FUT is more popular than FUE

[Dr. Alan Feller]

OR…

 

Dr. Bhatti has a point and your FUE technique is wrong Dr. Feller?

 

Seriously, call Dr. Koray, Bhatti or any other Turkish FUE doctor for some FUE tips.

 

You clearly need them.

 

The problem here is that Dr. Bhatti has not yet seen my FUE techniques. Neither have you.

 

He has only viewed a video of me performing the worlds first revealed FUE online back in 2002. Which is still far more gentile and delicate than that demonstrated in his recent video. The better FUE surgeons of today use slight variations on this approach, not anything like that mangling we all witnessed in the video.

 

And a video I put up five years ago of a device I invented, worked great, but no longer use. It's good for beginners, but a skilled manual hand can work far faster and more delicately.

 

I believe most of the Turkish FUE clinics are run by technicians and not doctors so you'll forgive me if I pass on seeking pointers from them.

[Mick50]

I would say there about 10 fairly well know clinics in Turkey where the actual Doctor does the work but sure there are more clinics where the techs do everything

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Ha ,just had an interesting some might say perverse thought how about if Dr Feller were to offer

someone an FUE mega transplant pro bono just to prove his theory I wonder if anyone would volunteer .

 

just adding a bit of humour here it gets a bit dark on this thread sometimes

 

Indeed Mick.

 

 

Edited August 16, 2015 by Dr. Alan Feller

[1978matt]

Here's a few I picked out of Lorenzo's with quite high numbers:

 

6223 hairs; 2.48 hairs/graft

7193 hairs; 2.24 hair per graft

9743 hairs; 2.56 hair/graft

5998 hairs; 2.72 hair per graft

6614 hairs; 2.36 hair per graft

4499 hairs; 2.42 hair per graft

..but admittedly I did find some in the low 2.0 range.

I totally agree with you about the targeted approach. Dr Konior showed me a magnified side on view of an FUT strip from a patient his techs were working on. What looked like a close bunched '3' was actually a '2' with a third follicle splaying off at 45 degrees. No 'Golden Harvest' technique is going to make it possible to identify this just by looking a the top of the scalp.

 

Matt,

FUE "appears' consistent on the forums because they are handpicked results and the poorer results posted by patients are simply ignored.

 

I'm not sure of the reality of those numbers you posted. But that said it's an interesting theory you put forward. It would explain why the moth-eaten effect becomes so prominent in so many of these FUE patients after even just one session. But it works against the FUE practitioner because if in fact they really are "cherry" picking multis, then what's left for the second FUE procedure? Or FUT procedure for that matter?

 

In reality, Matt, having performed FUE since 2001 I can say that FUE doctors target multi hair grafts because it's easier and more reliable to grab them. If one of the follicles is damaged during the extraction at least there are another one or two still left in it to justify the effort and get SOMETHING out to implant. When you go for singles you only get one shot. Break it and it's over. A multi gives you a second and sometimes third chance. But at what price? It's that price that is being ignored here.

 

FUE doctors know what's going on, but they aren't talking. They just point to happy patients and say everything is hunky dory. Remember when plug, scalp reductions, and flaps were in fashion. These practitioners did the very same thing. Simply point to the results of their happy patients and say the results speak for themselves and therefore there are no problems with the technique.

 

Where are these techniques today?

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Here's a few I picked out of Lorenzo's with quite high numbers:

 

6223 hairs; 2.48 hairs/graft

7193 hairs; 2.24 hair per graft

9743 hairs; 2.56 hair/graft

5998 hairs; 2.72 hair per graft

6614 hairs; 2.36 hair per graft

4499 hairs; 2.42 hair per graft

..but admittedly I did find some in the low 2.0 range.

I totally agree with you about the targeted approach. Dr Konior showed me a magnified side on view of an FUT strip from a patient his techs were working on. What looked like a close bunched '3' was actually a '2' with a third follicle splaying off at 45 degrees. No 'Golden Harvest' technique is going to make it possible to identify this just by looking a the top of the scalp.

