Everything Neb has brought up and expressed dissatisfaction about he has done so based on facts, that is key. There's a major difference between someone talking about growth issues at 4 months when the day 1 photos look perfect, compared to this case where the day 1s look around 50% of typical density from top surgeons.
Someone complaining or getting angry isn't what is relevant, its whether or not the concerns are legitimate, in this case they are and the complaints should be taken seriously. The density was clearly implanted well below acceptable levels, particularly with that ridiculously low hairline and the pushed forward temples.
Absurd to consider this acceptable. On the donor issues, I think its plausible that it will improve, on whether or not the work is refined, thought through and an acceptable density for natural results, absolutely fucking not and its visible from the post ops.
Your concerns aren't misguided and you will be proved absolutely correct by twelve months, as will I and those that asserted these various issues again.
You're correct at 4 months, you were correct at 1 month, and you'll be right at a year. The problems are visible in the photos from day 1, anyone who has looked at a reasonable amount of transplants can see them.
Thank you. I agree. Also, Dr Bhatti himself said that the hair should be mostly grown in by 6 months. I think my yield is not that bad, at least not as bad as it could have been. I need to live with this for at least another 6 months, so I’m hoping it looks sort of close to normal after another month or two of growth.