Dr Bhatti made a point as what he believes to be a disadvantage of electing FUT over FUE, that being the stretching of the crown/vertex area when you get a strip taken. I feel strongly that just as if you expect him to come out and refute your claims, it is not unreasonable to ask you to come out and refute his claims. With the greatest of respect sir, this is is not the Dr Feller show, and just because you don't believe that Dr Bhatti has succeeded in refuting anything you have stated, doesn't mean you shouldn't also attempt to refute all the claims made by him. I would try create another thread, but last time I tried to do that Bill shut me down and insisted we continue this debate on this thread.

 

Bill, thoughts?

Edited August 12, 2015 by mav23100gunther

[BaldingBogger]

I do not think of the FUE graft as "injured," unless an FUT graft is also "injured" during dissection. They do need to be handled carefully, inspected for being intact, and keep moist during the procedure. They are also more subject to desiccation than FUT grafts. The point is not that FUE grafts are superior to FUT grafts, it is that when the procedure is done properly, they are equal in survival to FUT grafts. Obviously studies need to be done to clarify these remarks, and no one should be taking my words as gospel.

 

But I do feel the need to report what I have seen with performing FUE surgery daily, and compared to what I have seen performing FUT surgery for the past decade. I do feel that some the physical forces described occur during FUE surgery, but I do not believe it matters much when it comes to graft survival. When we began FUE procedures, we placed grafts with forceps, and even with experienced placers, the results were indeed variable. However, when we switched to implanter pens, we saw much more consistent results, and in my opinion, slightly better than when we were doing FUT procedures.

 

Finally, when it comes to discussions like these, I believe that a picture is not worth a thousand words, it is more like ten thousand words, and we should let the results speak for themselves.

 

Let the results speak for themselves.. This is the phrase of the day and one in which people seem to be losing sight off getting caught up in the hyperbole of this thread offered up by Dr Feller.

 

Dr Feller has proved NOTHING with this thread except offering subjective conjecture of HIS experience of FUE. He makes no concession to the fact other Dr's from leading clinics have excelled to a higher standard of FUE than he has and mitigated these '3 detrimental forces' to a level where they can produce consistent HIGH YIELDNG FUE results.

 

If we are wrong where are all these failed FUE results? On the Dark web perhaps?! Do you not think this and other forums would be FLOODED with bad cases all in which patients are trying to negotiate their money back from the clinic like what happens when we see a genuine sub par case.? These clinics are booked out 6 months in advance. That would be a huge volume of potential bad results creeping online..

 

 

I think this thread has lost any relevance and one man ranting is getting pretty old. It should get back to the business of sharing and evaluating results and the resulting engaging debate from there.

 

I would simply implore people to do their own due diligence and view as many cases online and crucially IN PERSON to see the reality of both procedures and what FUE & FUT can really do. And not just take one Doctors view (on the FUE or FUT side) as gospel.

[Eurofue]

Surely this debate is pointless? All this rant for rant people will get what THEY want anyway. I would still choose FUE even if the yield was 50% success compared to 98% for FUT. it's all about the scar and having to have your hair longer unless you want to see the line. Even if it failed you can still buzz it down. But let's be honest the 3 forces don't have massive problems as you do offer the procedure yourself Dr feller if it was that bad you just wouldn't do it. Plus you can use body hair as a filler so adding to the amount of grafts available to the top of the head. This is the way I look at it after reading masses and masses of these threads. My 2 pence. Although do carry on the rants are quite amusing

[lileli]

I think we have learned a lot of new information. We have learned that FUE grafts are subjected to three forces that MAY harm said graft. We have also learned/known that there are doctors out there who consistently get good results when performing FUE megasessions. However, Dr. Feller isn't alone in his opinions,Dr. Ali Emre Karadeniz also shares them. He has said in the past that FUE produces the worst type of scarring etc. He has also stated that in order to remain competitive in Turkey, he had to learn how to do FUE to good level. I believe FUT is the gold standard in the sense of just pursing an absolute number of grafts, but FUE seems to have caught up in many regards. The gap is closing and has continued to close. My surgeon told me that when he first saw FUE demonstrated he vowed never to do it because it left the donor area with shotgun wounds. Things have progressed since then and now he only does FUE as well. Moral of story, regardless of FUT or FUE go to a quality surgeon who knows what they are doing. For FUE, I would only go to a doctor that does it on a daily basis.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

i would still choose fue even if the yield was 50% success compared to 98% for fut.

