Count Hairs or Only Count Grafts?

[Jotronic]

I don't want to hijack IOH's thread with our discussion.

 

Two things:

 

In IOH's thread you said...

 

1.) "If you're still not providing the numbers 8 to 10 months from now then you're right, there will be no more vagueness - I'll know for sure. But, don't worry, we'll just keep it to ourselves."

 

What is it that you'll "know"? Please do tell.

 

2.)I would think that being one that is such a stickler for details you'd pick up the torch that I lit regarding deceptive photos and the use of flash photography, a facet of hair transplant photography that all too often completely misrepresents real life results. It is one thing for patients to do this with some of their photos but another issue altogether when clinics do this for most or all of theirs. Your own various photos confirm this as you have some with and some without flash. Do you agree or disagree?

 

Note from Pat - As the moderator of this forum I changed the name of this topic from "Gorpy" to "Count Hairs or Only Count Grafts?" because the topic is not about Gorpy but providing hair counts.

[NervousNelly]

I understand that this thread was meant for Gorpy but I didn't quite understand the significance??

 

Do we really need valued members throwing jabs at each other?

 

Gorpy has stated that the debate about splitting of FU could easily be squashed with a count. It's that simple. And Jotronic it is that simple. Provide the numbers no debate. Don't provide the numbers, well....

 

In my opinion I do not care whether any clinic splits FU or not, (for hairline or other reasons) but it is good that the topic has been discussed and it is open for individuals to make their own decisions. It is all about the quality of the final product. If an individual wants to possibly pay a little more for possibly inflated numbers is up to them.

[the B spot]

I would think that it would be simple to add the hair counts.

Instead of 2 dishes with 1's and "multi's" you have 3-4 dishes with the grafts separated.

 

The constant wrangling about this is tiresome.

 

There is NOTHING wrong with us wanting to know the breakdown of grafts/hairs.

It is the TRUE reading of what is moved.

 

Joe--- there is no question of RESULTS, however, the failure to provide these details and the subsequent spin on the numbers is confusing. You just don't multiply by 2.3 and guess the numbers, because that is not accurate. H&W does not operate on guesses and chances in my opinion, so why should we as the informed consumer base now guess or estimate these numbers?

 

I think that is why we feel a little confused as to why the breakdown is not forthcoming or has not been provided.

 

Thanks

J

[nobuzz4me]

Originally posted by Jotronic:

 

I would think that being one that is such a stickler for details you'd pick up the torch that I lit regarding deceptive photos and the use of flash photography, a facet of hair transplant photography that all too often completely misrepresents real life results. It is one thing for patients to do this with some of their photos but another issue altogether when clinics do this for most or all of theirs. Your own various photos confirm this as you have some with and some without flash. Do you agree or disagree?[/quote

 

 

 

Joe, I would think that it is on H&W to be the "stickler for details" and provide detailed graft counts.

 

Also, shifting the question to the photo discrepancies does not address the original question.

 

We all know about H&W great results, you most of all. What alot of us may want to know is how come H&W comes up with these large number of grafts on a consisent basis.

 

If we, the patients are comparing graft counts with other top docs are doing one might think going to H&W is better because they produce more grafts on a consistent basis.

 

I guess what Pat says: "Count hairs not grafts" is the real fair comparison.

 

H&W are at the top of the industry for many reasons other than producing just the largest sessions. When I think of H&W, that is one of the things I have come to believe, they do great work and produce the largest sessions.

[Gorpy]

What Joe has just done is a common political ploy when one wants to avoid a question - redirect the conversation to another topic and question the person making the initial inquiry.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Joe,

 

Now you know I'm a big Hasson and Wong advocate...heck, I went there myself BECAUSE the RESULTS speak for themselves. Nobody here (I hope - or they could easily be proven wrong) questions the amazing yield and spectacular results of Hasson and Wong. Heck, I'm starting to get excited as I see my own results coming in. And you know I hold you in the highest regard, being a fellow mentor and more importantly....friend to me. I still hope to come to Vancouver again, but this time for social reasons and hope we can hook up and grab some dinner somewhere .

