FUT still superior

[SoSoz]

The most perfect procedure known today is FUT. If you want the best growth with the least amount of scarring with the best chance for thick results it's the FUT procedure hands down. Any ethical doctor would tell you that for a number of reasons:

1. Grafts harvested via FUE do not grow as well as from FUT so your results will not be as good.

2. Your donor area will be thinned out far more than FUT

3. You will have fewer grafts available for the future than FUT.

4. You will have visible scars that look like a gang of crazed moths attacked you.

5. An FUT scar is over 10 times less than FUE scarring for the same number of grafts.

[HappyMan2021]

If you ever buzz your hair down I'd take FUE scars over that FUT Joker smile any day of the week 🤣

[SoSoz]

9 minutes ago, HappyMan2021 said:

If you ever buzz your hair down I'd take FUE scars over that FUT Joker smile any day of the week 🤣

The problem is that you cannot actually "buzz" the hair in the back without FUE scars showing. The reality is that these people shave their heads, see thousands of dots  often overlapping each other and causing the appearance of small strip scars

[Vann]

I dont get it. Youre just posting the advantages of FUT, was there any claim to this post?

[Melvin- Admin]

There are pros to FUT sure, but it’s no longer the gold standard. FUE grows just as good as FUT in the right hands.

Second point is true, though, one could argue thinning out the donor would provide less contrast from the balding demarcation line.

That was true 10 years ago, but with surgeons like @Dr. Felipe Pittella he’s consistently getting high graft numbers. FUT is dependent on scalp elasticity, some patients can only get 4k grafts max with FUT.

This is not true, in the right hands FUE scars are barely detectable. Mothe eaten appearance happens in the wrong hands.

This is true, FUT has less scarring since it’s concentrated in one area. However, the scarring while less, is more pronounced and easily visible. 

[sunsurfhair]

2 hours ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

There are pros to FUT sure, but it’s no longer the gold standard. FUE grows just as good as FUT in the right hands.

Second point is true, though, one could argue thinning out the donor would provide less contrast from the balding demarcation line.

That was true 10 years ago, but with surgeons like @Dr. Felipe Pittella he’s consistently getting high graft numbers. FUT is dependent on scalp elasticity, some patients can only get 4k grafts max with FUT.

This is not true, in the right hands FUE scars are barely detectable. Mothe eaten appearance happens in the wrong hands.

This is true, FUT has less scarring since it’s concentrated in one area. However, the scarring while less, is more pronounced and easily visible. 

I'm going to get attacked for this but there is no doubt FUT is well on it's way out. This is the reality. Yes, there are still surgeons doing it, but this will be less and less as time goes on, for all of the points Melvin mentioned. Again, always boils down to who is the surgeon and clinic (techs) doing your surgery. That's the most important factor in a result, along with all of the other common variables. 

[Gatsby]

1 hour ago, sunsurfhair said:

I'm going to get attacked for this but there is no doubt FUT is well on it's way out. This is the reality. Yes, there are still surgeons doing it, but this will be less and less as time goes on, for all of the points Melvin mentioned. Again, always boils down to who is the surgeon and clinic (techs) doing your surgery. That's the most important factor in a result, along with all of the other common variables. 

The thing is though that FUT is generally cheaper so that alone will attract an audience of potential patients as so many people are cost focused.

[sunsurfhair]

18 minutes ago, Gatsby said:

The thing is though that FUT is generally cheaper so that alone will attract an audience of potential patients as so many people are cost focused.

Truth to that for sure but there is such an uptick in HT procedures (during/post Covid) and the general "acceptance" of cosmetic procedures for men in general, I feel like the majority will opt for scarless FUE procedures, even though we all know that FUE is truly not scarless, but you don't end up with the large linear scar that's associated with an older era of HT and the general risk that the linear scar can turn bad due to a myriad of variables. 