 

Correct! Without x-ray vision "cherry picking" is a myth, or more accurately, a marketing ploy.

[irishsailor]

Correct! Without x-ray vision "cherry picking" is a myth, or more accurately, a marketing ploy.

 

Dr feller, you know I'm a strip patient all day long not because I wanted a linear scar, but because it's the best technique and well if you want, something in life , you have to be willing to give something in return, so I have no issues with my scar.

However would you say I was wrong going fue for teme points? I truly only went fue as I thought you could cherry pick the finer calibre of hair?

[TakingThePlunge]

When someone puts a video on this forum confirming Dr. Bhatti's vue, it is removed!

 

When someone speaks highly of his experience with Dr. Bhatti it is criticised or you are named a "Shill"

 

When someone puts a comment in a private chat to Dr. Bhatti, it is read and removed!

 

Seriously a problem with the freedom of speech and a serious breach of privacy

 

Darlinglocks,

 

I've already responded to some of these comments in the private message you sent me but I see you've added a couple of items to your list of complaints so I'll address everything here as well.

 

1. When someone puts a video on this forum confirming Dr. Bhatti's vue, it is removed!
    
   Not true. There are some particular physicians that we no longer host discussions of on our forum for various reasons. When someone makes a post that contains the names of these physicians they are filtered to our moderation cue and the poster is notified. That person may then edit the content and repost if they wish.
    
   The videos you are talking about were made by one such physician and, as such, are not permitted. It has nothing to do with what they may or may not support.
    
   
   
2. When someone speaks highly of his experience with Dr. Bhatti it is criticized or you are named a "Shill".
    
   Again, not true in the least. Perhaps you don't understand that Dr. Bhatti is recommended by our community because we believe he is performing world class FUE. There are many, many positive reviews of Dr. Bhatti on our forum by sincere members whose motives have never been questioned. Some of them were written by me as I am also his patient.
    
   However, when someone behaves outside the norm of forum etiquette by hijacking threads about other doctors and posting copious promotional links in support of another physician, their motives will become suspect. That is the nature of this medium and the nature of this business. I gave you some very simple advice as to how you might share your experience in a positive way without drawing negative attention. Inexplicably, you've chosen to ignore my advice.
    
   
   
3. When someone puts a comment in a private chat to Dr. Bhatti, it is read and removed!
    
   As I explained in the very rude private message you sent me, the issue I contacted you about had nothing to do with any private messages you may have sent to Dr. Bhatti and I have no idea what you may or may not have said to him privately. The issue I messaged you about was the post you attempted to make (3 times) PUBLICLY to this discussion that referenced a physician we no longer permit discussions about.
    
   One more time for good measure...I am not reading your private messages and I have no interest in what you say privately. My job is to moderate what is posted publicly to his forum. I hope that is clear now.
   
   

[fortune11]

1978matt raises a very good pt regarding number of hairs per follicle being higher for FUE than FUT. One could say then FUE could actually work better for non hairlines cases (hairlines need more 1s than 2s or 3s) , notwithstanding the lower yield.

 

I am also intrigued by what Dr Bhatti said about SPEED of extraction being an asset to his procedure as opposed to a problem, which is the general negative impression I have from watching that video posted . Frankly, I have not heard this anywhere else, although people have certainly mentioned that amount of time grafts spend outside the scalp needs to be minimized . Do others have thought on this ?

[Melvin- Admin]

I gave Dr. Bhatti multiple chances to debate me on specific points of the FUE procedure and he refused to engage; choosing instead to answer my questions with three of his own that were unrelated and off topic to distract from not answering my questions directly.

 

Then he officially resigned the debate. Understandable since he was in an untenable position.

 

But quitting never looks good so he thought putting up a video of how he performs his FUE procedure would impress the public and somehow demonstrate that grafts are indeed not subjected to more damage during FUE.

