Jump to content
Dr. Alan Feller

Why NOT to get an FUE- Interview with Dr. Willaim Reed- by Dr. Feller and Bloxham

Recommended Posts

Most FUE clinics claim that FUE is "the newest" and "latest"

procedure. It isn't. The procedure was reintroduced to North America 17 years ago. One can hardly call that "new". Would you call a car that was 17 years old "new"? Yet on the majority of FUE clinic websites they taut that they use the most "modern" method available of hair transplant. They claim it's "new" and "superior". The false implication that it is better than the "less-modern" procedure of FUT. Which of course it isn't.

 

Then there are the claims of "IMPROVED" FUE using robots, motorized punches and suction machines. Also untrue. In the end, these devices do not improve on simple manual FUE nor do they elevate the results of the FUE procedure to the level of FUT (the Gold Standard).

 

Nothing has changed since Dr. Rob Jones and I developed and shared North America's first revealed FUE procedure. This means we didn't pretend it was a State Secret like the few other doctors experimenting with FUE and use it as a marketing tool. Everything we figured out and developed we shared openly with the world. In fact, I performed the first FUE procedure that was video recorded and placed online back in 2002. And Dr. Jones and I performed the first FUE in a live surgical workshop during an ISHRS meeting back in 2003. Nothing has substantially changed that since time regarding the mechanics of the procedure itself. It is still exactly the same: A punch is used to score around the graft, a forceps is used to grab the graft, and the graft is ripped from the skin. Every clinic does it this way with the possible exception of one awful tool that tries to use suction instead of a forceps which injures the graft even more.

 

Here is the worlds first FUE procedure shown online in great detail and close up back in 2002. NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE THEN !

 

 

 

 

I called it a "perfect extraction" in the video because the graft LOOKED intact. But in reality it was significantly injured. There was just no way to see or measure the damage. But when you stop and look at what forces were inflicted on that graft compared to FUT it becomes clear to any rational physician that the FUE procedure is brutal by comparison. See how I had to grab that graft and hold pressure on the forceps as I pulled and pulled waiting for it to tear free ? THAT is what injures the FUE grafts and makes FUE outcomes very unreliable when compared to FUT. And of course the bigger the case the faster the doctor goes and the worse the compression and yanking forces become. There is no equivalent in the FUT procedure.

Edited by Dr. Alan Feller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rofl. How many celebrities, athletes, etc. get strip?

 

Nadal, Lebron, etc. all get FUE. Because strip sucks.

Jamie Foxx, Matthew McConaughey, Kevin Costner, Jermey Piven, Steve Carrell, Joel McHale, and Neil Diamond have all had transplants, and did them before the FUE hype.

 

man_file_1053548_2-jeremy-piven-1993-2008-1.jpg

 

5%20Jamie%20Foxx%202011-2014.png

 

9%20Joel%20McHale%20-2012.png

 

7%20Kevin%20Costner%202007-2013.png

 

8%20Steve%20Carell%202005-2013.png

 

6%20Matthew%20McConaughey%201999-2014.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where did you hear that Jean?

 

Only a comment on a Belgravia article. Of course not even close to a guarantee, but considering Konior has a waiting list of over a year and refused to send me any more FUE results when I asked for them as he said he didn't need to due to his massive client base I doubt he needs the abstract marketing.

 

"HERE Is the Final Word on MATTHEWs HT. I was an assistant to MM's agent at CAA in Los Angeles. Strictly speaking he had 3 agents but I became point person for main agent, helping w MM's sundry affairs, coordinating everything from doctors appts to real estate purchases and vacation travel plans. A Dr Konior in Chicago performed 2 different HT procedures on MM over 4 month period. I know because I coordinated w Konior's office. End of story."

 

Wouldn't be surprised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only a comment on a Belgravia article. Of course not even close to a guarantee, but considering Konior has a waiting list of over a year and refused to send me any more FUE results when I asked for them as he said he didn't need to due to his massive client base I doubt he needs the abstract marketing.

 

"HERE Is the Final Word on MATTHEWs HT. I was an assistant to MM's agent at CAA in Los Angeles. Strictly speaking he had 3 agents but I became point person for main agent, helping w MM's sundry affairs, coordinating everything from doctors appts to real estate purchases and vacation travel plans. A Dr Konior in Chicago performed 2 different HT procedures on MM over 4 month period. I know because I coordinated w Konior's office. End of story."

