Why are we so adverse to FUE?

[pilipili]

@Occulus
1.Again : expensive? no matter if u have the wallet. Btw Here in Belgium you find very good surgeons <$4 who launched their own business and do the work themselves and don't have to pay tons of assistants, so their can afford low prices.
2. The same way there is absolutely no reason to think HT will interfere.. I remember watching Replicel video (japanese version) and at the end of it they were talking about drugs could be a problem, I don't know if this has been updated..)
3. You never know with MPB sometimes it goes incredibly fast. By the time new treatment comes out you could have gained 2 norwoods
4.We hope, as we have always do

[Occulus]

@Occulus
1.Again : expensive? no matter if u have the wallet. Btw Here in Belgium you find very good surgeons <$4 who launched their own business and do the work themselves and don't have to pay tons of assistants, so their can afford low prices.
2. The same way there is absolutely no reason to think HT will interfere.. I remember watching Replicel video (japanese version) and at the end of it they were talking about drugs could be a problem, I don't know if this has been updated..)
3. You never know with MPB sometimes it goes incredibly fast. By the time new treatment comes out you could have gained 2 norwoods
4.We hope, as we have always do

1) Sorry, but I'm not going to do a HT "on the cheap" - I don't trust medicine outside the US, and I don't trust HT surgeons outside the IAHRS. A decent, conservative HT under those requirements will cost $10k.
2) I have a hard time believing that violating the scalp 1000+ times, transcending viable terminal hairs, and causing scarring won't interfere with pharma-based topical protocols. Fibrous tissue doesn't grow hair, so how could future protocols grow hair in scars?
3) I totally agree, and that's why I say that if you are a NW4 and want hair in the next five years and haven't grown hair on what is currently available, your only options are an HT or a hairpiece. If I weren't a NW2-3 right now, but a NW4 or above, I'd get an HT.
4) Finally, in addition to the drawbacks I've already listed, here's another: An HT is not a final solution. It will not give you a full head of hair. It will give you coverage, but you will be very limited in the way you can style your hair, and in most cases, it won't look great. Better than being bald? Absolutely. But an HT, in most cases (yes, I know there are some great examples of HTs, but those are the exception, not the rule), you're not going to look like a normal, NW1-2 person. Given that outcome, I don't think the risks are worth it for NW3s or less. I'd rather wait a year or two to see if we can expect anything new in the next 3-5 years, than roll the dice on a surgery.

[Paul73]

1) Sorry, but I'm not going to do a HT "on the cheap" - I don't trust medicine outside the US, and I don't trust HT surgeons outside the IAHRS. A decent, conservative HT under those requirements will cost $10k.
2) I have a hard time believing that violating the scalp 1000+ times, transcending viable terminal hairs, and causing scarring won't interfere with pharma-based topical protocols. Fibrous tissue doesn't grow hair, so how could future protocols grow hair in scars?
3) I totally agree, and that's why I say that if you are a NW4 and want hair in the next five years and haven't grown hair on what is currently available, your only options are an HT or a hairpiece. If I weren't a NW2-3 right now, but a NW4 or above, I'd get an HT.
4) Finally, in addition to the drawbacks I've already listed, here's another: An HT is not a final solution. It will not give you a full head of hair. It will give you coverage, but you will be very limited in the way you can style your hair, and in most cases, it won't look great. Better than being bald? Absolutely. But an HT, in most cases (yes, I know there are some great examples of HTs, but those are the exception, not the rule), you're not going to look like a normal, NW1-2 person. Given that outcome, I don't think the risks are worth it for NW3s or less. I'd rather wait a year or two to see if we can expect anything new in the next 3-5 years, than roll the dice on a surgery.

2- I have asked it to some doctors and they said that it wouldn´t be a problem since the scaring is superficial. According to them, a HT doesn´t inactivate native hair folicles. There´s an audio interview here at TBT where Dr Ziering (from HISTOGEN) says to Spencer that people who had HTs would benefit from Histogen without problems.