Edited September 19, 2022 by sunsurfhair

[Shaheer]

JT has had 3 fut procedures and still has like 2000 grafts available that itself shows that FUT is superior. He has documented his complete journey on youtube. Those people complaining about joker smile can be fixed with SMP and beard grafts. FUT IS A WIN WIN SITUATION!!!!! PERIOD

[mr_peanutbutter]

i heard it works best on people with elastic scalp - but how do i know if i my scalp is noticable elastic?

 

 

 

 

[mr_peanutbutter]

also is it true the scar tends to less visible on people with rather fair skin?

[Gramatik]

Surgeons tend to give up doing FUT, cause nowdays FUE has been evolved so much, that there is no any reason to choose FUT and cut your back of your head in half and get a big joker smile in you back of your head. You never know how your FUT strip will strech, depending on the individual and his activities. Healing is much longer also with FUT, and you feel pains for longer period.

Edited September 19, 2022 by Gramatik

[mr_peanutbutter]

50 minutes ago, Gramatik said:

Surgeons tend to give up doing FUT, cause nowdays FUE has been evolved so much, that there is no any reason to choose FUT and cut your back of your head in half and get a big joker smile in you back of your head. You never know how your FUT strip will strech, depending on the individual and his activities. Healing is much longer also with FUT, and you feel pains for longer period.

are there any legit studies on graft survival in both techniques?

 

what are the exat reason behind the claom that more grafts are available with fut? higher graft survival rate?

[Gramatik]

4 minutes ago, mr_peanutbutter said:

are there any legit studies on graft survival in both techniques?

 

what are the exat reason behind the claom that more grafts are available with fut? higher graft survival rate?

In the past the FUE may did not have the same graft survival. But nowdays clinics can continually achieve high survival rate of grafts with FUE.  I think that if you do FUT, then you will not able to harvest many grafts with FUE, since by extracting more grafts with FUE, the donor will be thining more and so the FUT scar will be more exposed. So in reallity i dont think that with FUT you can get more grafts. Also around FUT scar, many times it can be observed shock and thining of surrounding donor grafts, which limits the donor capacity.

[LookMaxx]

So in all cases of FUE, the moth eaten appearance/overharvesting look is apparent? I thought this only happened with bad transplants?

[Vann]

It’s not just about procedure it goes from personal preference, lack of knowledge between available options, and now you have a lot more presence for cosmetic surgeries I.e. hair transplants.

there’s heavy handed marketing in social media making people more aware of said procedures, so if they only find out about FUE. A lot of people think DHI is a separate thing than FUE… then you have marketing like sapphire FUE vs stainless steel.

FUT is accepted more with people with long hair but it really varies between age (skin elasticity) but people don’t understand that. Yes you can potentially yield more grafts but it always varies case by case. 
 

your personal opinion is FUT is superior, but then you have people in positions that NEED to get grafts from the beard, chest, etc. so FUE is superior to cherry pick.

remember there are monsters out there that achieve just as much, if not even more, with fue (Zarev, Bisanga, fretas, etc.). 

Edited September 19, 2022 by Vann

[Melvin- Admin]

6 hours ago, mr_peanutbutter said:

are there any legit studies on graft survival in both techniques?

 

what are the exat reason behind the claom that more grafts are available with fut? higher graft survival rate?

Yes, Dr. Ron Shapiro did a study and found growth was even, in one case better with FUE. 

https://www.ishrs-htforum.org/content/htfi/29/5/local/front-matter.pdf

[mr_peanutbutter]

1 minute ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

Yes, Dr. Ron Shapiro did a study and found growth was even, in one case better with FUE. 

https://www.ishrs-htforum.org/content/htfi/29/5/local/front-matter.pdf

cant fut also destroy folicles that are in the exogen phase?

[BaldDude]

4 hours ago, LookMaxx said:

So in all cases of FUE, the moth eaten appearance/overharvesting look is apparent? I thought this only happened with bad transplants?

correct it's not always noticeable.

[HairEnthusiast101]

Not everyone heals the same too. I tend to scar easier and an fut scar may get the most grafts but it would leave a nasty raised pink scar. I also like to wear my hair short on the sides(fade) and with fut most people cannot do that as well. I do think fut probably yields more over time but not everyone is appropriate for it and honestly in 20 years there may be something even better.