 

On this particular topic, however, I'm in agreement with the other on THIS: I'd like to see Hasson & Wong provide detailed hair counts. Now I believe everything you've said...that Hasson and Wong does NOT split FUs, except for the occasional times like all clinics do to produce more singles when needed say for hairline work, etc. BUT, providing detailed hair counts would be helpful to rule out all confusion and doubt that some have had in understanding how your clinic operates. Now I can't speak for all patients outside of this community...but as people surf this forum and educate themselves, people begin to want to know not just how many grafts they can get, but how many hairs. The clinics that DO split FUs....4000 grafts may only equal 2500 grafts somewhere else, so graft counts alone are just not enough now adays to satisfiy the educated patients. As Dr. Hasson stated in one of his videos on your site "It's all about the numbers". I believe that's true. So since Hasson & Wong does not split FUs, providing detailed hair counts doesn't appear to me to be problematic for the clinc.

 

That being said...again, the work done by Hasson and Wong have shown to be superior over and over again. Dr. Hasson will always be the best in my book! Again, however, the public (in the forum anyway) is demanding hair counts....will your clinic meet the demand of the call? It's not a matter of proving anything either...so don't think that....your clinic has nothing to prove....it's already been proven. It just seems pretty standard and it makes people feel comfortable.

 

Bill

[the B spot]

How come I never got invited to dinner???

 

That is just pure B.S. Bill!!!!!

 

Now I'm pissed....... there better be a good boxing match or Star Wars movie on to make me feel better.

 

[Bill - Seemiller]

B

How come I never got invited to dinner???

 

That is just pure B.S. Bill!!!!!

 

Now I'm pissed....... there better be a good boxing match or Star Wars movie on to make me feel better.

 

Hahahaha! How about a good Hercules episode...or am I the only dork that enjoys that show? Yes, I just bought all 6 seasons on DVD....ah well, the truth comes out! What can I say...I'm a hero at heart!

 

The dinner invitation is open to you too my brother...in fact, I still hope we are going to plan something for this summer...we just have to pick a place and invite whoever wants to come out with us

 

Bill

[pushing 40]

Actually, according to my extensive research Bill, YES, you are the only dork that watches that show..........

[the B spot]

Hercules is cool--- I was really into the Avatar, but they are taking sooooooo long between episodes it is ridiculous!!!!

 

Anyway, Naruto, Inuyasha, Full Metel Alchemist, Rurouni Kenshin, DBZ, Vampire Hunter D to name a few anime shows that I like.

 

All of this in addition to reading any Sci-fi/Fantasy I can get my hands on!!!!

 

I know, I know... we dorks gotta stick together, right?

 

Anyway, anyone wants to call me a dork better bring the golf clubs and the checkbook!!!!!!!

 

LOL!!!!

 

We really need to start planning something Bill,

Hairbank just found out he is 1/4 lesbian or something and is useless for now

 

HAHA!!!

[Jotronic]

Gorpy,

 

Well, Kettle meet Pot. Two questions posed directly to you and instead of answering you throw a classic Clintonian spin yourself

 

Gentlemen,

 

I can appreciate at least as well as any of you what value there is in knowing the details of a procedure however there are some things that I will argue are not of significant value in the grand scheme of things.

 

Hair counts vs. graft counts. Let's look at the already confusing issue of graft counts. How many times I've had a patient say that they want to have 8000 grafts so they can have results like mine or Bobman or 5200 grafts so they can have results like Futzy I dare not try to count. Part of my job is to do everything I can to identify and rectify discrepancies between realistic expectations vs. unrealistic expectations. To have a patient with final results say that they don't look like so and so even though they got the same number of grafts is a real problem that I try to nip in the bud so to count hairs, even if the number is similar (just like grafts) to another patient does nothing to explain final results. In fact it only adds fuel to the fire. "I not only got the relatively same number of grafts but also the same number of hairs give or take couple of hundred so what gives". Therein lies the problem in that it is not the actual number of hairs above and beyond the number of grafts but more so the TYPE of hair which is important. Hair shaft diameter, coarse vs. fine, curly vs. straight, hair color contrasted against scalp color. These factors have a far greater impact than anything, so much so that someone with 3000 grafts may have a better result than someone with 4000 grafts.