 

 

But it backfired. He underestimated how much the lay public could see for themselves. What he really demonstrated was a procedure that is clearly not only more injurious than FUT, but far more injurious than even the standard FUE that I and other practitioners perform. And why is this so? Well for one obvious reason at least: SPEED.

 

What is going on in that video is not a debatable issue. It is prima facia proof of what I have been saying on this thread, and even this site, for 14 years about the FUE procedure in general. FUE grafts are twisted, squeezed, pulled and even yanked violently during the FUE procedure; whereas none of this trauma is visited on any FUT graft.

 

But he already posted his video to some hideous reviews and can't take it down. Notice not a single complimentary comment from anyone- including his vocal supporters, paid reps, or fellow FUE megasession colleagues. Dr. Vories ? Any comments?

 

So the best he could do now is to post as many before/after pictures as he can to get as far away from that video as he can. Sure, he can show a stack of before/after result-which are of course handpicked and try to imply the ends justify the means. But before/after photos don't show how many grafts are wasted due to the trauma of the procedure. And to deny the trauma would be to deny what can easily be seen in that video. And that's impossible. Even to the lay eye.

 

This is why I say that no matter how good or bad an FUE result looks, the equivalent FUT would have been better with less graft waste and less donor damage. And the reason for this is supported by his video itself. FUT grafts do not go through the gauntlet the FUE grafts in his video do.

 

Now, he can go into long long posts where he dissembles reality and sets up straw dummies to knock down and attack me personally to save face, but that video does all the talking.

 

You refuse to acknowledge Dr. Bhattis last comment hmm wonder why, did you see the video links I posted on page 77 before they were removed? A lot of valid points were brought up, unfortunately this site can not discuss this physician. The biggest point raised is the hair growing in unnatural direction where the scar is at, the unpredictability of the scar widening, the fact that when you have a distorted strip scar you have to waste Grafts on the scar that could've gone to the top of the head, this is a waste of grafts what are your thoughts, he also stated that many physicians like yourself preach FUT because they have not taken the time to master the skill. Basically, he feels FUE gives the best aesthetic result when performed correctly, there is no strip scar, no chance of the scar widening, and the yield he states is just as good, he stated he conducted a small study and found that out of 100 grafts 96 of them grew, this is by far better than the 75% mentioned. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this, from a physician who started off FUT he switched to only FUE.

Edited August 16, 2015 by Melvin-HTsoon

[Dr. Alan Feller]

HTsoon,

 

Why have you assigned yourself as Dr. Bhatti's guardian? Such a loud and nasty one, too. Do you not think he can speak for himself and that he NEEDS your help?

 

I think you need to lay back a bit. It's ok. Take a breath. This isn't a court room. Nothing is going to happen to your doctor. If you don't agree with what I"m writing you are more than welcome to laugh and walk away.

 

If Dr. Bhatti has valid concerns about strip method or anything else then he can start his own thread and you can go with him. If it gets as many views, responses and interest as this one then it may have merit. But the issues he brings are up are not valid, not of concern to anyone, never been a thread of interest on this site or any other in the past, and are only invented and used as mere distraction. And he knows this.

 

I haven't heard your opinion as to the content of Dr. Bhatti's video. Was it what you thought it would be? Any issues come to mind? or would you be content having that done to your precious donor area?

 

Here it is again in case you missed it:

 

Edited August 16, 2015 by Dr. Alan Feller

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Dr feller, you know I'm a strip patient all day long not because I wanted a linear scar, but because it's the best technique and well if you want, something in life , you have to be willing to give something in return, so I have no issues with my scar.

However would you say I was wrong going fue for teme points? I truly only went fue as I thought you could cherry pick the finer calibre of hair?

 

Irish,

 

Not to be concerned. I know exactly where you're coming from. I remember you well.

