Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lennney said:

I don't think you read my post. You wouldn't have mentioned this last bit. I mentioned I was happy as-is. Am I typing for the benefit of myself? Are you reading any of this?

I can't help my hair falling forward, after a certain length, hair falls. I appreciate Melvin saying that, but there were others who said this earlier. I think such results are impressive at 5 months post op, don't you? Thank you for the complement of being fine before, but I was truly balding. I looked at minimum 5 years older (I got called 23. That was flattering). I picked Bhatti partially for the temple work. Temples are coming in nicely. jan8.thumb.jpg.51ca98dbbe7b00a00d39ee9d48eac7c2.jpgJun82.thumb.jpg.b90f90d37d7cc08b7dffde3fdeef10b8.jpg

I don't think you read any of my of my post

I know you’re satisfied. I read your entire post. I just think that in hindsight you might not be satisfied with the result. I think you will look fantastic if you get a second transplant to improve the density. Yes, the shape of the temples look good, but I’m not sure about the angle of implantation. My temple point implants are going off at a totally different direction from the native hair around them. I think you should consider another doc and fill in for better density. Yes, you were balding before the transplant but I think a natural look is better than having an unnaturally thin frontal zone that is so low. You looked good and didn’t necessarily need a transplant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, AltonMeyer2 said:

When we speak about physiology, any case of a severe complication will have far reaching effects not limited to only the grafts not growing out.

What's your source? I named mine. If you want specifics, like you asked, speak in specifics. You can't use feelings in this discussion anymore.

22 minutes ago, AltonMeyer2 said:

Did you take a look at the patients in the study that had those complications? They need medical and cosmetic help. 

I did. Go back and look at figure 4. It is a textbook case of "I'm getting the early signs of growth" zits and typical shedding. The symptom is the same, but the effect is not.

 

32 minutes ago, AltonMeyer2 said:

I've been on this forum since a year and I'm yet to see someone facing such a severe case of folliculitis. A completely irrelevant quote when I'm clearly speaking in the context of @Nebulosity@Badresults@johanchicago and several other Bhatti Candidates. Who faced no such issues on their scalp, and yet were told that its their fault that the procedure failed.

Nebulosity has results that are improving daily. His 6 months is slower than many, but miles better than his earlier posts. Look back (I did) and tell me there is no improvement. We're talking about a guy who isn't at the 12 month mark, let alone the 18 month mark. Pump the brakes. 

Badresults did indeed have poor results. But I pose your question back to you. "We also know that @Badresults temples grew in, (perfect scalp), the top didn't. Case of point number 4?" Really, you really think that  Bhatti managed to get the punches perfect on both temples and fuck up the top. How likely is that? Surely there isn't a physiological reason (like we've seen with crowns that refuse implants) that is responsible? Use your logic for a second, just entertain the idea that a section (regardless of who implants) of a patient's head will reject the implant.

For Johanchicago I've already made my point on page 1 of (t)his post. He doesn't grow his hair out (personal choice, but his prerogative) and his results don't look impressive at 9 months. I do concede that he doesn't have incredible growth, but I will make my point 1. He doesn't allow himself to create the illusion of density with a near-buzz cut haircut and 2. He isn't done with his result. In my opinion, he wallows in despair. I bet my paycheck against yours that him growing his hair out for the next 4 months will look (quantitative and yet qualitative measurement) 5-10 years younger. I am still interested in seeing him grow his hair out, even if he isn't.

49 minutes ago, AltonMeyer2 said:

 

http://www.jcasonline.com/article.asp?issn=0974-2077;year=2018;volume=11;issue=4;spage=182;epage=189;aulast=Kerure

 

  1. Donor-site depletion: Irrespective of whether scoring was performed by manual, motorized, or robotic punches, the risk of a clinically apparent depletion of hair from the donor region because of aggressive and nonuniform harvesting is observed. This may create an iatrogenic “moth-eaten” or “pseudo-syphilitic” appearance [Figure 2].[7]


     
  2. Pinpoint scaring: It is a misconception that FUE is a scarproof technique. The punch used to harvest each follicular grouping may create pinpoint white atrophic macules [Figure 3]. In the hands of a skilled surgeon, most of them are not visible to the human eye, and even if visible, they are far less noticeable than a linear scar of FUT for most patients. Nevertheless, patients should be informed about the possibility that these pinpoint white scars or hypopigmented macules may be visible on close inspection with short hair.[7]

    This is more important in patients with skin color types 4–6, common in India, where hypopigmentation is more prevalent. It should be understood that FUE not just removes hair from the scalp but also removes melanocytes, and it is a well-established fact that hair follicles are the reservoir of epidermal melanocytes. Hence, particularly in aggressive FUE with large sessions, thousands of such hypopigmentation can be very apparent on shaving, thus negating the perceived benefit of a minimal scar by FUE.



     
  3. Postoperative effluvium: A possibility of postoperative donor hair effluvium is reported, which can happen post-surgery [Figure 4]. The condition may appear after few days to few weeks of the surgery and show diffuse hair loss. It is mostly temporary and resolves within 3–4 months in most of the cases. The most common cause can be overharvesting and/or hampered blood supply.


     
  4. Buried grafts: They can be seen most commonly when blunt punches are used. If punching is performed in hurry or proper alignment of punch along with hair follicles is not carried out, then the graft is pushed into the dermis leading to buried graft.


     
  5. Overharvesting: It may lead to permanent damage of the donor area, thinning, and patchy hair loss [Figure 5]. Before starting the extraction process, safe donor area should be demarcated and overharvesting should be avoided. Hence, it is preferable not to exceed extraction of more than 1:4 follicular units.


