Jump to content
memzinla

1900 grafts with Dr. Luis Nader!

Recommended Posts

This is a difficult stage, as the HT hair is growing in at its own pace. Might be better trimming it to an even length, until it fills in a bit more.

 

Good that growth is under way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello!

 

I feel like my hair is barely starting to grow! I just started receiving compliments all this week about my hair! I'll be at the 4 month mark on April 28.

 

I kept cutting my hair to even it out, but decided to finally let it grow. I think the hairs that are long are the hairs that survived the shed. I have some hairs that are BARELY starting to grow.

 

Here are some pictures from this week.

 

IMG_1870.jpg

IMG_1914.jpg

IMG_1925.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks good. From what Ive read around the 4-5 month mark is when the growing begins. My appt with Nader is exactly a month away. My hair is similar to yours with 1500-2000 FUE recommended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hair looks good man.

I'm sitting in Dr Naders office right now and just had 2000 grafts extracted. Super stoked...he is a great guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did it go phegotgame14 and forbeshrn?? :)

 

I'm at 5.5 months! I'm wondering when the hair will become thicker. The hairs that survived are super long now. I cut some with scissors myself because it wasn't even. haha.

 

Here's a pic.

IMG_3693.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not too hopeful with this result. Very little going on at 5 months and too few grafts for a natural looking hairline moved that far down. Nothing from this surgeon impresses me, just seems like a close options for those in the US that don't want to pay US prices. Better options in Turkey and India at this price level.

 

The result that seems to draw people to him is Tom Forresters on Youtube and his result isn't great to begin with. Low density, way too perfectly rounded to look natural and a lot of multis in the hairline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah....I think you will see a lot more thickness around the 7 month mark.

My procedure went well. I had 2000 grafts placed in the front and 2000 grafts placed in the crown the following day. The accommodations were great as were the tacos both days. Dr Nader was very kind and continues to answer my texts. It was trippy looking at the same plate of tacos as the pics you posted and taking photos in the same hotel room your photo shows.

 

I was 8 weeks post op for the second day procedure yesterday and the shed is real. At this point it looks as though I may have even lost some of the native hair as well due to shock loss. Over all I think it will still turn out ok and I plan to return for around 2000 more grafts in a year or so depending on this result. I will likely post pictures in the future when I have time to sort through them all. I appreciate your updates and was encouraged by your early results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5.5 months is still early. My Nader transplants looked good at 5 months and great after about 8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ur hair is growing well .. doctor nader does good work .. I like that he does most of the work himself and only do one patient a day .. only thing I can see he can improve upon is dense packing the first few rows of the hairline to make it not as see through .. those first few rows consist of mainly singles n doubles so it needs to dense packed really tight so it won’t be see through , but with enough skill n forethought to still have good growth .. that’s what separates a good surgeon from an elite surgeon..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Not too hopeful with this result. Very little going on at 5 months and too few grafts for a natural looking hairline moved that far down. Nothing from this surgeon impresses me, just seems like a close options for those in the US that don't want to pay US prices. Better options in Turkey and India at this price level.

 

The result that seems to draw people to him is Tom Forresters on Youtube and his result isn't great to begin with. Low density, way too perfectly rounded to look natural and a lot of multis in the hairline.

 

 

I looked at your results after 5 months with Erdogan (1st procedure) & compared them to memzinla's and, frankly, his results look better than yours did at 5 months. And, as far as Tom Forrester goes, his results are close to the best anyone has seen, something which is testified to by the comments on his YT videos. Forrester's results are comparable to what I've seen from Lorenzo.

Edited by pedromanchaca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How did it go phegotgame14 and forbeshrn?? :)

 

I'm at 5.5 months! I'm wondering when the hair will become thicker. The hairs that survived are super long now. I cut some with scissors myself because it wasn't even. haha.

 

Here's a pic.

 

 

Looking good amigo. I see improvement/thickening also between April and June.

 

 

 

Thank you for the updates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I looked at your results after 5 months with Erdogan & compared them to memzinla's and, frankly, his results look better than yours did at 5 months. And, as far as Tom Forrester goes, his results are close to the best anyone has seen, something which is testified to by the comments on his YT videos.

 

 

Tom Forresters hairline is full of multi-hair grafts and without perfect density, fairly seethrough. Extremely straight as well which doesn't look natural (admittedly my hairline from my first procedure had this issue but I can hardly complain when I told him what I wanted). It's not a good result, but this is the most celebrated Nader result when the reality is I could find 20-30 better by Konior, Erdogan, Hasson + Wong, Freitas etc. He's also had two procedures and clearly it was very thin still after the first.

