Great point Topcat..... Good photos. Question to ask those who have had 1mm punches used (photo 2), is this the typical scarring seen by most that have had FUE...Or is it less common? Obviously, these are results I'd be unhappy with. Regardless of how long I wear my hair. (on a totally differant subject, SMP does a great job hiding scarring like this. Allmost becomes undetectable). I have to think anyone who doesn't value the importance of punch sizing is missing the big picture. Until evidence is shown to evaluate the production of scarring from various punch sizes, I would always stress using the smallest punch possible without increasing the risk of transection. For me it's common sense. Dr Epstein pointed out in this thread, it is essentially the overall O.D. that is the magic number and not the I.D which is the number used to identify the tool.
Makes complete sense. If a .80 punch is being used but the overall thickness of the tool is .2mm wider than a 1mm punch they are essentially producing the same size hole.....something to think about. I'd like to see some evaluation by Dr's who have used a variety of punch sizes on each patient and determine whether there is a significant difference in terms of healing. Is there a difference in scar size for a punch that is .80 compared to .90 compared to 1mm.....and so on? Is there a point where punch sizes get so small they are irrelevant in terms of being a cosmetic improvement?