     
  6. Necrosis: Cutaneous necrosis after FUE is uncommon but has been reported in literature. Karaçal et al.[8] have reported donor-site necrosis after hair restoration with FUE, leading to cicatricial alopecia.


     
  7. Subdermal cysts: They present as multiple, slow-growing nodular, painless swellings in the scalp donor area. Lack of due diligence while performing FUE can lead to subluxation of the grafts into the subdermal layer of scalp. Over tumescence of the scalp donor area, use of blunt punches, and trying to “core” out the full-thickness grafts can all contribute to this.[9] Hence, it is advisable to remove all grafts from the donor area.


     
  8. Keloid: A thorough search of literature found two case reports of keloid or hypertrophic scar formation at donor site following FUE.[10],[11]


     
  9. Other rare complications: Lichen planopilaris has been reported after FUE as well as strip method possibly because of the precipitation of autoimmune reaction of transacted hairs.[12],[13] Alopecia areata is another rare complication.[14] Trichorrhexis nodosa too has been reported.[15]

You didn't read your own material. You are a bad ambassador of truth. I don't know where to begin.

You literally skip the points which contradict you!!! You went out of your way to  copy-paste the wrong info. You are a deviant and you suck ass. I can't believe I gave up time from my day to refute this.

Did you not think I would see that the #1 bullet for FUE complications is: Chronic folliculitis,[16] though uncommon, can be seen as a result of failure to maintain hygiene or because of some preexisting dermatological disorder. This is usually a foreign body reaction to poorly dissected hairs- damaged shafts – Pus is sterile. Aggressive treatment with topical and systemic antibiotics and daily cleansing with antibacterial shampoo are advocated to prevent cicatricial scarring.

Jesus Christ. You just found the first thing that mildly agrees with you and just pasted it, assuming no one would read it. Lazy research and lazy presentation.

You skip the relevant portion (the god damn recipient area) and paste donor-related issues. The points do not relate to this nor the previous cases (you could make an argument for nebulosity and donor, but you didn't). My point still stands that physiology is a large factor along with post op care. This is irrefutable by your article as well as mine. You and I don't know the care taken, and cannot speak with certainty either way. But one of us refuses to acknowledge the possibility of patient care.

1 hour ago, AltonMeyer2 said:

We now understand that @Nebulosity is a victim of complication Number 1. We also know that @Badresults temples grew in, (perfect scalp), the top didn't. Case of point number 4?.

I addressed Nebulosity above. I also addressed badresults temples. Again, do you not find it odd that the temples are fine, but not the hairline? Ask yourself objectively how it could be possible that a doc manages to mess only the hairline, and not the temples. 

Buried grafts: They can be seen most commonly when blunt punches are used. If punching is performed in hurry or proper alignment of punch along with hair follicles is not carried out, then the graft is pushed into the dermis leading to buried graft.

You seriously quote something and not use it? You think Bhatti messed up the alignment only on the hairline? You think Bhatti was "in a hurry" only on the hairline? Do you realize how dumb that sounds?

1 hour ago, AltonMeyer2 said:

I can speculate, but the truth is that anyone who blames the patient for the failure of a result without even a hint of evidence (for that particular case), is straight out being dishonest.

 

You can and do speculate. You speculate without a hint of evidence. How does that feel, turning the question around on you to defend? How do you know that Bhatti improperly placed the grafts? What evidence do you have that Bhatti messed the HT up? I am really curious. Please, elaborate.

Everything looks fine to me. I don't see a sign of malpractice on his part, where you on the other hand are referencing patients who don't completely document their recovery. You don't know these patients, nor their history. You also have not mentioned nor addressed my point of: if Bhatti messes up so many surgeries, why are there not an abundance of fixes of his work by other docs? 

If you're going to reference something, at least read what you reference. This is painful for me to put thought and reason into a point for you to casually ignore it. I feel like I'm wasting my time talking to a troll.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Nebulosity said:

I know you’re satisfied. I read your entire post. I just think that in hindsight you might not be satisfied with the result. I think you will look fantastic if you get a second transplant to improve the density. Yes, the shape of the temples look good, but I’m not sure about the angle of implantation. My temple point implants are going off at a totally different direction from the native hair around them. I think you should consider another doc and fill in for better density. Yes, you were balding before the transplant but I think a natural look is better than having an unnaturally thin frontal zone that is so low. You looked good and didn’t necessarily need a transplant.

Can we pump the brakes on a second transplant? I'm less than 6 months (exactly 5 months - 150 of 365 days) into my surgery which have a well documented 12-18 month maturation period. It is irresponsible to speak this way of a procedure. If I had braces (which I've had) and I was 5 months in, and had you tell me "well, you'll need a second braces set to finish what this braces set is doing" I'd think you're wild. Let the procedure work it's way in. I will judge the efficacy at 12 months, and again at 18 months. I won't be judging it at 5 months.

My hair was at about 60 degree angle, by this I mean, look at my side profile view. My temples were approaching the center-top of my head (which would be the 90 degree portion). I looked like a man in his 30s quite possibly 40s. I now pass as a college kid under 25. Again, I appreciate the complement, but I had a disconnect between how I felt and how I looked. I spoke about this in my posts. It is uncanny the feeling of seeing a stranger in the mirror.

jan8.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Lennney said:

Can we pump the brakes on a second transplant? I'm less than 6 months (exactly 5 months - 150 of 365 days) into my surgery which have a well documented 12-18 month maturation period. It is irresponsible to speak this way of a procedure. If I had braces (which I've had) and I was 5 months in, and had you tell me "well, you'll need a second braces set to finish what this braces set is doing" I'd think you're wild. Let the procedure work it's way in. I will judge the efficacy at 12 months, and again at 18 months. I won't be judging it at 5 months.