 

 

To say "and, as far as Tom Forrester goes, his results are close to the best anyone has seen" is to be a shill, a liar or someone who simply hasn't looked at a lot of results.

 

No issues if you think OPs results are better than mine at five months and mine certainly had a long way to go and a lot of improvement 5-7, but the reality is he has virtually no meaningful growth at 5.5 judging from the last photo. I had probably 50% at that stage. Sorry if that offends, but again you just sound like a dishonest shill.

 

And comparing Nader's results to Lorenzo? LOL, your aesthetic judgement is clearly questionable, and Lorenzo's gallery of 1000s of patient results is on another level to what is available from Nader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom Forresters hairline is full of multi-hair grafts and without perfect density, fairly seethrough. Extremely straight as well which doesn't look natural (admittedly my hairline from my first procedure had this issue but I can hardly complain when I told him what I wanted). It's not an awful result, but this is the most celebrated Nader result when the reality is I could find 20-30 better by Konior, Erdogan, Hasson + Wong, Freitas etc.

 

 

To say "and, as far as Tom Forrester goes, his results are close to the best anyone has seen" is to be a shill, a liar or someone who simply hasn't looked at a lot of results.

 

No issues if you think OPs results are better than mine at five months and mine certainly had a long way to go and a lot of improvement 5-7, but the reality is he has virtually no meaningful growth at 5.5 judging from the last photo. I had probably 50% at that stage. Sorry if that offends, but again you just sound like a dishonest shill.

 

 

Not offended in the least.

 

Attached is your pre-op from Procedure 1 & then Procedure 2, both wet for fair basis of comparison. Frankly, I don't see much improvement. What did you pay for that? You're saying you asked for an unnatural ("I told him what I wanted") result?

 

With regard to your posting of Forester's video & your attendant criticism, why is it that you chose a video where his hair is wet/semi-wet as opposed to, say, this video, where it is not: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGBtUcmN-R4?

 

Even in the video you picked, Forester says the thickness he achieved is as good as when he had "a full head of hair".

 

If we take you, pre-op, put you next to Forester, pre-op, and then compare you both a year after your procedures, it would be a waste of time arguing who achieved better results because it is so obvious. As mentioned already, memzinla's results at 5 months look better than yours did at that same point with Erdogan.

 

Now, with regard to your mention of all the other doctors in contrast to Nader, I ask you:

 

1. Do they post their failures/not-so-good results or just their successes?

 

2. Where are the examples of their failures/not-so-good results?

 

3. What is the ratio of their successes to failures/not-so-good results?

 

I don't dispute that there isn't a large body of accessible FUE results from Nader, but some of the results I've seen are good work. To argue that what amounts to failure to run an office/operation well (Nader not posting FUE surgical results on a website as other operations are diligent to do) is proof of poor surgical skill/results is pure balderdash.

 

"but the reality is he has virtually no meaningful growth at 5.5 judging from the last photo. I had probably 50% at that stage"

 

Its obvious that's not the case when you put his pre-op side-by-side with his 5.5. With regard to your 50% claim, even your 6 month photos (except the ones where you combed your hair forward) don't bear that out. Sorry if that offends, but you just sound/seem dishonest.

attachment-1.thumb.jpg.7551f6db33157612e5aad32a9b98cbd4.jpg

attachment.thumb.jpg.40f7f8da45b45ca6fceb26741c4b939d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Not offended in the least.

 

Attached is your pre-op from Procedure 1 & then Procedure 2, both wet for fair basis of comparison. Frankly, I don't see much improvement. What did you pay for that? You're saying you asked for an unnatural ("I told him what I wanted") result?

 

With regard to your posting of Forester's video & your attendant criticism, why is it that you chose a video where his hair is wet/semi-wet as opposed to, say, this video, where it is not: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGBtUcmN-R4?'>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGBtUcmN-R4?

 

Even in the video you picked, Forester says the thickness he achieved is as good as when he had "a full head of hair".

 

If we take you, pre-op, put you next to Forester, pre-op, and then compare you both a year after your procedures, it would be a waste of time arguing who achieved better results because it is so obvious. As mentioned already, memzinla's results at 5 months look better than yours did at that same point with Erdogan.

