How much of an advantage is having coarse hair when considering transplantation?

[Dragonsphere]

Browsing some of the results on this forum, I have noticed that transplants for people who have coarse hair tend to have the illusion of greater coverage. 

Of course this is obvious, but I am wondering of how much of an advantage is it?

I have seen results with patients who have had half the number of grafts from the same surgeon yet achieve superior results than patients who have fine hair.  

Typically speaking, would patients who have this favourable hair characteristics usually only require half the density to achieve the same result?

I myself have very coarse hair and before starting preventative therapy had significant loss in a Norwood 5 pattern.

With gel my hair looked essentially empty and yet without it, I received comments on how thick it appeared.  

[Gatsby]

Thick hair will always be an advantage over thin, light hair. As to the number of grafts required it will still come down to the individual patient’s needs, the surgeon’s approach, etc. 

[HappyMan2021]

coarse hair is pound for pound better for density. 

But...if density and donor availability are not concerns, I think medium thickness straight hair would be ideal.

The reason is coarse hair can tend to be a bit unruly, curly, and not as 'orderly' looking as medium, straight hair. 

Ultimately it depends what hairstyles you like and the texture of the neighboring, existing native hair. 

Is your native frontal hair also coarse? If your frontal hair is thin and silky straight but your donor hair is coarse and curly, it could cause issues...

[mr_peanutbutter]

the more coarse the hair the better. the bigger the volume of hair, the bigger the chances are that it is going to shut out the reflection of light from the scalp and look like a full head of hair. the reflection of light from the scalp through thin hair (therefore light reflecting in-between low calibre hair shafts) creates the perception of hair loss. for every 10 microns increase or decrease in the hair shaft calibre, there is a 35% volume effect, either way. the average persons’ hair shaft calibre is around 68-70 microns. if for example, the calibre goes down to 58 microns, then literally 36% of the persons’ hair volume gets lost

 

this being sad other factors such as skullsize play also important role. when you say "I have seen results with patients who have had half the number of grafts from the same surgeon yet achieve superior results than patients who have fine hair." id take this with a grain of salt. people can be the same norwood level but the area which has to be covered can vary drastically due to different skullsize and shape

 

nontheless the ideal candidate for a haitransplant is probably and indian person with a small skull, quiet coarse hair and a low hair-to-scalp contrast

Edited February 17 by mr_peanutbutter

[ScottishGuy21]

It’s an advantage for sure. I remember between months 7-11 of my own transplant when my hair was coarse and curly the volume and density looked off the scale 

Mine reverted back to my own natural hair texture after a year and the result was still very good but nevertheless an eye opener. It’s a real advantage to have textured / coarse hair when having a transplant.
 

With the right Dr hair type isn’t the be all and end all either, research as ever is key. The ‘wow’ results are certainly easier to obtain in regions which see coarse , curly hair being the default hair type of the locals. Something you should factor in when comaring Dr’s and results.

 

 

Edited February 18 by ScottishGuy21