My hair was at about 60 degree angle, by this I mean, look at my side profile view. My temples were approaching the center-top of my head (which would be the 90 degree portion). I looked like a man in his 30s quite possibly 40s. I now pass as a college kid under 25. Again, I appreciate the complement, but I had a disconnect between how I felt and how I looked. I spoke about this in my posts. It is uncanny the feeling of seeing a stranger in the mirror.

jan8.jpg

I do understand what you mean. I think a transplant is for one’s self, and not necessarily for other peoples’ consumption.

Bu the way, a good way to show hair transplant results is to show a close up of where the native hair meets the transplanted hair, and maybe a shot where the native hair is combed back.

Regarding the maturation of a HT, I’ve spoken with several very reputable doctors by phone and discussed the topic of HT timelines with two of the most famous ones. One said that by month 7, basically all of the hairs that are going to grow, have probably grown. The other said that maybe it’s worth waiting 12 months, but at 6 months the majority of the hairs will have sprouted. And regarding waiting 18 months, he said you might get a few more hairs in that extra 6 months beyond the first year.

In the case of my transplant, I measured the average density post transplant at around 25-30 follicular units per square cm (if that) and took a photo with a translucent ruler, it is sort of easy to compare with more recent pics and get an idea of yield. I can say with confidence that around 75%+ of my inplanted hairs have grown. Only one area is noticeably low in yeild. I don’t see why I would need 6 more months to realize whether the density is sufficient. It’s not.

You can also make a judgement on day 1 just based on the density of implanted follicular units. In my case I could see an extreme contrast between the density at my native hairline which is too high for me to measure, and an implanted density of around 25 follicular units per square cm at the edge of my native hairline. Even though the implanted hairs were a bit thicker than my native hairs at the hairline, it’s like there’s a wall or a force field where the density just abruptly drops. There’s no way it can look natural. Since then, more than one of Dr. Bhatti’s former patients have sent me images of the *same exact issue* with their transplants. One had a repair transplant recently. Another recently scheduled his repair. *Exact same problem* as me. The implanted hairs grew, but the density just wasn’t at all sufficient, by design.

Edited by Nebulosity
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

By the way Lennny, below are two of the Bhatti cases I mentioned where the inplanted density was too low, and where either a repair was already done, or is being planned. Their low densities were not the result of low yield. Their grafts grew. Their transplants were just designed such that the density could not possibly be sufficient unfortunately. I found several other similar looking Bhatti cases on this very forum, but didn’t have time to chat with all of the victims to find out what they ended up doing. I guess most people don’t like hanging around on hair transplant forums. Go figure.

[1]

This patient is planning a repair procedure. 

 

[2]

This patient already had a repair done, but is not allowed to post results due to a legal disclaimer. I chat with him a while after the procedue and he said that things were going well and that his experience and results with the second doctor were much better. I’m very happy for him. He also posted an image of his shaved Bhatti donor area from right before his repair transplant, and it looked bad, and not in a diffuse pattern at all.

 

Edited by Nebulosity
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

6 hours ago, AltonMeyer2 said:

Let's take a look at some cases of chronic folliculitis  :  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5821164/

What Dr.Bhatti patient has recorded burning skin with large lumps of puss filled boils around the recipient area among the cases that we currently are looking at? These are medical conditions that can be and will be easily documented.

 

image.thumb.png.c9938b03224f61c2d44c327cf1ca130c.png

Figure 4 shows acute uneven discoloration of the scalp with pull filled lumps all around the recipient area. This looks typical shedding to you? It looks like a typical case of ignorance and dishonesty to me. Look above.

Nebulosity's case is a classic case of bad donor extraction. It doesn't matter if we look at it 10 years down the line, the pattern is horrid and can only be covered by growing out your hair. Are you even thinking while you type or am I just wasting my time with an idiot who simply refuses to see the truth? If @Nebulosity manages to paint the back of his head black you're the type of dude who is going to show up and say "Hey, that looks better than it did 6 months ago".

If you were speaking about the recipient area, it still looks bad for the 6 month mark.

I am attaching pictures (I can't believe I have to do this):

image.png.2f049999bd101f164cf7997f709e4ec3.png

Very likely, given that he has been consistently fucking up his work over the past few months.

A failed procedure is a failure on the part of the doctor by default. If we're going to play this game of blaming the victim, there must be documented evidence post op about deviations or anomalies.

Did Dr.Bhatti document anomalies or complications immediately post op? Nope.

Did the patients experience severe cases of complications weeks or even months after the procedure? Nope. Their threads are active with loads of pictures.

I won't ask you to use logic here because you have already demonstrated that you are immune to it.

That isn't the #1 bullet point for FUE Complications. Chronic Folliculitis has been listed as a common complication in both FUE and FUT.

I've already established how that looks like in comparison to a normal procedure and none of the patients in question have had the same. Can you prove otherwise?

The #1 bullet point for FUE Complications is:

Donor-site depletion: Irrespective of whether scoring was performed by manual, motorized, or robotic punches, the risk of a clinically apparent depletion of hair from the donor region because of aggressive and nonuniform harvesting is observed. This may create an iatrogenic “moth-eaten” or “pseudo-syphilitic” appearance [Figure 2].[7]

This is unfortunately what happened to @Nebulosity

The points listed show how an FUE surgeon could contribute to bad/growth during the procedure itself. I understand that this is the part that you want to conveniently skip because Dr.Bhatti is involved and proceed straight to the post-op complications to blame the patients here.

Unfortunately, none of the patients here have documented cases of any of those complications.

It is sad and pathetic to see you try blaming the victims.