 

Now, with regard to your mention of all the other doctors in contrast to Nader, I ask you:

 

1. Do they post their failures/not-so-good results or just their successes?

 

2. Where are the examples of their failures/not-so-good results?

 

3. What is the ratio of their successes to failures/not-so-good results?

 

I don't dispute that there isn't a large body of accessible FUE results from Nader, but some of the results I've seen are good work. To argue that what amounts to failure to run an office/operation well (Nader not posting FUE surgical results on a website as other operations are diligent to do) is proof of poor surgical skill/results is pure balderdash.

 

"but the reality is he has virtually no meaningful growth at 5.5 judging from the last photo. I had probably 50% at that stage"

 

Its obvious that's not the case when you put his pre-op side-by-side with his 5.5. With regard to your 50% claim, even your 6 month photos (except the ones where you combed your hair forward) don't bear that out. Sorry if that offends, but you just sound/seem dishonest.

 

 

"Attached is your pre-op from Procedure 1 & then Procedure 2, both wet for fair basis of comparison. Frankly, I don't see much improvement. What did you pay for that?

 

Don't act like you're making a "fair" comparison when you're not even using photos from the same angle and they're both right there to do so. I'll attach them for reference among others. Again, it's fine to support your surgeon and speak in hyperbole occasionally, but you outright sound either delusional or like a paid shill.

 

"You're saying you asked for an unnatural ("I told him what I wanted") result?"

 

Obviously I didn't say this, but its not immediately obvious how a hairline design should be before you see it grown out. Drawn on doesn't give the same impression.

 

"With regard to your posting of Forester's video & your attendant criticism, why is it that you chose a video where his hair is wet/semi-wet as opposed to, say, this video, where it is not: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGBtUcmN-R4?

 

Even in the video you picked, Forester says the thickness he achieved is as good as when he had "a full head of hair"."

 

I chose his latest update, also note this is after TWO procedures and still is somewhat see through. His hair doesn't look wet there either. The idea that its as good as when he had a full head of hair? Firstly that's physically impossible, secondly its after two procedures.

 

"If we take you, pre-op, put you next to Forester, pre-op, and then compare you both a year after your procedures, it would be a waste of time arguing who achieved better results because it is so obvious. "

 

You do realise he has had TWO procedures?

 

 

In the attached photo his is clearly still see-through in very dull lighting, in mine as seen below it clearly isn't.

 

"As mentioned already, memzinla's results at 5 months look better than yours did at that same point with Erdogan."

 

He has virtually no meaningful growth at 5.5 months. Not sure what you're looking at but I can't believe you're anyone but a paid rep if you believe his growth for this stage is good. Mine still had a long way to go but the areas weren't completely baron and still gave thin coverage. OP has zero coverage in the recipient at this point and zero consistency of density. My photos were also in direct sunlight, his isn't.

 

"Now, with regard to your mention of all the other doctors in contrast to Nader, I ask you:

 

1. Do they post their failures/not-so-good results or just their successes?

 

2. Where are the examples of their failures/not-so-good results?

 

3. What is the ratio of their successes to failures/not-so-good results?"

 

There are over ten times the amount of patient posted Erdogan, Lorenzo and HnW results for example compared to Nader most importantly, and well over that in clinic posted results. Despite the massive difference, I've seen only a single Nader result I've been impressed with which is Tom's; although again he has had TWO procedures and the first the result was lackluster. Despite being 10 times less patient posted results of Nader, I'd peg 40%ish as being poor results or below average in comparison to many top surgeons represented here, for the others mentioned at around 10% or less.

 

A quick Google search will find the not so many Nader results, I'm not going to post every person who went to him because I don't think that'd be appropriate but many are on this site and they aren't hard to find.

 

"To argue that what amounts to failure to run an office/operation well (Nader not posting FUE surgical results on a website as other operations are diligent to do) is proof of poor surgical skill/results is pure balderdash."

 

This is pure bullshit. If he can't even put up results on his own website and there are less than about 30 easy to find online (and close to half aren't great by any means) then there is a problem. Especially a lack of recent results. People are only going for the price, and the reality is there are better options in this price range

 

"Its obvious that's not the case when you put his pre-op side-by-side with his 5.5. With regard to your 50% claim"

 

Nothing to say to this. Delusional. I didn't say this was 50% either, it is well below it. Not going to bother responding further, clearly I've touched a nerve and your mind won't be changed.

 

Just a note, your passive aggressive writing style is hilarious considering how delusional your points are. You write like you're dropping constant bombshells when in reality you're just clarifying that you might need see an optometrist.