 

You cannot cherry pick finer caliber hairs because what appears "fine" in caliber today may be quite thick tomorrow as the hair moves through the growth cycle. If one picks hair on the outside of the donor area, then those hairs are looking finer because they are dying. Think of these low areas of the donor as the "hairline" in the back. It too recedes and does so by miniaturizing the hairs first. Just as it does in the front hairline. That's why I've always chided when I read about HT doctors claiming to take hairs from the nape of the neck to produce finer hairs for the hairline. They are on their way out. That's WHY they are fine.

 

Also, since you had already had a linear strip scar, I see no reason why you should have bothered with FUE. It wouldn't make any difference to how the donor area looked if you had gone for one more FUT.

[adonix]

Irish,

 

Not to be concerned. I know exactly where you're coming from. I remember you well.

 

You cannot cherry pick finer caliber hairs because what appears "fine" in caliber today may be quite thick tomorrow as the hair moves through the growth cycle. If one picks hair on the outside of the donor area, then those hairs are looking finer because they are dying. Think of these low areas of the donor as the "hairline" in the back. It too recedes and does so by miniaturizing the hairs first. Just as it does in the front hairline. That's why I've always chided when I read about HT doctors claiming to take hairs from the nape of the neck to produce finer hairs for the hairline. They are on their way out. That's WHY they are fine.

 

Also, since you had already had a linear strip scar, I see no reason why you should have bothered with FUE. It wouldn't make any difference to how the donor area looked if you had gone for one more FUT.

 

Seriously Alan, temple points take what, >1000 grafts? And you would recommend strip? Crazy..

[hairshopeing]

Check out feriduni hair to graft numbers on fue he uses mainly 1s and 2s very few multiple hair grafts! And gets fantastic results!

[Melvin- Admin]

HTsoon,

 

Why have you assigned yourself as Dr. Bhatti's guardian? Such a loud and nasty one, too. Do you not think he can speak for himself and that he NEEDS your help?

 

I think you need to lay back a bit. It's ok. Take a breath. This isn't a court room. Nothing is going to happen to your doctor. If you don't agree with what I"m writing you are more than welcome to laugh and walk away.

 

If Dr. Bhatti has valid concerns about strip method or anything else then he can start his own thread and you can go with him. If it gets as many views, responses and interest as this one then it may have merit. But the issues he brings are up are not valid, not of concern to anyone, never been a thread of interest on this site or any other in the past, and are only invented and used as mere distraction. And he knows this.

 

I haven't heard your opinion as to the content of Dr. Bhatti's video. Was it what you thought it would be? Any issues come to mind? or would you be content having that done to your precious donor area?

 

Here it is again in case you missed it:

 

 

 

I've never been a patient of Dr. Bhatti the physician who I was speaking about can not be mentioned on here, you have plenty of posters on here defend you when they feel something is not right, some posters have even personally attacked my results, do I care?? No this is a public forum, I have the right to voice my opinion, I think it's logical to answer concerns regarding strip surgery if you are comparing both procedures.

 

What I think and actually see going on, is concerns have been raised about FUE, however any concern raised about FUT is swept aside no answers, so how is this an equal debate? Bill had kept this thread open as a way to interact with physicians and hopefully hear the pros and cons on BOTH procedures not just one. So far it hasn't been that way at all, it's been allegations against one procedure without answering any valid concerns from the procedure you're advocating, as a patient this is concerning.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

I've never been a patient of Dr. Bhatti the physician who I was speaking about can not be mentioned on here, you have plenty of posters on here defend you when they feel something is not right, some posters have even personally attacked my results, do I care?? No this is a public forum, I have the right to voice my opinion, I think it's logical to answer concerns regarding strip surgery if you are comparing both procedures.

 

What I think and actually see going on, is concerns have been raised about FUE, however any concern raised about FUT is swept aside no answers, so how is this an equal debate? Bill had kept this thread open as a way to interact with physicians and hopefully hear the pros and cons on BOTH procedures not just one. So far it hasn't been that way at all, it's been allegations against one procedure without answering any valid concerns from the procedure you're advocating, as a patient this is concerning.