If a Doctor could be lazy and careless during extraction, he could be lazy and careless during slit making or implantation too. When you show up for cosmetic treatment, you do not blame yourself by default.

In a nutshell, your argument is:

Good Result: "Oh Damn, Dr. Bhatti did a great Job".

Bad Result : "Lazy ass patients can't take care of themselves. Should've gotten his scalp conditioned checked. Poor Dr.Bhatti gets blamed for all his bad surgical outcomes, how unfair"

Nobody is talking about malpractice on Dr.Bhatti's part. Just that he didn't produce the results he promised some of his patients. Am I not allowed to call a spade a spade?

Plenty of cases of Dr.Bhatti's failed procedures all over the forum, completely documented upto the 10-12 month mark. I don't want to go digging and pasting them here as I do not have a vendetta against him. 

But when his reps and poster boy patients like you who show up and blame ONLY the patients (or rather victims), it is critical that they must be defended.

Here is a link to a guy who had what looks to be two failed HTs from recommended docs. 
https://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/topic/42780-cobblestoning-or-folliculitis-3-weeks-post-op-from-second-ht/

It seems he was prescribed medication, but clearly he has a propensity to get folliculitis. Two surgeons, so by your logic, still not his fault, but the surgeons'.

This will be probably the last time I address this:

>The #1 bullet point for FUE Complications is:

>Donor-site depletion: Irrespective of whether scoring was performed by manual, motorized, or robotic punches, the risk of a clinically >apparent depletion of hair from the donor region because of aggressive and nonuniform harvesting is observed. This may create an >iatrogenic “moth-eaten” or “pseudo-syphilitic” appearance [Figure 2].[7]

>This is unfortunately what happened to @Nebulosity

zzz.thumb.JPG.f274b8c4cbda084e78da5564498139c4.JPG

****Sorry I guess it wasn't FUE, but recipient. My point still stands. I was always talking about the recipient hair because it is the relevant discussion of hairline.*****

zzz4.thumb.JPG.a3a052630bea35638411d5abdf2cc44b.JPG

The article is not even 3 pages long, and you fuck it up. Are you going to eat your words? Fuck. Your 1. Blatant lie, 2. Denial and 3. unwillingness to accept contradicting points to your ideas brings this conversation to an end for me. You lie about things that are easily disproven. You are a liar and you're wasting everyone's time.

I agree that nebulosity will have to grow out his donor. It doesn't look good, and that (the donor) is a purely doc related issue. The conversation was originally about op's head, and his growth. 

zzz1.thumb.JPG.4698704cd1c266a74aef125b3cdfb706.JPG

Occurred 8 months after surgery... Yet is not AT ALL the patient's fault. Right. I'm the idiot.

I never claimed that all failures are due to the patient, I only claimed that a doc, regardless of who he or she is, isn't the sole reason for a good or bad result. It comes down to my original thesis: Post-op care and patient physiology matter greatly for the success of a HT. If you argue with that point, all the journals state the same facts which support the thesis. I am done defending it. Research and studies don't sway your opinion, so I know I can't. I'm not that good.

As far as the bad patient's are lazy bit, I have stated that it comes down to physiology. Some people do sweat more (I honestly don't know if this is a controversial issue with you lol). Some people, wait for it, have hair that is weaker (due to physiology again, idk if you will argue this point) which will have less success outside the body and less success again after transplantation. 

zzz2.thumb.JPG.60b9c98ddbbb0923683c6fd0d523a8f1.JPG

I posted the links from the article you chose to not read. It's all here should you choose to suck it up and actually read the damn 3 pages.

Is this blaming the patient? In my eyes, no. In your eyes, definitely yes I wager. If calling a patient's biological characteristics a potential cause for poor results (as the NCBI states) then I guess I am. Your arguments are lazy with blaming everything on the doc. Your ability to omit information is remarkable. I marvel at the way you view the world. 

I appreciate being called a poster boy, I'll take whatever complements I can get. When you say I ONLY blame the patients, I never once blamed any patients here. Read my posts (you haven't so far lol). I asked questions if perhaps it could be physiology or the care. The hair grafts (outside of several concerns of density) looked normal post-op. There was nothing that would suggest "not deep enough" slits nor any other issues I could see.

Again, if you choose to fight against the established medical literature, I won't stop or argue with you. It's your battle to wage.

 

Edited by Lennney
**** added edit. I was wrong to quote "fue complications" when I meant to quote "recipient area complications". My mistake. I quoted the wrong TITLE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I’ve understood is that H&W check out their patients and try to discourage them from going ahead with a procedure if there is any doubt that it will be successful, for whatever reason. They take into account physiological differences, and carefully design their extraction patterns and recipient areas to avoid walking their patients off a cliff. Dr. Bhatti seems to have the exact opposite strategy. Lets call it the “fast life” hair transplant surgeon strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nebulosity said:

By the way Lennny, below are two of the Bhatti cases I mentioned where the inplanted density was too low, and where either a repair was already done, or is being planned. Their low densities were not the result of low yield. Their grafts grew. Their transplants were just designed such that the density could not possibly be sufficient unfortunately. I found several other similar looking Bhatti cases on this very forum, but didn’t have time to chat with all of the victims to find out what they ended up doing. I guess most people don’t like hanging around on hair transplant forums. Go figure.

[1]

This patient is planning a repair procedure. 

 

[2]

This patient already had a repair done, but is not allowed to post results due to a legal disclaimer. I chat with him a while after the procedue and he said that things were going well and that his experience and results with the second doctor were much better. I’m very happy for him. He also posted an image of his shaved Bhatti donor area from right before his repair transplant, and it looked bad, and not in a diffuse pattern at all.