_1.thumb.jpg.01a1fc09f8e229ba7cd788668623191d.jpg

_11.thumb.jpg.38b4fdaae129608c62843bb2f803b2a8.jpg

_DSC6529.thumb.jpg.116ccc057486ff1cad4c4ed4af2f0cbe.jpg

_DSC7761.thumb.jpg.a6d96df15cce083f51d510cda2c05a9a.jpg

post.jpg.4330ce1addcefd793f7cf07e6a646815.jpg

IMG_8533-04-01-18-02-12.thumb.jpg.2024dab911dadd1f9bad8aec038bb860.jpg

aaaa.jpg.a8d749b040831264588b11b2ee9b75af.jpg

aa.jpg.045a768b46060e8c9d6e6ec813772757.jpg

Edited by JeanLDD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not offended in the least.

 

Attached is your pre-op from Procedure 1 & then Procedure 2, both wet for fair basis of comparison. Frankly, I don't see much improvement. What did you pay for that? You're saying you asked for an unnatural ("I told him what I wanted") result?

 

With regard to your posting of Forester's video & your attendant criticism, why is it that you chose a video where his hair is wet/semi-wet as opposed to, say, this video, where it is not: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGBtUcmN-R4?

 

Even in the video you picked, Forester says the thickness he achieved is as good as when he had "a full head of hair".

 

If we take you, pre-op, put you next to Forester, pre-op, and then compare you both a year after your procedures, it would be a waste of time arguing who achieved better results because it is so obvious. As mentioned already, memzinla's results at 5 months look better than yours did at that same point with Erdogan.

 

Now, with regard to your mention of all the other doctors in contrast to Nader, I ask you:

 

1. Do they post their failures/not-so-good results or just their successes?

 

2. Where are the examples of their failures/not-so-good results?

 

3. What is the ratio of their successes to failures/not-so-good results?

 

I don't dispute that there isn't a large body of accessible FUE results from Nader, but some of the results I've seen are good work. To argue that what amounts to failure to run an office/operation well (Nader not posting FUE surgical results on a website as other operations are diligent to do) is proof of poor surgical skill/results is pure balderdash.

 

"but the reality is he has virtually no meaningful growth at 5.5 judging from the last photo. I had probably 50% at that stage"

 

Its obvious that's not the case when you put his pre-op side-by-side with his 5.5. With regard to your 50% claim, even your 6 month photos (except the ones where you combed your hair forward) don't bear that out. Sorry if that offends, but you just sound/seem dishonest.

 

One more point on this too:

 

"What did you pay for that?"

 

Less than I would've for shittier results with Dr. Nader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a note, your passive aggressive writing style is hilarious considering how delusional your points are. You write like you're dropping constant bombshells when in reality you're just clarifying that you might need see an optometrist.

 

"You do realise he has had TWO procedures?"

 

The whole point was to compare you and Forester pre-op, procedure 1 (Forester being in a worse situation hair-wise than you) & then post-op around/near a year down the road and its not even a debate who got better results.

 

Not sure how you could possibly conclude I was talking about after 2 procedures given that your 2nd procedure hasn't even run its course.

 

"If he can't even put up results on his own website....then there is a problem."

 

This I don't dispute. The scheduling issue & his diligence to document his own work is problematic to say the least.

 

"Nothing to say to this. Delusional. I didn't say this was 50% either, it is well below it."

 

You said: "I had probably 50% at that stage."

 

Point was your claim of 50%, even at 6 months (based on your pictures), is, to put it mildly, an overstatement. More evidence of your inability to follow or perhaps deeper, more fundamental issues that affect reading comprehension.

 

Cheer up. I'm told Desitin does wonders for butthurt. I was tempted to avoid engaging this dialogue altogether given your demonstrated bitterness/anger in some of your other posts. At least you dispensed of all pretense and gave full expression to your vitriol/intolerance. Sadly, you make too easy of a target for others to toy with given your lack of self-awareness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not going to bother responding further, clearly I've touched a nerve and your mind won't be changed.

 

And then..

 

One more point on this too:

 

"What did you pay for that?"

 

Less than I would've for shittier results with Dr. Nader.

 

"Not going to bother responding further" --> "One more point on this too"

 

Clearly, a man of your word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for being emblem of what playing chess with a pigeon looks like.

 

Thanks for being the emblem of what a delusional idiot looks like. Unfortunately for you getting the last word in doesn't mean you win the argument.

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

×