 

Wouldn't be surprised.

What's ridiculous about McConaughey is he lies about it, I can't tell if he's just trying to pull everyone's leg for fun or if he thinks everyone is stupid.

 

It's especially ironic for him to lie or try to pull the leg of Christian Slater, who has had an HT himself.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Piven has a gnarly scar, I don't know who did his procedure but closures were not his specialty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

 

 

"If a thin strip scar appears under a thick head of hair, does it really exist?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about how I did this . took photos of a respnse I got from

Dr Cooley clinic a few months back regarding the cherring picking of FUE grafts. You can read final reply below.

20170814_100808.thumb.jpg.bb87ffa77b1c2b89eaf88af57527c22f.jpg

20170814_102039_002.thumb.jpg.e6c52073e80d9e3bde3a0354fc48b9a1.jpg

20170814_102129.thumb.jpg.7cdc84ad59836bbd5ef8e0a2bf72b64e.jpg

20170814_102220.thumb.jpg.8299453026d7c779ffdfdcec15747932.jpg

Edited by Mick50

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again I apologise for doing it this way just i;m not sure how to add them directly from the site ,seem to be sideways as well.

As you can read form the conversation above they seem to be saying they can carry pick the grafts with the FUE method I could never understand this because as Dr Feller stated it's a blind procedure . If you don't want to get neck strain just click on my messages and you will find the post on page 6 ,there you will see the thread I commented on Dr Cooley 4000 grafts I think it is .

20170814_102331.thumb.jpg.9792247f7d03417d2cf5f3275857f44c.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The best decision you can make is to have an FUT procedure.

 

FUE is a blind procedure that rips the graft from the scalp.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This has always been my understanding of the FUE procedure but as you can read Dr Cooley's clinic clearly state this isn't the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The best decision you can make is to have an FUT procedure.

 

FUE is a blind procedure that rips the graft from the scalp.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This has always been my understanding of the FUE procedure but as you can read Dr Cooley's clinic clearly state this isn't the case.

 

I think Dr. Feller's point was that you can't see through the skin from the surface no matter what magnification you have. Cooley didn't really refute that in that quote. If he punches a 2 follicle graft out and it turns out to be a 4 he could very well have damaged the 2 hidden ones by using too small a punch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think Dr. Feller's point was that you can't see through the skin from the surface no matter what magnification you have. Cooley didn't really refute that in that quote. If he punches a 2 follicle graft out and it turns out to be a 4 he could very well have damaged the 2 hidden ones by using too small a punch.

 

Well exactly, that is the point, no matter how strong the magnification you can't see under the skin to cherry pick the grafts . Also it's not Dr Cooley responding it's a a clinic rep . In the sequence of responses the rep didn't refute anything, he's just stating that you can cherry pick FUE grafts as well as you can in FUT .

 

It still wasn't wasn't properly explained to me in the reps responses how you can cherry pick grafts using the FUE method in his final response he seemed to be mixing up the two methods together.,

Edited by Mick50

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well exactly, that is the point, no matter how strong the magnification you can't see under the skin to cherry pick the grafts . Also it's not Dr Cooley responding it's a a clinic rep . In the sequence of responses the rep didn't refute anything, he's just stating that you can cherry pick FUE grafts as well as you can in FUT .

 

I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has been very helpful and has changed my thinking and approach. However, it also has reduced my hope in future options. I know what the doctors will say: FUE is still viable if you can't use FUT. One must just choose a reputable surgeon. But this video goes a bit too far in disparaging the only other option to FUT. After watching this, it's hard to be enthused for FUE, whatever surgeon one might go to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That quote from Cooley has nothing to do with "cherry picking" FUE grafts.

 

It's just saying that he uses magnification to help him extract the grafts as they are, and then uses microscopes to determine how many follicles those extracted grafts actually have in them AFTER they have been removed and are on the dissecting table.

 

The reason he is doing this is precisely because he can't cherry pick. You applied the word and the concept of cherry picking, Cooley (or whoever wrote that quote) did not. There is nothing about it in the quote.