 

Nobody "defends" me. I have had some supporters every now and again, but none based on deep emotion as the FUE supporters have demonstrated for their cause. It's very unpleasant to tell the truth sometimes and people don't want to hear it. I take a lot of hits for it.

 

Nobody should have personally attacked your results. That was wrong and I don't support it. I try to steer clear of referring to individual results as it is hurtful and completely unproductive. Besides, every doctor has patients who don't grow as well as others.

 

You are concerned that FUE issues are being discussed and FUT issues are begin swept aside. But you are treating the two as if they are both equivalents. Like they both just arrived on the scene at the same time and one is getting unfairly critiqued.

 

But that's not the case. FUT already went though it's vetting process long before you got here and does not have to do it again. It is the proven Gold Standard of HT. There would be no HT if not for high level FUT.The FUT issues you are referring to are not issues, they are inventions. That has all been sorted out years ago. That's why nobody participates when a wild FUT claim is made by the FUE camp- they know it is hollow. People new to this site may not realize that, but the veterans and the doctors know it.

 

The only doctors making issues out of modern day FUT are the ones who are trying to elevate themselves and their FUE practices.

 

Fundamentally, the only "advantage" of FUE is lack of a linear scar, this has not changed in 14 years. That's the up side, but it inherently comes with a downside for growth and donor damage.This also hasn't changed in 14 years.

 

And since MOST patients are not going to buzz cut their hair after a procedure, why take the risk of FUE? And after viewing so many results on this site alone it has become obvious that these patients can't shave their heads either because of the moth eaten effect caused by grabbing out so many multi hair grafts thoughout the donor area anyway. So that "advantage" is also diminished. So what's the point of FUE at all?

 

If you are a person who doesn't care about more injury to the grafts and a lower yield and a more damaged donor area, then go for FUE.

 

I'm a patient and an HT doctor. I only do strip on myself. Never FUE simply because I don't have the donor area to gamble with. Do you think I would pick an inferior procedure to be performed on me?

 

Still wondering what your thoughts are on the technique shown in the Bhatti video. Would you consent to have that technique performed on your donor area?

[FUE2014]

Dr Feller have you ever asked Dr Lorenzo (1) Why he gave up FUT and (2) How he achieves the yields he does with mega FUE sessions ?

[Mick50]

Dr Feller, if someone's had a mega session of say 4000 FUE grafts is FUT

still an option?

I presume it depends on the remaining density of the donor, or is it generally not a viable option?

Edited August 17, 2015 by Mick50

[TakingThePlunge]

In my opinion, this discussion is as much about FUE vs. FUE as it is FUE vs. FUSS. What I mean by that is, putting strip aside, Dr. Feller advocates for small FUE sessions (<1000 grafts) and is opposed to FUE mega-sessions.

 

Now, much has been made of the speed and handling of the procedure depicted in the video Dr. Bhatti shared as compared to other examples depicting slower and apparently more methodical extractions and my opinion is the same one that I shared in an earlier post. I'm much more interested in what this gentleman's results turn out like and how satisfied he is with those results than analyzing the manner in which those results are produced.

 

Now, we may never see that patient's final result or hear from him so that's an answer that we may never get. But we have seen numerous photos of Dr. Bhatti's impressive results.

 

How do we know we can trust these photos? Do FUE practitioners cherry pick the results they post online? Probably...and so do many FUSS practitioners. Why wouldn't they? I have seen examples of clinics posting subpar results for educational purposes but this is not the norm.

 

So, to balance the scales a bit we look to results shared by the patients themselves. But, the problem is we only see a very small sample of the total number of hair transplant cases performed worldwide. If we consider the number of popular clinics that are booked months in advance, that's a lot of FUE and FUSS cases that never come online to share their results, either good or bad.

 

So, again, at this stage I have to form my opinion from my personal experience as each you who has had surgery has done as well.

 

My 2400 graft FUE did not feel rushed. I was perfectly relaxed and, from my perspective, doctor and techs handled me with the utmost care. My last update at 5 months post-op speaks for itself. My next update will be in about a week. So far I'm very pleased with my decision.