[pilipili]

Occulus If you want hair, you won’t shave your head if you get them. so who care about scars since remaining hair cover them anyway. Getting a HT usually means getting a hairline. at the end, transplanted hair won’t get lost. and In the future if treatments come you could be able to complete a HT and treat your scalp to get density (Like Paul73 says for example Histogen, same as replicel ?).... Every theory is possible. Like we see , nobody is right, nobody is wrong

[fred970]

I don't trust medicine outside the US

You think Belgium and Europe are the third world or what?

Most of your American surgeons cannot hold a candle to Bisanga, Mwamba, De Reys, Feriduni and Devroye.

Medicine is way safer in Europe than it is in the US. I've got a glimpse of your healthcare system in the documentary Sicko.

[pkipling]

Call me biased since I had an amazing experience with FUE, but I think the pros far outweigh the cons. I had mine about a year and a half ago and couldn't be happier. It ultimately comes down to how each individual views their specific situation and if the pros outweigh the cons for them specifically. For me, it was an easy decision to move forward with FUE. The downtime was minimal and I was fortunate enough to be able to wear a professional hat in my line of work so that I didn't have to worry about explaining my red scalp to anyone. The price was reasonable for me, and ultimately worth every penny. As for risking botched results, the chances of that actually happening are greatly reduced (almost to zero, I would say) by doing research and choosing a top, well respected surgeon with a proven track record of providing consistent, high quality results. If you don't do your research and make a decision based on which surgeon gave you the best sales pitch and the best price, then you're playing with fire.

Also in that same realm: If you choose a top surgeon, you're hairline should look no different than someone with intact, native hair. I don't buy the argument that they look unnatural. I've seen way too many good ones on this forum and others to believe that.

A hair transplant may not be for everybody, but for those who are good candidates can find themselves in the hands of the right surgeon through responsible research, then I see very little downside.

I am a patient advocate for Dr. Parsa Mohebi in Los Angeles, CA. My opinions/comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Dr. Mohebi and his staff.

[StayThick]

I constantly go back and forth. I am in sales and am most concerned with recovery. The implant sites being apparent for a month after the surgey worries me. If i could go in pay 10 grand with no visual evidence of surgery, id be 100% in

This!! 100% spot on and this is what holds me back.

I'm in sales as well and if I could hibernate for 2 weeks and show no evidence work was done, then this wouldn't even be a dilemma for me nor would I be on this forum.

The issue is I can't and having others in my line of work know something was done or for it to be obviously visible would not fly with me. Co-workers are absolutely ruthless in my line of work and I wouldn't want to deal with that aspect because I'd get fired punching someone in the face.

Aside from that, scarring also concerns me about FUE, although I keep seeing cases where it's so tough to see them. I would have to see somebody in person to evaluate that further in order to ease my concerns as it relates to scarring.

Cost isn't an issue for me. Take pricing aside, if I knew scarring would be undetectable even when bald, recovery would be quick (2-3 weeks) where nobody could tell, and knowing I would not get an F'd up hairline done, then I would do it tomorrow. Unfortunately, none of this is guaranteed and the thought of getting a butcher job, horrible hairline, while paying thousands of dollars to have that happen scares the hell out of me.

[Occulus]

You think Belgium and Europe are the third world or what?

Third world? No. As well trained and with the same resources and access to the very latest equipment, protocols, and education as the US? No way. There's a reason why the world's wealthy come to the US when they need life-saving treatments. The UK health system just went on strike for God's sake lol.

Medicine is way safer in Europe than it is in the US. I've got a glimpse of your healthcare system in the documentary Sicko.

Oh, well you saw a movie by a biased, silly filmmaker, so you must have an excellent idea of what the US healthcare system is like.