 

And the issue seems to be beyond counting hairs. Let me explain. It is apparent that while there is a great call for counting hairs not grafts there is an effort akin to a witch hunt going on in that Hasson & Wong appear to be the only clinic not giving these numbers on a regular basis but are in the cross hairs every time a result is shared, be it by the clinic, or recently by a patient of ours (See It's Only Hair's thread). Some patients of clinics have posted their experiences without pictures but glowing reviews to the response of (Great for you! Good luck!" and not a peep about the hair count. Other doctors and clinics have posted photographic documentation and again, where is the call for hair counts? The silence is deafening.

 

Gorpy,

 

In the thread showing Dr. Alexander's results you said...

 

Dr. Alexander Hairline results

 

"Having said that, I would like to add Dr. Keene in the most diversified category. She definitely does not use a cookie cutter approach to patients like many doctors do. She analyzes each patient and plants accordingly. Many doctors will say they do that, but in reality they don't."

 

Hair counts please? Zero, nada, zilch.

 

In another Alexander thread you say...

 

Dr. Alexander 3502 graft results

 

"As you know, we are very into details here." A two page thread and you don't chime in, much less does anyone else, about hair counts. Where is the call for details here?

 

You said this about a result by Dr. Rahal...

 

Dr. Rahal 2500 grafts

 

"I like your attitude Rafael. You are a positive dude! I think this transplant will give you a solid base. You will most likely want another one later to add a little more density. Good luck with your growth. Keep us posted."

 

Here's a special example of a collection of results by Dr. Shapiro where you have not one but several examples to call into question yet not a word regarding hair counts, just "wow"...

 

Here, you not did NOT ask for hair counts but when the poster previous to you mentioned that many patients of several docs INCLUDING H&W did not go back for a second procedure you felt it necessary to single us out and not the others referenced when in fact the others should have been.

 

Ron Shapiro Hairlines

 

"I can point out H&W patients who haven't been happy with their result either. No doctor produces showcase results every time."

 

Here with a patient of your beloved Dr. Keene's that is showing 2000 grafts and asking questions you say...

 

Dr. Keene 2000 graft patient

 

"Congratulations on your hair transplant...."

 

You simply answer his questions. In this thread you post not once but twice and not a single word about hair counts.

 

There are more examples of you and a few others that do this but at this point the pattern is undeniable.

 

So, the question begs to be answered, why are we being singled out? If getting hair counts is so necessary why is it only with our results? I thought this "requirement" was for ALL clinics yet only one doctor does this of late and that is Dr. Paul Shapiro, Ron's brother. If one of you comes up with the answer of "it's because you get bigger sessions than other clinics so we need to know why" I already have a two part response. We have endeavored for years to do the things we do and it wasn't accomplished over night. This and every other previous milestone (session size, density, lateral slit, etc.)that we've hit has been validated by other clinics eventually doing the same thing so I think our track record of being proven right is established.

 

So, the important things to ask should be in relation to the hair type rather than hair count. Should we all (clinics) start pulling our our micrometers to measure hair shaft diameter? In one of the threads above the focus is on the density so should this be included too? Being so "into the details" these are points of relevance that matter, big time, but instead you are fixated on hair counts when these other factors are so obviously and blatantly more important.

 

And enter stage right the issue of flash photography. I've proven time and again that this is a major misrepresentation of the REAL results and when getting the most detail is of such paramount importance all I see is "great result" or "wow, excellent hairline design" when in fact what you are seeing is a sham, deliberate or not. Flash doubles density in hairlines, reduces the fullness/density in overhead shots and softens hairlines that would otherwise be a bit pluggy. I've PROVEN this and you ignore it. Why? Anyone care for a recap or more proof just let me know. For a few years now we've shared our results as openly if not more so than other clinics and it could be argued that we've set the standard for many of your expectations but lately when our results are compared to others it is anything but an apples to apples situation yet we still, arguably, come out looking like champs. Should we too use a flash to further (and falsely) improve our results or should we continue to take the high road and show our results for what they are (darned great hair transplants)? The choice is yours but at this point it doesn't appear that anyone cares about this ever important issue. You just want to back slap and pick on H&W with statements proclaiming a need for "the details". You want these details to empower yourselves however empowerment from information can only be achieved with information that is relevant.