 

wow !

[Dr. Alan Feller]

My surgeon told me that when he first saw FUE demonstrated he vowed never to do it because it left the donor area with shotgun wounds. Things have progressed since then and now he only does FUE as well. Moral of story, regardless of FUT or FUE go to a quality surgeon who knows what they are doing. For FUE, I would only go to a doctor that does it on a daily basis.

 

How? Where? Absolutely nothing has progressed since the introduction of FUE in 2001. That's the point behind the debate. This claim has been made since 2001, but there have been no developments. That's why Dr. Bhatti has not been able to name any; and Dr. Vories could only point to an implanter pen- which has no bearing on extraction.

 

The reason you see "so many"FUE results out there is because more and more doctors are willing to "brute force" their way through them. The more people doing it, the more results out there. But what you don't see because you are not a practitioner that I do is the consistently poor results of FUE procedures compared to the equivalent FUT procedure.

 

The wild claims that these clinics are doing something different is completely false. Demonstrably false. Wishful thinking, fantasy. You all are simply looking through the narrow window of internet websites like this. A site where opposition to FUE is met with vicious attack while even the mildest FUE result is applauded.

 

There are MANY poor FUE results on this site right now, yet they are never mentioned.

No doctor, including Dr. Bhatti has come on here and demonstrated that he is capable of doing ANYTHING differently than the FUE megasessionist of 14 years ago. And I KNOW he can't. So what "advances" ??? None. But FUE sycophants are not interested in the plain truth.

 

FUE is like a religion or cult for many FUE advocates on this site. Just read what some of these adherents write. They expose themselves with each barb they throw. Mindless hate, petty attacks, and complete intolerance for non-believers.

 

But I will continue telling the truth about FUE and making my case logically. Not for the sake of the "believers" nothing will sway them, but for the legion of people out there reading this thread who truly want to know what the pros and cons of any HT procedure are. This site is in sore need of "equal time".

[lileli]

How? Where? Absolutely nothing has progressed since the introduction of FUE in 2001. That's the point behind the debate. This claim has been made since 2001, but there have been no developments. That's why Dr. Bhatti has not been able to name any; and Dr. Vories could only point to an implanter pen- which has no bearing on extraction.

 

The reason you see "so many"FUE results out there is because more and more doctors are willing to "brute force" their way through them. The more people doing it, the more results out there. But what you don't see because you are not a practitioner that I do is the consistently poor results of FUE procedures compared to the equivalent FUT procedure.

 

The wild claims that these clinics are doing something different is completely false. Demonstrably false. Wishful thinking, fantasy. You all are simply looking through the narrow window of internet websites like this. A site where opposition to FUE is met with vicious attack while even the mildest FUE result is applauded.

 

There are MANY poor FUE results on this site right now, yet they are never mentioned.

No doctor, including Dr. Bhatti has come on here and demonstrated that he is capable of doing ANYTHING differently than the FUE megasessionist of 14 years ago. And I KNOW he can't. So what "advances" ??? None. But FUE sycophants are not interested in the plain truth.

 

FUE is like a religion or cult for many FUE advocates on this site. Just read what some of these adherents write. They expose themselves with each barb they throw. Mindless hate, petty attacks, and complete intolerance for non-believers.

 

Dr. Feller,

 

Then you surely must find this website to be unethical since it recommends FUE only surgeons who do perform mega sessions and claim to get consistent good results. If they didn't get consistent good results, how could they be recommended?

[fortune11]

people who are satisfied w 50% yield to avoid a scar better be sure that their hair loss will not progress beyond a NW2 or 3 , or better hope that their "fall back " clean head shaven look won't become hopelessly outdated in 10 years time.