 

The reason he looks at the grafts after they have been removed is because he doesn't know how many follicles are actually in it. There may have been one hair coming out of the skin before the extraction and yet there might be one or two more follicles in the graft in different phases of growth where the hairs could not be seen. There is no way for him to know before he targets it. That's what makes FUE is a blind procedure. It is also why so many FUE hairlines have multiple hairs coming out of a graft instead of just being pure singles.

 

Also, he may target a three hair graft, but one or two of the follicles and/or their bulbs may be torn off during the extraction process. The only way to know is to look under a microscope after the fact. We've been doing this since we started doing FUE 17 years ago. Problem is MOST FUE clinics do not inspect their grafts under a microscope- or at all. If the target graft had three hairs coming out of it yet two are torn away leaving just one possibly functioning follicle it is still counted as a three hair graft. If you want to know how they justify this, just ask me.

 

There is no cherry picking in FUE. It is a totally blind procedure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piven has a gnarly scar, I don't know who did his procedure but closures were not his specialty.

 

Agreed. This is it. Although you would expect he went to a leading Dr?

IMG_2739.jpg.5a07a2f43b1b2cbda7c04fd288eea15b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Dr Fellers/Bloxhams response video they make some statements

 

At 3:30ish in the vid...Fut grafts 98% survival rate...fue grafts at best 85%, more like 50%.

 

So lets go ahead and average that... tho if you apply Dr Fellers tone then it should be closer to the 50% than the middle but for the sake of simplicity, average..., Round up the half point, 68%...so we're on average getting 30% more growth from from fut over fue for the same number of grafts used...so we're essentially saying 3k fue grafts = 2100 fut grafts.

 

at 4:43 Dr Bloxham emphatically nods, no real point in mentioning this but they did on the video so I felt I should as well :P

 

At 8:18 the docs say among a couple other things hair shafts will not grow as well and hairlines will not look as good using fue

 

so we're at this stage getting 30% less grafts and the ones that do grow are weaker which means weaker hairlines and I assume just coverage period...So if we're to go by this then 3k fue grafts wouldn't even equal 2100 fut grafts, Lets just super low ball it and say that of the survivors the fut grafts are just 5% better which Im sure the drs would say isn't the case its much higher but for the sake of the math, so now it takes 3150 fue grafts to equal 2100 fut grafts.

 

So just an informal poll among the members, when you see the likes of Lorenzo, Erdogan, Feriduni, Bisanga, Lupanzula, Diep all docs either approved here or known for excellence, given the same hair characteristics, over the same general area...are you guys seeing the top fut doctors being able to accomplish with 2k grafts what these guys do with 3 k grafts? Knowing full well you'll never have an exact same situation but I think we've seen enough similar type situations that we can extrapolate to form an opinion on this.

 

I'm not disputing anything the docs are saying in regards to fut being the better yielding procedure, nor am I questioning the points they made about the potential damage to fue grafts, gold standard talk but visually I am having trouble reconciling the numbers they lay out to the results I am seeing when it comes to clinics most of us would use. I am just curious to see what other members are seeing, are the numbers passing the eye test?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mikey,

You definitely get the participation award. I think few watched the video as intently as you did, though they certainly should. Doctors, too. Just received a phone call from an HT doctor who viewed it said BRAVO to the video.

 

Unfortunately your observations and analysis are not on point. Not because you are not intelligent or

not dedicated to figuring things out, but because you don't live in the HT world as a profession- nor perform the procedures yourself. You only see it from the outside lay view which is a completely different view. The extent of your HT field of view is this forum. But imagine if you were a doctor who saw thousands of hair transplant patients every year. Don't you think your perspective might change just a little bit ?

 

Apparently I can't convince you, and many others, about the truth of FUE. All I can do is convey the facts and hope they take root before too many more patients become FUE victims.

 

We have been getting great feedback from patients who have read these posts and viewed our videos and were thankful to be given the realities of both procedures. In the end they almost always choose FUT.

 

Please keep viewing our videos and commenting. Thanks !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think Dr. Feller's point was that you can't see through the skin from the surface no matter what magnification you have. Cooley didn't really refute that in that quote. If he punches a 2 follicle graft out and it turns out to be a 4 he could very well have damaged the 2 hidden ones by using too small a punch.

 

Correct !