 

Think about the points of influence for results that I've mentioned before you respond (anyone) as I find it hard to argue with the proof and the facts I've presented. Remember, that first and foremost I am a patient and I want the exchange of information to be not only free flowing but useful so that prospective patients can make truly informed decisions but this information not only has to be relevant but fair as well.

 

Bill, next time you are in town dinner and beers are on me. Same goes for you, Bspot, as I learned in your earlier post that we have something else in common (like Bill) which is a love for sci-fi. Yes, I am a geek too Hell, anyone that wants to come (you too, Gorpy) see our clinic in action will get dinner on me. Just let me know.

[NervousNelly]

Jotronic,

 

It's early in the morning and I don't have much time to respond as I would like to but I have to at least address a couple things.

 

None of us question the excellent work of H&W. Most of us if not all of us recommend H&W to thousands viewing this site. Personally I believe that they are tops in the profession right now from an overall standpoint.(see thread of "Best Hairlines)

 

You ask why we constantly question H&W about hair count and not others? Come on Joe, you are an intelligent man. Don't insult us. Obviously the other clinics are not throwing around such big numbers on a consistent basis. The size of the sessions are so drastically larger than other top docs that you have to expect the scrutiny.

 

You no doubt will get the scrutiny yet you continue to dodge the question. What are we supposed to think. I'm sorry Joe, we have given you several opportunities to give the count and still nothing. Unfortunately because of that, I for one have now formed my opinion of what is going on there at H&W.

[hairbank]

Originally posted by the B spot:

We really need to start planning something Bill,

Hairbank just found out he is 1/4 lesbian or something and is useless for now

HAHA!!!

 

B spot.......#*@&$......you weren't supposed to tell anyone about that!! I just liken it to being in touch with my feminine side ! If you'll just invite me to come along for dinner I promise to talk about Hercules, Full Metel Alchemist, VH.......heck, maybe even Darth Vader??

 

Ever read anything from the Piers Anthony Incarnation of Immortality series?? Great stuff!

 

Back to the thread.....

 

I have a little difficulty with the grafts/numbers thing. Is it nice to see a hair count along with a graft count...........yes, I guess so. I suppose for me to really see the importance there would need to be a little doubt about the clinic in question. There is nothing covert going on at H&W. Obviously, the results have spoken for themselves over the years and they have been outstanding.

 

In the interest of keeping up with other clinics, it may be a good idea for H&W to start providing hair counts, even something such as single hair and multiple hair. I must confess I'm not as concerned with this as others appear to be. When I started looking around for clinics to perform my HT, I simply looked at before/afters and graft counts which was enough. As Joe mentioned in his response, there are many factors that can cause equivalent graft yields to produce unequivalent results.

 

In the end, I will continue to look at the finished product as to whether or not I believe a clinic is providing quality work.

[Gorpy]

Joe, Joe, Joe,

 

You seem hell bent on not providing the counts. Let me just say that we already know about all of the other factors that go into a hair transplant. I have to admit, you're pretty good at what you do. You remind me of Tony Snow, or any other White House spokesman. I hope you are well paid.

 

Let's see, you provided expamples of my comments on 4 doctors:

 

Dr. Alexander - actually I have challenged him on this. I didn't say hair counts exactly, but I asked for a more detailed breakdown of the larger grafts in the central core. I also challenged him on his stated density.

 

Dr. Shapiro - what!!! They are the leaders in supplying hair counts.

 

Dr. Keene - well, I have a little experience there, so I think I know the answer already.

 

Dr. Rahal - Hey, I was trying to be encouraging to a new patient.

 

Here's the bottom line (sorry, I'm starting to repeat myself).

 

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>

<LI> As leaders in the HT industry you will be the focal point and therefore receive more questions.