 

I appreciate this post. I've seen both posts in the past, but neither have a resolution, hence my statement of not seeing Bhatti's work corrected. I've not chatted with the legal disclaimer person, seems a little flimsy to not post anything. You* are the owner of the body and all cosmetic modifications, no artist or doctor can prevent you from displaying your body and the modifications. A doctor cannot censor his patient. Even with a NDA, it would never pass the legal threshold of a binding contract. Suspect, but I hope to see the results he posts eventually. Could you imagine a take-down order for someone displaying a bad tattoo? What a dystopia this would be.

35 minutes ago, Nebulosity said:

What I’ve understood is that H&W check out their patients and try to discourage them from going ahead with a procedure if there is any doubt that it will be successful, for whatever reason. They take into account physiological differences, and carefully design their extraction patterns and recipient areas to avoid walking their patients off a cliff. Dr. Bhatti seems to have the exact opposite strategy. Lets call it the “fast life” hair transplant surgeon strategy.

I think it is smart of a clinic to turn down patients. The patient may have a higher risk level, and it may not be worth associating your name with failure. Some of the highest if not the highest regarded surgeons practice this method of only selecting the best possible candidates and refusing all others. I agree that Bhatti doesn't operate this way possibly to his detriment. Bhatti does a lot of repair work, and I find that impressive and risky. I wouldn't want to try something someone else messed up for fear of a second failure. I think he may very well be too open to working on all who come to him. This is a genuine and possible criticism and concern. Maybe he should be more selective.

I think Bhatti doesn't prioritize money. If he did, he could certainly charge more, he has more name recognition than most if not all the Indian docs (similar to ASMED in Turkey - I only use this example for cost purposes, please don't take this as any deeper comparison ASMED charges more and does more volume, neither of which Bhatti is known for). Businesses differentiate themselves by certain strategies. Bhatti's strategy is lifelong service of a client. It's why I chose him; he is willing to serve a patient for their lifelong needs. It is appealing to me that he does BHT, since I think I will need more hair than my donor can provide later on in life. Some other strategies are volume economics and perceived greater quality. I mention this because nothing has supported a theory that he wants to collect money and do careless surgeries with abandon. He could do it more efficiently and for greater profit, yet he doesn't. That's my point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AltonMeyer2 said:

I do think you're affirming that, yes. None of the cases we're talking about has had a case of folliculitis. The para you've quoted starts off by saying that infections are rare too.

Your grammar is trash. That, or you don't read. There are two thoughts expressed: 1. Serious infections which occur in less than 1% (these are the horror stories of the scalp literally becoming a petri dish and 2. folliculitis - which is named sterile because they cannot pin the cause down to any one issue. Why are you like this? Can you please just take the L? 

zzz8.thumb.JPG.d3a45b921e113eee47c28a0b65e6f5d9.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, let's all stop blaming and shaming. This forum should be used to help people who may be considering a HT. I think anyone considering a HT has the right to research and have prior result of the doctor presented to them.

Again, I think @AltonMeyer is just sharing his opinion and I respect that and I do agree with him that my surgery wasn't a particularly successful one.

I have experienced that lot of the senior members jumped into conclusion that I was too bald, but the fact is Dr.Bhatti inspected my situation and seen my photos and based on the assessment decided to go with 2500 grafts. He also proposed to take 500 beard along with 2500 grafts to spread it over the entire head including the crown. I decided to go only with frontal / mid scalp section only.

I have attached a photo taken today, it would give you a close up idea on the current situation of the scalp. I am considering for a 2nd HT next year  to get some density on the front/mid and get some hair on the crown as well. I should have about 1500 grafts as per Dr.Bhatti's assessment post surgery, I am willing to get some body hair / beard taken to increase graft count.

20190623_145628.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lennney said:

I appreciate this post. I've seen both posts in the past, but neither have a resolution, hence my statement of not seeing Bhatti's work corrected. I've not chatted with the legal disclaimer person, seems a little flimsy to not post anything. You* are the owner of the body and all cosmetic modifications, no artist or doctor can prevent you from displaying your body and the modifications. A doctor cannot censor his patient. Even with a NDA, it would never pass the legal threshold of a binding contract. Suspect, but I hope to see the results he posts eventually. Could you imagine a take-down order for someone displaying a bad tattoo? What a dystopia this would be.

I think it is smart of a clinic to turn down patients. The patient may have a higher risk level, and it may not be worth associating your name with failure. Some of the highest if not the highest regarded surgeons practice this method of only selecting the best possible candidates and refusing all others. I agree that Bhatti doesn't operate this way possibly to his detriment. Bhatti does a lot of repair work, and I find that impressive and risky. I wouldn't want to try something someone else messed up for fear of a second failure. I think he may very well be too open to working on all who come to him. This is a genuine and possible criticism and concern. Maybe he should be more selective.

I think Bhatti doesn't prioritize money. If he did, he could certainly charge more, he has more name recognition than most if not all the Indian docs (similar to ASMED in Turkey - I only use this example for cost purposes, please don't take this as any deeper comparison ASMED charges more and does more volume, neither of which Bhatti is known for). Businesses differentiate themselves by certain strategies. Bhatti's strategy is lifelong service of a client. It's why I chose him; he is willing to serve a patient for their lifelong needs. It is appealing to me that he does BHT, since I think I will need more hair than my donor can provide later on in life. Some other strategies are volume economics and perceived greater quality. I mention this because nothing has supported a theory that he wants to collect money and do careless surgeries with abandon. He could do it more efficiently and for greater profit, yet he doesn't. That's my point.

 

The point regarding those two victims was that they didn’t have any physiological problems. Their transplants were just poorly designed. The grafts grew. But they were placed too sparsely. So they had to get a repairs. What difference does it make whether we can see the results of their repairs? Do you think that Dr. Bhatti was merely being wise to design sparse and unnatural frontal zones?