 

http://www.fellermedical.com

Edited by Dr. Alan Feller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread has been very helpful and has changed my thinking and approach. However, it also has reduced my hope in future options. I know what the doctors will say: FUE is still viable if you can't use FUT. One must just choose a reputable surgeon. But this video goes a bit too far in disparaging the only other option to FUT. After watching this, it's hard to be enthused for FUE, whatever surgeon one might go to.

 

 

The video can't be going a bit too far if it is telling the truth. The truth is simply the truth.

 

Notice no FUE practitioners have come on to debate these statements ? They never do.

 

There is a simple reason for it...they can't.

 

FUE is the option if you can't do strip, but the overwhelming percentage of the population can do FUT.

 

It is unethical to only offer FUE to a patient who is a candidate for FUT because these two procedures are NOT equivalents any more than ice cream and diet ice cream are equivalents.

 

http://www.fellermedical.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr. Feller, Dr. Bloxham, (bverotti),

mikeyhwk made a point which I also addressed before.

I really liked the content from “the letter video” as it summed up most of the points which were discussed before in these long discussions. You even added one point (transection during strip) which was, as far as I know, only briefly discussed in the mFUE thread between Dr. Bloxham and myself.

But actually, I am not 100 % sure how serious the post was, which you were reading. If I am right and bverotti made some absurd statements just to make use of Dr. Fellers words and twist them around: I think this is really borderline in ethics, as he acts as a clinic representive (and some users could see his post as a fact). This is not a drama class with points for creative writing; it is a serious topic for many people here.

On the other hand: Dr. Feller/Bloxham, you are calling a lot of other clinics unethical for using FUE. You are also not speaking here as forum users, but as experts and even consider your opinion as facts. In this case other rules than to normal forum user have to be applied for you as well. Put this into perspective, it is unethical to me to (using our own words):

1) Post random (=always changing) growth rates of FUE (and FUT)

2) Not answering with clarification after being questioned about this numbers several times

3) Not backing them up with facts or not answering the serious questions to the few poor data which were

given

4) Answer in another thread with an offensive video and title after finally another clinic had joined the discussion (who raised similar questions).

5) Post “results” of a hollywood actor, who never admitted to have surgery, to promote FUT. You cannot know if he had FUE or FUT and on top he is probably using concealers/topic/partial wig etc. on this picture as it is from the Oscars event.

6) Not answering serious questions about negative aspects of FUT at all (like thinning in the donor) or even giving misleading answers.

7) Connect “damaged grafts” with existence of FUE clinics in the US

By the way: In one of your “strip scars” videos the strip can be easily recognized from far distance, just by the color contrast and hair directions. No need to comb though. This is exactly the reason, why many people are afraid of FUT. Most of us know that strip is superior to FUE in growth. But we (or at least I) want to make our own mind, based on facts and to weight “growth vs. stigma”.

I know, what now is going to happen: Dr. Feller is going to claim, that I am a laymen (just like he did with mikeyhwk and all other before that) and we cannot understand it or that he doesn't want to debate with us. But instead Dr. Feller/Dr. Bloxham, why don’t you just answer the questions? It is notthing personal, but we can understand the math without running a clinic ourselves. And we want to decide for ourselves if X-percent better growth in average is worth a strip scar or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The video can't be going a bit too far if it is telling the truth. The truth is simply the truth.

 

Notice no FUE practitioners have come on to debate these statements ? They never do.

 

There is a simple reason for it...they can't.

 

 

That is not true: Two FUE clinics came. How many FUT clinics joined the discussion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So just an informal poll among the members, when you see the likes of Lorenzo, Erdogan, Feriduni, Bisanga, Lupanzula, Diep all docs either approved here or known for excellence, given the same hair characteristics, over the same general area...are you guys seeing the top fut doctors being able to accomplish with 2k grafts what these guys do with 3 k grafts? Knowing full well you'll never have an exact same situation but I think we've seen enough similar type situations that we can extrapolate to form an opinion on this.

 

Mikey,

 

Interesting proposition. But think about it another way:

 

Some of the things FUE clinics do to make up for these lower yields and less dense results from FUE megasessions include:

 

-Bringing patients back in multiple times over a short period and only posting the "before" and the final "after" as the result while minimizing the number of procedures.

 

-Over-estimating graft count, over-harvesting the donor, and over-packing the recipient site area to the point where a patient may experience a real problem like necrosis.

 

Have any members seen this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×