[New_Barnet_Please]

On 9/19/2022 at 5:21 AM, SoSoz said:

The most perfect procedure known today is FUT. If you want the best growth with the least amount of scarring with the best chance for thick results it's the FUT procedure hands down. Any ethical doctor would tell you that for a number of reasons:

1. Grafts harvested via FUE do not grow as well as from FUT so your results will not be as good.

2. Your donor area will be thinned out far more than FUT

3. You will have fewer grafts available for the future than FUT.

4. You will have visible scars that look like a gang of crazed moths attacked you.

5. An FUT scar is over 10 times less than FUE scarring for the same number of grafts.

This post is absolute nonsense 😂😂

Worst post I’ve ever seen on this forum, literally every single thing you say with such confidence, is incorrect when someone goes to a top tier surgeon. Point 3 is the only debatable one which is a non issue anyway for the vast majority of patients.

[Al - Moderator]

I tried to make somewhat of a chart to see if FUT or FUE is better for you. What do you guys think.

 

If you like having length to your sides and back, can't stand the thought or look of yourself with a shaved head, don't like the shaved sides and hair on top style then FUT is for you especially if you also have a family history of NW 6s.

 

If you have a family history of NW 6s and you think you may be headed there and you like having length to your sides and back, but think perhaps you would shave it someday if at some point years after your hair transplant you lost more hair and think you may not want to bother with more hair transplants, then it's a toss up between FUE and FUT, so you have to decide if you would really be OK shaving your head in the future (try it now before you have a transplant) because if you will shave your head later then FUE is better, but if you really feel you'd do more transplants (this is why you need to try shaving first if you are in this situation) then lean towards FUT.

 

If you like the shaved sides and longer hair on top hair style and can see yourself cutting it all off later in life if you lose more hair then FUE is better for you

 

If you have been buzzing or shaving your entire head and are OK with continuing to do it, but would like more hair instead and you are at NW 6 or above or feel pretty strongly that you are headed there then don't do FUT. You would be better off with FUE, but you should seriously consider not doing anything as it's probably best in the long run just continuing shaving your head if you've been OK with that.

 

[Vann]

If I ever did FUT the only surgeon I would allow to do the procedure would be Konior. However, for me FUT is something I wouldn’t want to do.
 

in my time here… FUT scars from konior don’t seem real. There are a exceptions from others that have very good scars that arent noticeable, at all, from other surgeons. But, I think it also is because their body has a remarkable way of healing/scarring. (Recently saw the best donor ever from a fue patient by mwamba) 
 

outside of that if I ever went to konior I would still choose FUE in my case because I am a diffuse thinner and I honestly believe with my hair texture/type he could do much more with fue by cherry picking grafts individually. 
 

But that is just me and a separate case from everyone else.

[pkipling]

While there are pros and cons to each, it's simply not accurate to say with such confidence that FUT is a "perfect procedure" and that any doctor who values FUE over FUT is unethical. That's a huge leap and quite dishonest and misleading... As has been pointed out in many of the comments already. 

[HairEnthusiast101]

4 hours ago, Vann said:

If I ever did FUT the only surgeon I would allow to do the procedure would be Konior. However, for me FUT is something I wouldn’t want to do.
 

in my time here… FUT scars from konior don’t seem real. There are a exceptions from others that have very good scars that arent noticeable, at all, from other surgeons. But, I think it also is because their body has a remarkable way of healing/scarring. (Recently saw the best donor ever from a fue patient by mwamba) 
 

outside of that if I ever went to konior I would still choose FUE in my case because I am a diffuse thinner and I honestly believe with my hair texture/type he could do much more with fue by cherry picking grafts individually. 
 

But that is just me and a separate case from everyone else.

I agree Konior is a master but the biggest worry of fut is how do you heal. If I knew even under Koniors work I would have a near flawless heal then without a doubt I’d spend the money. The problem is if I don’t heal great on scar revision then I doubt fut regardless the doctor will chnage that