I’m not entirely sure why the one who already had his repair didn’t want to post his results. What I remember is that he claimed there were legal reasons which I assumed had to do with a disclaimer. This may be related to the jurisdiction where he lives and got his transplant. I don’t want to post the location. But it doesn’t matter. His grafts almost all grew in. The transplanted density was like half of what top surgeons do, and that was the entire problem.

Also, I didn’t have to try very hard to find two Bhatti cases like that.

I don’t know why Bhatti has so many cases of implanting too low of density. It is very hard to explain. Maybe he is not very good at achieving high densities in as many candidates as are other doctors. In which case, maybe he should advise his patients to look elsewhere or not try to lower their hairlines so much. Whatever the reason, he hasn’t explained it, and none of this leads me to believe he is ethical. Also, I found Bhatti to be dishonest on more than one occasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2019 at 6:51 PM, Melvin-Moderator said:

@AltonMeyer 

It seems you’re only here to post disparaging posts about Dr. Bhatti. Im surprised you haven’t commented on @Lennney post because so far his results are looking fantastic.

Truthfully, not every surgery is going to be great and @Shera has already stood by the patient. I have a feeling you may be an undercover rep for another clinic. I will keep a close eye on your account. We do not allow undercover reps. 

I am not an undercover representative for any clinic and I find it unethical, dishonest and uneducated to bring up hypotheticals and accusations based on thin air in order to only defend a clinic that is supporting your website financially. Perhaps it would be more ethical and in order to stand behind the patient in this case instead of trying to digress away from this poor result. 

When an elite surgeon takes on a difficult case, it is of high importance that he educates the patient and explains what can and cannot be done via surgery. Setting realistic expectations is crucial; it is the duty of any ethical and caring Doctor to have his patients best interests in mind. When the patient understands realistic expectations, he is free to make a well-informed decision that will affect him for the rest of his life. Expectations were not set here, as indicated by the patient himself. Doesn't this concern you?  This was even indicated by the patient himself. As a moderator, you should be focusing on helping ensure that this doesn't happen in the future instead of accusing those who actually bring up valid points to ensure that the industry progresses. 

I would also like to highlight that it is an ethical obligation to turn down a case where the clinic feels that an expected result cannot meet the patient's expectations. How could the patient possibly know what to expect when the clinic didn't even go over realistic expectations with the patient?  It was highlighted by one of the representatives that the patient had a lot of area to cover, which seems to imply that this result is what the patient should be expecting. So if this is the type of result that Bhatti can deliver on a case like this, why on earth wasn't this explained to the patient beforehand? Why accept the patient's money and perform surgery that will cause a lot of difficulties and hardship for the patient long-term? 

To be perfectly clear, 2,500 grafts it a lot of hair, which should result in a nice hairline and somewhat thin frontal third. This result is far from it. 


 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

I am not a medical professional and my words should not be taken as medical advice. All opinions and views shared are my own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, delancey said:

I am not an undercover representative for any clinic and I find it unethical, dishonest and uneducated to bring up hypotheticals and accusations based on thin air in order to only defend a clinic that is supporting your website financially. Perhaps it would be more ethical and in order to stand behind the patient in this case instead of trying to digress away from this poor result. 

When an elite surgeon takes on a difficult case, it is of high importance that he educates the patient and explains what can and cannot be done via surgery. Setting realistic expectations is crucial; it is the duty of any ethical and caring Doctor to have his patients best interests in mind. When the patient understands realistic expectations, he is free to make a well-informed decision that will affect him for the rest of his life. Expectations were not set here, as indicated by the patient himself. Doesn't this concern you?  This was even indicated by the patient himself. As a moderator, you should be focusing on helping ensure that this doesn't happen in the future instead of accusing those who actually bring up valid points to ensure that the industry progresses. 

I would also like to highlight that it is an ethical obligation to turn down a case where the clinic feels that an expected result cannot meet the patient's expectations. How could the patient possibly know what to expect when the clinic didn't even go over realistic expectations with the patient?  It was highlighted by one of the representatives that the patient had a lot of area to cover, which seems to imply that this result is what the patient should be expecting. So if this is the type of result that Bhatti can deliver on a case like this, why on earth wasn't this explained to the patient beforehand? Why accept the patient's money and perform surgery that will cause a lot of difficulties and hardship for the patient long-term? 

To be perfectly clear, 2,500 grafts it a lot of hair, which should result in a nice hairline and somewhat thin frontal third. This result is far from it. 


After my own unfortunate Bhatti transplant, I asked Bhatti in an email why he had recommended such a low hairline. He said it wasn’t low. Later, in a Skype call, I asked him why he had implanted at such a low density. He said that he did his best given the available grafts.

I spoke with another Bhatti patient who said that the excuse Bhatti gave him for his sparse growth was that his head was too big. He also said that Bhatti hadn’t mentioned anything about his head size before the procedure, yet claimed he had.

And now we see another patient getting gaslighted with a similar excuse. “It was too much area to cover, what did you expect?”

I have a serious problem seeing this form of devastation and gaslighting come up again and again in Bhatti cases. This goes against the ethical principles of medicine, and yet Bhatti is still “recommended.”

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2019 at 4:07 AM, johanchicago said:

Guys, let's all stop blaming and shaming. This forum should be used to help people who may be considering a HT. I think anyone considering a HT has the right to research and have prior result of the doctor presented to them.

Again, I think @AltonMeyer is just sharing his opinion and I respect that and I do agree with him that my surgery wasn't a particularly successful one.

