"The Armani Equation"

[thanatopsis_awry]

Just gave a thorough reading of Armani's site for the first time, and I must say -- very, very tempting, but some questions, thoughts, and concerns....ultimately, we all (naturally) want maximum density; the lowest hairline; the quickest results; etc, etc.

 

Dr. Armani's website and literature aggressivly targets these primal wants density/hairlines/huge sessions...), particularly marketing towards youth...or people who simply want to attempt to regain their notion of youth. A few questions quickly came to mind, though: if everything that Armani markets is kosher, why aren't "top" Dr's following suit. From a shrewd financial perspective, wouldn't Dr's jump at the opportunity to market promises of ultra-packed density sessions, highly youthfull hairlines, vast donar sizes if it was at all possible and appropriate...? As far as I understand, technologically speaking, Dr. Armani doesn't use drastically special equipment that other Coalition Dr's don't, and isn't privvy to major information that others aren't.

 

At the same time, if Dr. Armani's grossly aggressive approach really can, and does, reap negative consequences, how come I have not seen or heard of any concrete examples...Again, I am pretty new to the hair-loss arena, so I may be missing huge, obvious chunks of info, but I speak from an untouched, objective curiosity. On the one hand, it would make little sense for other doctors not too offer the same approach of Armani if doable, and this raises a huge ? mark for me with regard to Armani's ethics; yet, I haven't seen any real life examples of wrongdoing via Armani's HTs....and the arguments against him seem to be made off of worst-case-scenario hypotheticals...

 

So is it all merely a question of: Do I want to be conservative and act as if the worst *will* come; and if not, how grave, and how likely, are the consequences...and, importantly, how do they compare to the prospects of getting "immediate" (an HT still takes time, of course) results of absolute, follicular satisfaction. I think age plays a very integral role in this hypothetical equation -- lets face it, losing your hair in your 20's carries greater weight (for many reasons) than losing it in your 40s, 50s,even your 30's....and so maybe Armani isn't "unethical", but rather is providing a genuine service to those in the most dire of places who are really just trying to make the most out of the already fleeting nature of youth, and re-capture what it means to be young...

 

<<< my (current)thoughts and questions concerning "The Armani Equation", which have been brewing for some time and I think is really a huge question for people considering a HT -- particularly if you are "young".

[thanatopsis_awry]

Just gave a thorough reading of Armani's site for the first time, and I must say -- very, very tempting, but some questions, thoughts, and concerns....ultimately, we all (naturally) want maximum density; the lowest hairline; the quickest results; etc, etc.

 

Dr. Armani's website and literature aggressivly targets these primal wants density/hairlines/huge sessions...), particularly marketing towards youth...or people who simply want to attempt to regain their notion of youth. A few questions quickly came to mind, though: if everything that Armani markets is kosher, why aren't "top" Dr's following suit. From a shrewd financial perspective, wouldn't Dr's jump at the opportunity to market promises of ultra-packed density sessions, highly youthfull hairlines, vast donar sizes if it was at all possible and appropriate...? As far as I understand, technologically speaking, Dr. Armani doesn't use drastically special equipment that other Coalition Dr's don't, and isn't privvy to major information that others aren't.

 

At the same time, if Dr. Armani's grossly aggressive approach really can, and does, reap negative consequences, how come I have not seen or heard of any concrete examples...Again, I am pretty new to the hair-loss arena, so I may be missing huge, obvious chunks of info, but I speak from an untouched, objective curiosity. On the one hand, it would make little sense for other doctors not too offer the same approach of Armani if doable, and this raises a huge ? mark for me with regard to Armani's ethics; yet, I haven't seen any real life examples of wrongdoing via Armani's HTs....and the arguments against him seem to be made off of worst-case-scenario hypotheticals...

 

So is it all merely a question of: Do I want to be conservative and act as if the worst *will* come; and if not, how grave, and how likely, are the consequences...and, importantly, how do they compare to the prospects of getting "immediate" (an HT still takes time, of course) results of absolute, follicular satisfaction. I think age plays a very integral role in this hypothetical equation -- lets face it, losing your hair in your 20's carries greater weight (for many reasons) than losing it in your 40s, 50s,even your 30's....and so maybe Armani isn't "unethical", but rather is providing a genuine service to those in the most dire of places who are really just trying to make the most out of the already fleeting nature of youth, and re-capture what it means to be young...

 

<<< my (current)thoughts and questions concerning "The Armani Equation", which have been brewing for some time and I think is really a huge question for people considering a HT -- particularly if you are "young".

[MrJobi]

Hi

 

My opinion is think Long term which should be the approach with many things in life.. Do I eat like a pig and sacrifice my health for the future? Do I lay out in the sun and sacrifice my skin's appearance for the future? Do I dense pack my slightly receding hairline and sacrifice my donor hair for the future? There are always risk associated with decisions we make.

 

In my mind, I want a long term solution so I don't end up in the situation I had the HT for in the first place? Of course let's not generalize. Not all Armani Ht's are "wrong" and there is definitely good work done..

 

I think it's a matter of opinion in some cases.

[NervousNelly]

At the same time, if Dr. Armani's grossly aggressive approach really can, and does, reap negative consequences, how come I have not seen or heard of any concrete examples

 

 

Give it time my friend!! You won't start to hear the negative press for several years when these 20 yr. olds are 40-50 and have a hairline like a gorilla and nothing behind it or a diffuse donor area because of overharvesting for FUE.

 

No worries though as Armani will be able to be contacted on his yacht somewhere in the Mediterranean.

 

NN

[Pat - Community Publisher]

thanatopsis_awry,

 

Your post shows that you are able and willing to read between the lines. Many are not and want to buy into the idea that they can have their 17 year old hairline now and forever.

 

Any physician can promise the moon to a young patient and make huge amounts of tiny incisions and charge for them. But ethical physicians don't oversell or over hype their services. They put the patients LONG term best interest ahead of their own short term financial interest.

 

I'll bet you can understand why Armani and Co are not recommended on this community - despite having more offices worldwide than the CIA :-)