<LI> As heavy advertisers on this forum you will be the focal point and therefore receive more questions.

<LI> Upon close examination of your post op pictures it appears that your incisions are very uniform and small. I don't see any larger incisions, which would be necessary for larger grafts.

<LI> Pat witnesses a procedure that confirms what we are all thinking.

<LI> Your refusal to supply the count confirms what we are all thinking.

 

 

 

Conclusion: In my opionion you do split grafts - at least to an extent larger than other clinics. I have always stated that I don't consider this a bad thing. I just think it is a different philosophy and it does produce very good results. I think there is value in patients understanding different philosophies and making a choice based on that.

 

I have had many positive comments about your patients and even directed some towards your clinic. At this point it is obvious that you are not going to supply the counts. You are not going to change my mind without them, so I'll just continue with my opionion and everyone else can continue with theirs.

 

BTW - I think you are wrong on some of your condemnation of flash photography. Flash does not soften a hairline, it sharpens it. That's what a flash does. It provides great detail and freezes any movement to eliminate softness or blurriness. I do agree with your other comments on flash. The problem is, you have scared so many people away from flash that they are taking photos without adequate lighting, which also has the effect of creating deceptive pictures. It's not easy for the average patient to take great non flash pictures with a low end camera.

[NervousNelly]

Hairbank,

 

We all love the work that H&W are capable of. That is not at question and never has been. I could just keep my mouth shut and move on but that is not in my nature.

 

The question is whether they are not providing the numbers because they are splitting FU.

 

If in fact they are doing so because they believe it is cosmetically better is fine. If they are doing so to boost the numbers to skirt the boundaries of ethics inorder for marketing purposes is another issue all together. Lets face it, the big numbers attracts a lot of attention. Are their 4500 FU sessions the same as other top docs 3000? It is only fair that people are educated and aware of this if indeed this is the case. Don't you agree with that statement?

 

That is what I have issue with. They make themselves look guilty of this practice by not providing the numbers.

 

It is simple. They should address things with a breakdown of each FU. Ofcourse this is just my opinion.

[hairbank]

NN-

 

Yes, I understand your point about providing hair counts and the reason for doing so. And, yes, maybe they should provide hair counts if only for comparison to other clinics if that is where the industry is headed and what he consumer ultimately demands.

 

I guess I haven't been as alarmed as some about the hair count, or lack thereof, as I haven't seen evidence of a 4500 FU session by H&W being the equivalent of a 3000 FU session of another Doc. Take Joe, Futzy, Bobman, London Lad, Qwerty...... I looked at the numbers and what the end result was and it seemed to add up based on other's I had viewed.

[NervousNelly]

Hairbank,

For the purpose of making my point I might have inflated the numbers, but it might be hard to see the difference of 750 or so FU.

 

This forum is different from others in that there are a lot of sincere individuals that are educated, curious and like to know the facts.

 

If you look at some of my 400+ posts, I have said many good things about H&W and will continue to do so, but would like to understand everything I can so that I am informed and may provide others with that knowledge.

 

 

I think there is value in patients understanding different philosophies and making a choice based on that.--Origianlly posted by Gorpy.

 

I love that statement and feel that it is the basis of the success of this website.

[hairbank]

NN-

 

I totally respect your opinion and appreciate your contributions here, my friend. I do not think you have any agenda here other than helping other hair loss sufferers.

 

If for a second I thought there was some sort of covert attempt by ANY clinic to against ANY potential HT candidate I would immediately call them to the mat. All clinics split grafts...........otherwise we would be seeing some pretty pluggy hairlines IMO. To me, it's just a matter whether or not it is to the benefit of the HT patient or the benefit of the clinic.

 

When I review my thoughts about any Doc or clinic I recommend, trust/integrity are number one. It seems that of late hair counts are starting to come into play more............I guess I'm more focused on results or lack thereof based on the number of grafts which used to be the standard by which judgment was passed.

 

Would it be nice if H&W could start providing hair counts with the grafts.....as I mentioned before, I guess it would. Either way, I feel they do quality work and are an asset to the site and to the HT community, as our other Coalition Surgeons are.

