FUT better option

[jolly]

hi guys

I know this can cause a intense debate here , but from what information I gathered , I can say with some degree of confidence that FUT grafts survive better than FUE grafts .

I have been meeting a few people who have had a FUE last 2/3 yrs and also meeting guys who had FUT last 2/3 yrs.

And in my observation the FUT guys had retained all their grafts when compared to FUE guys who complained loss of density after 2/3/ yrs.

I think its because of the fact that FUT Grafts are taken absolutely from the safe zone area , unlike FUE where the grafts are taken from the un-safe zones also as they cover a Larger area for harvesting grafts when compared to FUT ( Which is always confined to safe zone ONLY )

My opinion here is my own and I have done this small research on my own life experiences and meeting many ppl over the course of last 6 months .

Kindly please Note this is NOT TO START A DEBATE here , but a little observation  which might help other fellow members to take informed decision .

Also I am not saying that the grafts in FUE did not grow , what I am stating is that the grafts Fall out after 2/3/4 yrs as they are harvested from the larger donor area which effectively is NOT the golden Safe zone area.

For your info I have also done FUE , and my experience is also the same , Many of my grafts have fallen out after 4 years , following a Very good Result in the first 1/2 yrs .

[TrixGlendevon]

I agree with you but nevertheless, people have their preferences and beliefs. If they arrive to a different conclusion to us with the same information then who are we to say they're wrong?