I have experienced that lot of the senior members jumped into conclusion that I was too bald, but the fact is Dr.Bhatti inspected my situation and seen my photos and based on the assessment decided to go with 2500 grafts. He also proposed to take 500 beard along with 2500 grafts to spread it over the entire head including the crown. I decided to go only with frontal / mid scalp section only.

I have attached a photo taken today, it would give you a close up idea on the current situation of the scalp. I am considering for a 2nd HT next year  to get some density on the front/mid and get some hair on the crown as well. I should have about 1500 grafts as per Dr.Bhatti's assessment post surgery, I am willing to get some body hair / beard taken to increase graft count.

20190623_145628.jpg

Before your transplant, all you had available to you to assess Dr. Bhatti’s service were forum posts, brief conversations with him, etc. Now you’ve actually gotten a *failed* hair transplant from him, resulting from his own errors as a doctor, and you’ve been blamed for your own disappointment.

Now, based on actual experience, you can really judge and assess his service and decide whether it is worth going back to him and having him cut into your scalp again. I would run for the hills. You’ve only got one scalp, and really only once chance left at getting this right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for you response @Nebulosity and @delancey. This is failed surgery by Dr.Bhatti, no matter what other senior members are saying. I totally agree with @AltonMeyer. I think most of my hair grafts died, 5100 hairs in the 2500 grafts but look at my scalp.

Also, please suggest or recommend top doctors whom I should consider for fixing this HT.

I trusted the forums and the positive post in most of the sites. I have attached a pic taken today 06/25/2019 and the more I look at my shiny scalp, the more I get disappointed and frustrated because I lost my 2500 grafts / 5100 hairs. Most of the hair was double hair follicles and now I have very limited grafts to recover from the damage, I check forums and I see results from 2500 grafts to be much superior than what I have received. I am left with a shiny scalp after my HT with no way to cover my head with hair. It's very disappointing and saddening.

 

 

20190625_182209.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 11/8/2018 at 12:16 PM, Panamera13 said:

Aren't the graft implanted too far away from each other or is this normal since a lot of area had to be covered?

From what I read, it should be dense packed in front, medium in back and low in crown.

My hair loss pattern is pretty much same (probably worse in the back) as OP but I have lot of gray hair too.

OP - I replied to your post on Nov 18, way before this thread got a little heated.

I have same/more hair loss than you and one thing I have learned from my consults is you won't get full density ever if you spread out the grafts. Rahal quoted me 2500-3000 just in frontal third and hairline. So, when I'm done with an HT with Rahal (hopefully), I'll still have a pretty bald head in the mid scalp and crown region.

Where you probably went wrong was "spreading" out your grafts vs just focusing on Hairline + Frontal Third + Midscalp. 

When you go for a correction, which should be at least one year away, don't do the same mistake of spreading out. Just focus on front and leave the crown.

Edited by Panamera13
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I read this thread, the more I'm sh*t scared. I have itchy scalp and some red bumps here and there and I use Clobex spray twice a week along with all other regular stuff.

The thought of scalp biopsy came to mind but I didn't do it because of the scar in the bald shiny scalp. Now I'm thinking I should do a biopsy or take the risk of having a failed HT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, johanchicago said:

Thanks for you response @Nebulosity and @delancey. This is failed surgery by Dr.Bhatti, no matter what other senior members are saying. I totally agree with @AltonMeyer. I think most of my hair grafts died, 5100 hairs in the 2500 grafts but look at my scalp.

Also, please suggest or recommend top doctors whom I should consider for fixing this HT.

I trusted the forums and the positive post in most of the sites. I have attached a pic taken today 06/25/2019 and the more I look at my shiny scalp, the more I get disappointed and frustrated because I lost my 2500 grafts / 5100 hairs. Most of the hair was double hair follicles and now I have very limited grafts to recover from the damage, I check forums and I see results from 2500 grafts to be much superior than what I have received. I am left with a shiny scalp after my HT with no way to cover my head with hair. It's very disappointing and saddening.

 

 

20190625_182209.jpg

I suggest finding a HT surgeon who will help you plan for the future and conserve your donor area and donor supply. Bhatti doesn’t do that, fullstop. Before any shills or mods pop up to tell me that he does a great job: AFAIK Bhatti doesn’t measure donor density. To properly manage donor supply, the donor density needs to be measured. Future loss needs to be estimated to some degree. Extraction needs to be done aesthetically. Bhatti told me that he didn’t need to measure my donor density. He “eyeballed” it and roughly estimated (i.e. bullshitted) my remaining donor supply. He also extracted in an unaesthetic pattern, limiting my future options and leaving artificial irregularities in density that are visible to the naked eye. This is not an approach the OP can afford.

I know that Erdogan has a reputation for being very good at managing donor. @johanchicago, you might want to look up Erdogan cases to see how well he extracts from the donor area without overharvesting.

Secondly, I think you should find a good surgeon who does BHT. I think there may be a few options in India but don’t limit yourself geographically if you don’t have to.

Edited by Nebulosity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@johanchicago, check out the below case, and observe the patient’s donor area after 5000 FUE. If Erdogan can do that, then maybe he can salvage your donor supply and extract more usable grafts than you think. You might want a doctor like Erdogan, capable of predicting which hairs are likely to be basically permanent so that every possible donor graft can be used, and who is able to homogenize your donor area and marry its density with the density on top, in a natural way. Maybe Bhatti estimated the remaining donor supply from only the safe zone, or possibly some areas outside of the safe zone but not every area that is usable. Also, I doubt he even measured your donor density, so I wouldn’t put too much stock in his estimate. Erdogan is known to be good at maximally utilizing every possible donor unit. He obviously measures donor density and methodically extracts a specific number of grafts from well planned and delineated regions of your scalp. H&W learned FUE extraction from him.