 

How deep do we scrutinize? Do we want to start taking a look at Coalition Surgeons who only have the ability to produce 2500 grafts in a session when we realize that the HT patient was a candidate for a much larger session which would have benefitted them more and cost less?? Do we not accept pics posted that are not taken in natural sunlight which is the "tell-all" of HT jobs? I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, just asking honest questions.

[the B spot]

Hey Guys--- I think the issue is very simple.

 

We want to know what the hair moved is versus the graft count.

That is all.

 

Nothing about results.

 

IN FACT, if indeed H&W are splitting grafts and are not sharing this fact with the rest of the HT community, I think they are doing us a disservice.

 

Perhaps Dr. Hasson or Dr. Wong have stumbled onto a method that allows them to redistribute the hair in a specific manner that provides a GREATER illusion of density, and it should be presented.

 

I have discussed the subject of density, the subject of sub-follicular division, etc... and believe me, I am open to the thought that perhaps in some areas of the scalp, sub-divided grafts are providing more coverage.

 

However, if these graft counts are over-inflated, for what-ever reason, then we deserve to know, period.

 

I understand what is being said on both sides, and quite simply the day of the uniformed patient is gone.

 

I have always held H&W in high regard and I have OFTEN stated that every patient should visit them and SMG FIRST because these two clinics represent the very best of the industry, IMO.

 

I doubt that will change any time soon, but Joe you have to impress on Dr. Wong and Dr. Hasson that we want counts, and not just patients of other clinics, but patients of H&W.

 

Now, Hairbank poses an interesting question-- should Docs who only do 2500 max sessions be held in the same company as other docs who have embraced the demands of the paying consumer?

 

I think we might have to create 2 seperate Coalition Designations.

 

Please do not think for a moment that session size is the measuring stick for greatness in this industry----- it isn't.

However, I have been calling out Dr.s for a while now who keep doing 2200 graft sessions on 43 year old NW4-5's to raise the bar and provide 3000-4000 grafts in one session.

 

There is no excuse other than the Doc simply is unwilling to change.

 

2200 grafts 9500.00

2200 grafts 9500.00

= 19,000.00

(4.50 1st 2000, 2.50 after)

 

4000 grafts = 14000.00

 

Of course, cost is one issue, but what about down time?

 

Not only do you have to pay an additional 5K, but you are investing 2 years to reach your goals.

 

I just think it is time we demand Dr's take the next step.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Hello everyone,

 

I have skimmed through all the posts...not read every word....but here are my comments:

 

B Spot ---

We really need to start planning something Bill,

 

 

Yeah brother...we should start planning it...I just have no idea HOW! We'll have to pick a location between us somewhere and see who all is up to meet for a day

 

Jotronic ---

So, the question begs to be answered, why are we being singled out?

 

 

Joe makes a good point. I'm not stating that people are purposely singling out Hasson and Wong, but admittedly, perhaps we aren't doing a good enough job inquiring from other clinics as well. That being said...I hold that it would be helpful for ALL clinics to provide hair counts...but it is true, that though it would be helpful, I don't feel it necessarily adds credibility. RESULTS add credibility, and Hasson and Wong displays that time and time again, along with other top clinics.

 

Jotronic ---

Bill, next time you are in town dinner and beers are on me. Same goes for you, Bspot, as I learned in your earlier post that we have something else in common (like Bill) which is a love for sci-fi. Yes, I am a geek too Hell, anyone that wants to come (you too, Gorpy) see our clinic in action will get dinner on me. Just let me know.

 

 

You got it brother....though since I don't drink alcohol...I'll take a ROOT beer, or some other non-alcoholic bubbly drink! We can talk about Sci-Fi, FUT, women (it's all about the women ), etc

 

Hairbank ---

I have a little difficulty with the grafts/numbers thing. Is it nice to see a hair count along with a graft count...........yes, I guess so. I suppose for me to really see the importance there would need to be a little doubt about the clinic in question. There is nothing covert going on at H&W. Obviously, the results have spoken for themselves over the years and they have been outstanding.