I've lived abroad and have had experience with a few Euro health systems, and they don't hold a candle to the US. The US university system and medical education is far and away the best in the world - again, there's a reason why the world's wealthy send their children to the US for university and graduate education. There isn't a country that can compare to the number of medical advances and patents that come from the US. Even a cursory review of the number of US medical device makers and pharmas prove this. Simply put, you get what you pay for, and while you may pay more in the US, you get more.

[Occulus]

2- I have asked it to some doctors and they said that it wouldn´t be a problem since the scaring is superficial. According to them, a HT doesn´t inactivate native hair folicles. There´s an audio interview here at TBT where Dr Ziering (from HISTOGEN) says to Spencer that people who had HTs would benefit from Histogen without problems.

Well of course they'd say that - they're trying to sell you an HT. Short of implanting hair in the scar tissue, scar tissue doesn't grow hair. I find it hard to believe that future protocols will not only grow hair in otherwise healthy tissue, but also grow hair in scar tissue.

[fred970]

Third world? No. As well trained and with the same resources and access to the very latest equipment, protocols, and education as the US? No way. There's a reason why the world's wealthy come to the US when they need life-saving treatments. The UK health system just went on strike for God's sake lol.



Oh, well you saw a movie by a biased, silly filmmaker, so you must have an excellent idea of what the US healthcare system is like.

I've lived abroad and have had experience with a few Euro health systems, and they don't hold a candle to the US. The US university system and medical education is far and away the best in the world - again, there's a reason why the world's wealthy send their children to the US for university and graduate education. There isn't a country that can compare to the number of medical advances and patents that come from the US. Even a cursory review of the number of US medical device makers and pharmas prove this. Simply put, you get what you pay for, and while you may pay more in the US, you get more.

You're probably confusing Western and Eastern Europe.

Typical American arrogance. The rest of the world are peasants, and you're the light we should all follow. Right.

In the meantime, the facts don't lie:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/six-ways-america-is-like-a-third-world-country-20140305

At least I can safely walk down my streets knowing that I'm not going to get shot in the face.

At least I know that I will always have medical care no matter my financial status.

I saw a Belgian movie recently with a kid who had cystic fibrosis, and at a point the kid said:

"It's all about perspective, we could have been sick in the US!"

[Follisket]

It all boils down to just two things, really:
1) No donor regeneration.
You can't go for the hairline you really want without the risk of running out of donor hair at some point. If we had donor regeneration, that would, of course, take care of a lot of other concerns; you could really increase the density, you could fix botched work much more easily and you wouldn't need to worry about scarring as you wouldn't be all too likely to shave your full head of hair anyway.

But most importantly, this:
2) No guarantee it doesn't interfere with potential future treatments.
The results HTs can offer are perfectly acceptable for bridging the gap; but imagine finally getting a treatment that regrows hair yet not being able to benefit from it because you're stuck with a now substandard fix. I'm obviously not saying that will be the case, but I'd certainly like to know for sure.
But then, who the hell is going to research that when they can't even diagnose your ultimate pattern of baldness...

And oh my god, I can't believe I actually witnessed someone trying to hold up the US as a model of healthcare and education for the rest of the world. Ouch.

[kim889]

So the real cure for mpb is the donor area regeneration, and then you can do as many FUE you want.
Is it difficult to make grow new hair in this area?

[Hicks]

You think Belgium and Europe are the third world or what?

Most of your American surgeons cannot hold a candle to Bisanga, Mwamba, De Reys, Feriduni and Devroye.

Medicine is way safer in Europe than it is in the US. I've got a glimpse of your healthcare system in the documentary Sicko.

Bisanga, mwamba and Devroye got their training in the US.

Cosmetic vs a medical Dr./hospital is like comparing apples and rocks. I turned a $4500 ER visit to $145, you won't do that with a cosmetic clinic without an attorney.

[Dimoxynil]

Just out of interest what are people's opinions of SMP ?

[fred970]

Just out of interest what are people's opinions of SMP ?

Same as with FUE:

- Develop an infinite list of disadvantages and excuses
- Remain bald
- Keep on complaining about being bald and how we don't have solutions