 

Getting back to speed. If we do accept FUE mega-sessions as appropriate and consistently successful in the right hands, isn't it a given that the team will need to work quickly? Obviously, speed is far less of a factor with a 750 graft FUE than it is with a 2500 graft FUE. In other words, you can't have FUE mega-sessions without speed.

 

Again, in my opinion, the single most important question that needs to be asked when evaluating a hair transplant surgeon is...Does the vast majority of this clinic's patients receive a visually appealing and natural result that makes them happy. Until that can be quantified, I don't see the value in these endless debates.

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

As we all know the best in one field cannot be compared with the worst in another.

Traction, torsion and compression does not happen in my practice but Dr Feller will not understand.

Scars of FUE are minimally apparent when compared to the best strip scars.

For instance see this FUE case I am doing today. He underwent an FUE procedure around 2800 grafts 11 months back. He is a young Caucasian male who has come for some addition of density (500 grafts only) in the midscalp area where he has started to bald.

His result after one year of FUE is at-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCKu...k&spfreload=10

Dr. Bhatti- 2889 FUE grafts for hairline, midscalp and temples - Forum By and for Hair Loss Patients

 

I show his scars clicked today. And he is just a random case from today's surgeries (the newspaper proves that) and not picked from my large storehouse collection of FUE/FUT scars.

 

You can also see the other patient I did a few weeks back. We posted his pictures yesterday-

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/180591-dr-bhatti-1800-fue-grafts-patient-intense-scarring.html

Comparisons are odious you would say !

 

 

Edited August 17, 2015 by Dr. Tejinder Bhatti

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

 

If you are a person who doesn't care about more injury to the grafts and a lower yield and a more damaged donor area, then go for FUE.

 

I'm a patient and an HT doctor. I only do strip on myself.

 

Dr Feller count the grafts here... how many have not grown in your opinion. What is the yield you think?

The details of the case are at-

Please note that a conversation of cross recriminations is not the right way to proceed scientifically. I challenge you to share your FUE case of the day every single day till this thread is alive and kicking and I will reciprocate. Lets see what bad cases you get daily from FUE, Please post and show and so will I.

Let the members on the forum decide for themselves. Plain rhetoric has no place on this thread. Members want to see real stuff now. They are bored of your semantics.

See the TRP rating of this thread has begun to dip.

Lets breathe some life into it, Sir.

We all want to see the FUE cases you get so commonly with bad scars.

You show yours in realtime and I will mine.

 

Respectfully,

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

In my opinion, this discussion is as much about FUE vs. FUE as it is FUE vs. FUSS. What I mean by that is, putting strip aside, Dr. Feller advocates for small FUE sessions (<1000 grafts) and is opposed to FUE mega-sessions.

 

Now, much has been made of the speed and handling of the procedure depicted in the video Dr. Bhatti shared as compared to other examples depicting slower and apparently more methodical extractions and my opinion is the same one that I shared in an earlier post. I'm much more interested in what this gentleman's results turn out like and how satisfied he is with those results than analyzing the manner in which those results are produced.

 

Now, we may never see that patient's final result or hear from him so that's an answer that we may never get. But we have seen numerous photos of Dr. Bhatti's impressive results.

 

How do we know we can trust these photos? Do FUE practitioners cherry pick the results they post online? Probably...and so do many FUSS practitioners. Why wouldn't they? I have seen examples of clinics posting subpar results for educational purposes but this is not the norm.

 

So, to balance the scales a bit we look to results shared by the patients themselves. But, the problem is we only see a very small sample of the total number of hair transplant cases performed worldwide. If we consider the number of popular clinics that are booked months in advance, that's a lot of FUE and FUSS cases that never come online to share their results, either good or bad.

 

So, again, at this stage I have to form my opinion from my personal experience as each you who has had surgery has done as well.