 

 

I take a very similar stand on this issue. I think it would be NICE, but I don't feel that it's highly important. Like hairbank, the only reason I'd find it important, is if a clinic's 4000 grafts looked more like 2000 grafts consistently on patients and there was a question mark on whether or not they split FUs. But...I still think it would be a nice thing to know from ALL clinics.

 

Gorpy ---

1. As leaders in the HT industry you will be the focal point and therefore receive more questions.

 

2. As heavy advertisers on this forum you will be the focal point and therefore receive more questions.

 

3. Upon close examination of your post op pictures it appears that your incisions are very uniform and small. I don't see any larger incisions, which would be necessary for larger grafts.

 

4. Pat witnesses a procedure that confirms what we are all thinking.

 

5. Your refusal to supply the count confirms what we are all thinking.

 

 

I agree on the first 3 points, but not the last 2. I agree with the third statement only because of the word "appears". It is also true that they are small and relatively uniform, but under high scrutiny of the photos, I don't believe that would be enough to confirm or deny anything. Regarding point 4 and 5, we have to remember that everyone thinks differently. I do not think that just because H&W doesn't supply number of hairs along with grafts that that means they are splitting FUs (most likely what you are referring to when you state "what we are all thinking"). I admit, I'd like to see hair counts (from all clinics), but it doesn't give me a reason to question them. Lack of results (The proof is in the pudding) would call me to question a clinic, but not lack of providing hair counts.

 

NervousNelly ---

The question is whether they are not providing the numbers because they are splitting FU

 

 

Is that really the question? For some yes...but not for everyone. I'd like a hair count because I think it would be nice to know how many hairs I received (rather than an average), BUT I do not question the integrity of Hasson and Wong just because they are not.

 

Hairbank ---

I guess I haven't been as alarmed as some about the hair count, or lack thereof, as I haven't seen evidence of a 4500 FU session by H&W being the equivalent of a 3000 FU session of another Doc. Take Joe, Futzy, Bobman, London Lad, Qwerty...... I looked at the numbers and what the end result was and it seemed to add up based on other's I had viewed.

 

 

Again, I agree. Comparing Hasson and Wong graft counts to Shapiro graft counts (and Shapiro does provide hair counts), I don't see a similar size graft count looking any thinner at H&W. I don't believe ANYONE here should be questioning the integrity of H&W because they aren't providing the counts...I don't really believe that is fair. I think it's a great idea to request counts from all clinics, but it's the results that make the difference!

 

There's my 2 cents on the subject. Now, back to work with me

 

Bill

[buddyebsen]

From Pat's visit to H&W:

 

"Many of the other leading clinics I have visited keep detailed count sheets which enable a person to see not only the final graft count but the number of hairs in each graft. I find such detailed information useful, since the trimming of grafts is rather subjective and the average number of hairs per graft can vary from clinic to clinic.

 

Upon closely examining the multi haired grafts I found that the vast majority contained two hairs each, while three hair grafts were very rare. I found no four hair grafts. However, the number of hairs in a typical follicular unit does vary from patient to patient. Perhaps this particular patient had a disproportionately high number of single and double hair follicular units than the average patient. According to a published study the typical distribution of hairs in follicular units is ??“ 14% one hair, 51% two hairs, 29% three hairs, 6% four hairs.

 

When I asked two of the technicians about the lack of 3 and 4 hair grafts they told me that three hair grafts are the largest size they cut. Thus while the average number of hairs per graft does vary from patient to patient, the often quoted average number of hairs per follicular unit in the average patient is 2.3 hairs per follicular unit. Without a final hair count per graft I had no way of knowing if this patient's follicular units had more or less than the average 2.3 hairs per follicular unit or not.

 

Comparing "Apples to Apples" by comparing total hairs transplanted

 

Perhaps I'm splitting the proverbial hairs. But I believe that physicians and their patients should ideally provide not only their final graft count but also the amount of hairs moved so that patients and potential patients can compare "apples to apples". After all, ultimately it is the amount of hairs and how they are distributed in the recipient area that determines what a patient achieves.