I think there are other doctors who learned from Erdogan, or who have a similar approach. Keser seems to do extraction really well. There are some doctors who would say that it is foolish to extract from too far outside of the permanent zone, but I think if the scarring is not too pronounced, and the grafts from different areas of your donor are mixed up on your scalp diffusely, then a little thinning later on will only look natural.

Lastly, I think someone like Keser or Erdogan can give you a much higher assurance of success. It might end up costing more, but ultimately what you’re going for is priceless.

 

Edited by Nebulosity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a good example of what 2500 grafts can do for a Norwood 6 with a lot of area to cover: 

 


I am not a medical professional and my words should not be taken as medical advice. All opinions and views shared are my own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nebulosity said:

Erdogan is known to be good at maximally utilizing every possible donor unit. He obviously measures donor density and methodically extracts a specific number of grafts from well planned and delineated regions of your scalp. H&W learned FUE extraction from him.

I didn't know H&W learned the trade from Erdogan.

My question is - should I go to the student (and pay more) and go to the master (and pay less). I'm NW6/ Diffused.

Who is better for diffused thinning? As of now, I'm inclined to Rahal (very good info in cosult with density number etc) and cheaper than H&W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/25/2019 at 7:57 AM, delancey said:

I am not an undercover representative for any clinic and I find it unethical, dishonest and uneducated to bring up hypotheticals and accusations based on thin air in order to only defend a clinic that is supporting your website financially. Perhaps it would be more ethical and in order to stand behind the patient in this case instead of trying to digress away from this poor result. 

When an elite surgeon takes on a difficult case, it is of high importance that he educates the patient and explains what can and cannot be done via surgery. Setting realistic expectations is crucial; it is the duty of any ethical and caring Doctor to have his patients best interests in mind. When the patient understands realistic expectations, he is free to make a well-informed decision that will affect him for the rest of his life. Expectations were not set here, as indicated by the patient himself. Doesn't this concern you?  This was even indicated by the patient himself. As a moderator, you should be focusing on helping ensure that this doesn't happen in the future instead of accusing those who actually bring up valid points to ensure that the industry progresses. 

I would also like to highlight that it is an ethical obligation to turn down a case where the clinic feels that an expected result cannot meet the patient's expectations. How could the patient possibly know what to expect when the clinic didn't even go over realistic expectations with the patient?  It was highlighted by one of the representatives that the patient had a lot of area to cover, which seems to imply that this result is what the patient should be expecting. So if this is the type of result that Bhatti can deliver on a case like this, why on earth wasn't this explained to the patient beforehand? Why accept the patient's money and perform surgery that will cause a lot of difficulties and hardship for the patient long-term? 

To be perfectly clear, 2,500 grafts it a lot of hair, which should result in a nice hairline and somewhat thin frontal third. This result is far from it. 


 

 

I have stood behind the patient and reached out directly to the surgeon on his behalf. The results are far from finished and to say so is frankly, unethical, dishonest and uneducated. You have no idea what goes on behind the scenes and I received several private message from other members with information that @AltonMeyer and @AltonMeyer2 may be working for another surgeon. 

It’s my job to keep the forum fair and free of individuals with hidden agendas. Have I removed posts from other posters with negative things to say? Have we hidden this thread or silenced the member?   We’re not perfect, we’re human, but one thing we are is fair. If you don’t like how we operate delancey feel free to leave we’re not forcing you to post here.

  • Like 1

I do not provide medical advice, recommendations, all responses are my opinion.

My Hair Transplant Journey

Melvin- Editorial Assistant and Forum Co-Moderator for the Hair Transplant Network, the Coalition Hair Loss Learning Center, and the Hair Loss Q&A Blog.

Follow our Social Media Instagram @thehairtransplantnetwork FacebookPintrest, Linkedin and YouTube.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Panamera13 said:

I didn't know H&W learned the trade from Erdogan.

My question is - should I go to the student (and pay more) and go to the master (and pay less). I'm NW6/ Diffused.

Who is better for diffused thinning? As of now, I'm inclined to Rahal (very good info in cosult with density number etc) and cheaper than H&W.

I'm pretty sure that H&W are better on the recipient side of the transplant and I would definitely choose them if money m were no object. I don't know about diffused thinning or Rahal. More on H&W having learned from Erdogan below.

 

https://hassonandwong.com/our-journey-to-fue/

 

"In Europe the work of Dr Jose Lorenzo and Dr Koray Erdogan  has come closest to the quality of work that we like to produce. With their assistance we have trained already experienced technicians in their manual extraction techniques.  For approximately 2 years we have been slowly increasing the number of FUE procedures that we perform ."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

The results are far from finished and to say so is frankly, unethical, dishonest and uneducated.

It's been nearly 8 months since this patient's transplant. Dr Bhatti himself tells his patients that after 6 months, most of the growth will be apparent. Before my transplant, he told me that at 6 months I'd see 80% of the new hairs growing. Is Dr Bhatti wrong?

12 hours ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

You have no idea what goes on behind the scenes and I received several private message from other members with information that @AltonMeyer and @AltonMeyer2 may be working for another surgeon.

I just don't believe that AltonMeyer was a shill. I think Eugenix is nearly as shitty as Darling Buds, so I'm not picking one clinic over another either.

Edited by Nebulosity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm sorry to hear that you're not pleased with the results so far... and that's totally understandable. It's definitely frustrating, but like some of the guys here have said, please stay optimistic and give it the full 12 months before concluding that the procedure has failed to give worthwhile results.

As I'm sure you must have read on other threads, some "late growers" sometimes take 18 months to start seeing results.

Bottom line, don't give up so soon bro. Wishing you all the very best.

Edited by LeftHook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×