 

My 2400 graft FUE did not feel rushed. I was perfectly relaxed and, from my perspective, doctor and techs handled me with the utmost care. My last update at 5 months post-op speaks for itself. My next update will be in about a week. So far I'm very pleased with my decision.

 

Getting back to speed. If we do accept FUE mega-sessions as appropriate and consistently successful in the right hands, isn't it a given that the team will need to work quickly? Obviously, speed is far less of a factor with a 750 graft FUE than it is with a 2500 graft FUE. In other words, you can't have FUE mega-sessions without speed.

 

Again, in my opinion, the single most important question that needs to be asked when evaluating a hair transplant surgeon is...Does the vast majority of this clinic's patients receive a visually appealing and natural result that makes them happy. Until that can be quantified, I don't see the value in these endless debates.

 

 

Thank you, David.

Good to know I was not 'brutal' with you!

[lileli]

I am no expert but isn't some speed needed in order to minimize the extent the grafts are out of the body?

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

I am no expert but isn't some speed needed in order to minimize the extent the grafts are out of the body?

 

You hit the nail on the head "lileli".

Thank you for bringing up the topic.

Most practitioners do not understand this since they consider a mere 1000 FUE grafts as megasessions.

What I have shown in the video is a megasession, more than 5 times the size of this definition done over 2 days.

If there is no speed, the viability of grafts shall go down and will lead to poor growth and eventual yield will suffer. This is the reason why most clinics have not been able to improve their FUE yield.

The video is proof that in my practice and in those of many leading FUE megasession hair transplant clinics worldwide, the 3 forces alluded to do not occur.

It is evident from the excellent FUT-like growth we routinely get and publish.

Also, please consider the fact that the "stack" of before and after pictures have not been posted by my clinic but by happy patients themselves.

 

You may be happy to know that well researched and discerning members of this forum have appreciated my posting this impromptu video.

 

I have received unprecedented enquiries from prospective clients in the last 3 days!

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

I am also intrigued by what Dr Bhatti said about SPEED of extraction being an asset to his procedure as opposed to a problem......I have not heard this anywhere else, although people have certainly mentioned that amount of time grafts spend outside the scalp needs to be minimized .

 

"fortune11" speed is the singlemost essential factor which gives FUE in general and FUE megasessions in particular a higher yield almost comparable to FUT.

Edited August 17, 2015 by Dr. Tejinder Bhatti

[Dr. Alan Feller]

David,

Unfortunately Dr. Bhatti is incapable of staying on point as usual. I don't address him directly anymore because he had his chance and chose to play games instead. By the way, he still hasn't retracted his false charge against me. Nor apologized for it.

 

If I believed FUE procedures were as good as FUT procedures I would be doing them everyday and happy to post the results. But I don't for the reasons I made this thread. I've already been down this road ten years ago, I know what happens.

 

You cannot compare results of different people and different doctors easily, that's why I don't bother doing it. Or shall I start posting photos of patients who have experienced the poor growth with FUE that I predicted. There is no shortage of them on this site.

 

Instead, it is much more direct to look and study the method used to remove the grafts. It is common sense, no matter how much someone tries to blur the lines. that mishandled grafts will not grow as well or as consistently as more delicately handled grafts. In order to overcome the loss from mishandled grafts one must take and implant MORE hair than is necessary. This also means more donor scarring.

 

So if the discussion is focused on the different detrimental forces that act on the follicles, rather than subjective before/after photos one can come to a VERY scientific conclusion based on undeniable and observable information. That video Dr. Bhatti posted IS that undeniable observable information.

 

In a scientific debate it isn't the "ends justify the means". It's study the process from the ground up and look for the flaws when compared to another method.

 

So look at the poor FUE results out there. What happened if not graft injury?

 

If a doctor or inventor can come up with a way to get grafts out safely , much less quickly, then I would adopt it in a second. But nobody has done this to date. Nothing has changed in 14 years. Yes, if you do enough cases you will have enough good cases to APPEAR to be improving on the FUE procedure. But a look at that video shows everyone that this is not the case.