 

Some clinics cut grafts that contain "follicular unit families" (follicular units that are so close together that they are trimmed into one multi hair graft). Thus the amount of hairs such grafts transplant to the recipient area is high. Yet such multi haired grafts count as only one graft.

 

Patients and physicians can debate the aesthetic, practical and economic merit of different graft sizes and excellent points can be made by advocates of both large and small grafts. But in my opinion detailed information about the hair composition of the various grafts should be available to all parties in the debate. Information about the size of size of the donor strip removed would also be useful.

 

Personally I'm biased in favor of sessions that provide large numbers of refined follicular unit grafts rather than large multi haired grafts. But in fairness to all I think hair counts should be provided in addition to graft counts."

 

 

 

Puzzling how there's a lot of smaller grafts and no 4 hair grafts. Good work but.....

[pushing 40]

I for one could simply care less. It is the final product I care about. As long as 12 months from now I look like Johnny Depp and my weewee is 2 inches longer, they've done their job! (that is how this HT thing works right?)

[its-only-hair]

I just had my first ht this week with Dr Hasson and I have no problem at all with the way they count fu. If that was a big concern I would of went to another clinic that provides the number of hairs.

 

The reasons I picked Dr Hasson were,

1. I live in Canada.

2. Wanted to get as much work done in one session as possible.

3. I looked at some of his patients photos like Bushy's, Bobman's and others which all looked great. Also Hairbank's with Dr Wong.

4. I have heard nothing but positive write ups on this web site about Dr Hasson, so that was also a big factor.

5. Seeing Joe's web site, his videos and his ht by Dr Wong made me feel confident in my choice of clinic. And after meeting him in person I can say he has a great head of hair and a good guy.

 

The last thing on my mind next year when the hair grows in, will be number of hairs per fu.

[NervousNelly]

ALL IT COMES DOWN TO ARE RESULTS.

 

Im sorry, I for one will not just leave it at that. Results are key. That is what we are all looking for but not the ONLY thing.

 

They are potentially overselling the size of their sessions. They need to spell it out for people so that individuals are informed and making decisions based on that. Period. It is not right if they are misleading us the consumer.

 

I have made statements in past posts and read statements from some of you guys that are senior members that H&W are as reasonably priced as other top docs. That statement MAY NOT BE TRUE if they are splitting several FU and not disclosing this information so that apples and apples can be compared.

 

You guys know what we are saying and still responding "I don't care their results speak for themselves"-----What??

 

They potentially are broaching some serious ethical implications IMO IF they have and continue to misrepresent the actual number of FU they are charging their clients for. The results are irrelevant to that statement.

 

I have gotten things off my chest and choose not to further this thread because I have no intentions of a witch hunt. I just feel obligated to any uneducated individual that is saving his hard earned money for his future HT. I want him to understand all aspects of what he is delving into given that there are several skilled docs. He can take this info with a grain of salt, but atleast it is food for thought.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Nervous,

 

Hey buddy...first....take a deep breath...and relax...go get yourself some bubbly . Now...are you chilled? Good

 

I understand your concern about pricing and ethical issues IF indeed they are splitting FUs like that...but the statement "all it comes down to are results" proves true when you compare a 3000 graft session from them with a 3000 graft session from another clnic. Sure we can't count every hair...but have you or anyone been under the impression that H&W deliver lesser quality? Or that their 3000 grafts appears thinner than another clinics?

 

I'm simply not understanding why the ethical issue is coming up here. Joe said that H&W do NOT split FUs. Should we be calling him a liar just because they aren't providing detailed hair counts?

 

"The results speak for themselves" IMO is a valid statement...a 3000 graft transplant from H&W appears to match a 3000 graft transplant from other clinics that are also well known and respected and also give detailed hair counts. To me, it IS indeed an Apples to Apples comparison...and that's what's important. Would I prefer H&W to provide detailed hair counts? Absolutely! But not in order to prove they don't split FUs, but instead, just for my knowledge. Knowledge is power after all . BUT, I think it's presumptuous to assume that H&W split FUs just because they don't provide detailed hair counts.

 

That being said...I don't think I have anything further to add for now .

 

Keep the peace brothers...we are all on the same side

 

Bill