Highlights from the 2012 ISHRS meeting in Bahamas

[534623]

Here is the thing with these all these hair transplant doctors. They all have a big financial interest in all of this so of course they are biased against anything new or different they just want to keep doing transplants and making a lot of money.

I think it’s little bit inappropriate to say “they all“ – because the ISHRS as such, has around 800-1000 “members”. That means, of course, you simply can’t blame them ALL.

So the question rather remains, who is responsible for this article/brief summary or “news for hair loss sufferers” as such?

Unfortunately, HARIRI forgot to mention THE persons who contributed to this article/highlights – here they are:
*****************
… we interviewed a number of recommended physicians to provide this community with their input on the meeting.

The below highlights from this year’s conference come from presentations and interviews with recommended hair restoration physicians

- Dr. Parsa Mohebi,
- Dr. James Harris, and
- Coalition members Dr. Damkerng Pathomvanich,
- Dr. Jerry Cooley and
- Dr. Robert True.

A special thanks to these expert physicians for providing this community with their feedback on the latest innovations discussed at the 2012 ISHRS meeting.
*****************

So if you don’t trust them, or if you don’t like what they report …

http://de.scribd.com/doc/109186357/ISHRS-20th-Abstract-Book-2012-Bahamas-Final

… scroll down this almost endless page, and try to find out, what’re for you THE “highlights” from this meeting.

[clarence]

Guys, this meeting sounds like a bunch of hair transplant fanboys getting together and counting how much money they made this year giving ppl limited hair and ruining their lives once their hairloss progresses!

And what would stop them from doing it, if they keep convincing themselves this:
"If the surgery is planned out well, you should not need more surgery because you continued to bald. You may look thinner over time, but it should still look natural, not prompting the need for another surgery. Wanting another surgery is a different story." --Dr. William Rassman

It should still look natural?? Not prompting the need for another surgery!!??? No need for another surgery to look natural, when you continue to bald?? Well, I wonder, does Dr. Rassmann see anything 'natural' in a pair of thick hair line corners, which staunchly surround a somewhat thinner forelock when you reach your 50s? Or does a "well" planned out surgery exclude even 30-year old NW3 patients, whose forelock is at the time of surgery just too thick to allow for grafts to be placed in that area?? Or am I just too dumb to understand?

[534623]

And what would stop them from doing it, if they keep convincing themselves this:

"If the surgery is planned out well, you should not need more surgery because you continued to bald. You may look thinner over time, but it should still look natural, not prompting the need for another surgery. Wanting another surgery is a different story." --Dr. William Rassman

It should still look natural?? Not prompting the need for another surgery!!??? No need for another surgery to look natural, when you continue to bald?? Well, I wonder, does Dr. Rassmann see anything 'natural' in a pair of thick hair line corners, which staunchly surround a somewhat thinner forelock when you reach your 50s? Or does a "well" planned out surgery exclude even 30-year old NW3 patients, whose forelock is at the time of surgery just too thick to allow for grafts to be placed in that area?? Or am I just too dumb to understand?

Interesting you bring that up …

In the early 90s (1991, guys like Dr. Rassman didn’t even know how to perform a FUT procedure!), they told me the same – I’m the guy on the right side, 2 years ago.

The guy on the left side is in his 20s (a young HST patient, "in the near future" a norwood 5A guy as me), I’m in my early 40s (right side).
Indeed, in my 20s, the small strip HT’s, to fill-up my receding temple areas/hairline, sure, helped a lot, because I didn’t lose all the remaining hairs in the forelock, mid-scalp and vertex area – WITHOUT using any meds!
So during my 20s - early 30s, I had always an almost full head of hair.
In my early 30s, I suddenly noticed thinning also within all the other areas. I tried to use Propecia for around 2-3 years – not really successful, because even by using Propecia, I suddenly noticed thinning also in the vertex area. So I stopped using it ... here is the reason:

“If you don't use it - you will lose it?”

It wasn’t my intention to harm (possibly) my body just due to some f…… hairs, which are, in fact, “just still existing zombies on my head”.

FUE?
pffffffft … I “skipped” doing normal FUE procedures, because I KNEW in advance that FUE would have given me only a (temporary) benefit in the front area, and it wasn’t my intention, to deplete my donor area even more, besides the already existing strip scars due to my “benefit” in my 20s in my temple areas, which you still can see TODAY.
So I was practically forced to wait around 8 years – until recently…

[clarence]

534623: Well.. you had some grafts placed in the forelock back then, it appears, or at least at the central hair line. But those guys who have no grafts placed into the forelock at the time of the transplant, will prove Dr. Rassman wrong, when their balding progresses.




I'm talking about guys like me, who - in a quite abrupt manner - currently have 100% density behind the green line, and yet, these guys are all forehead in front of the green line. Not such a good idea to get a transplant now, unless the plan includes to have another one in the future, hmm Dr. Rassman?

[topcat]

Yeah sure Carlos Puig as Vice President, sounds like a giant circle jerk to me.

I mean seriously would Spencer consider Puig to come on the show as an expert.............hmmmm...........probably not yet these guy thinks he is expert enough to be second in command........lol.........

That''s not bitterness, it's reality and if anything how can one not laugh..........I point it out because I find it funny not because it makes me angry.

[534623]

534623: Well.. you had some grafts placed in the forelock back then, it appears, or at least at the central hair line. But those guys who have no grafts placed into the forelock at the time of the transplant, will prove Dr. Rassman wrong, when their balding progresses.

Correct. In 1997/98, it was my 4th and last small strip procedure (GAME OVER, because the tension between the strip scars or in general in the donor area, was already too strong) they placed also some so called mini/micro grafts, which consist of up to 6 follicles per graft (mostly they are in a row), were also placed in the forelock area, because the forelock area started suddenly to thin out a little bit during this time. So all in all the progress of my hairloss has always been - even just rather slowly - like a battle against windmills.

I'm talking about guys like me, who - in a quite abrupt manner - currently have 100% density behind the green line, and yet, these guys are all forehead in front of the green line. Not such a good idea to get a transplant now, unless the plan includes to have another one in the future, hmm Dr. Rassman?

The so called "plan" is the point. Where will you hairloss end up - and WHEN?

Everything you can do is trying Propecia 3 times a week (completely enough) for at least 2 years. But how can you know that Propecia works for you when there is still "100% density" in all the other areas? I had the same almost 10 years in my 20s - WITHOUT propecia.

The most "permanent solution" is simply by replacing the "zombies" STEP-BY-STEP and doing this - always just with a very very wisely (graft-) calculation. Otherwise you will end up with "Rassman's formula".

By the way - permanent solution:
All the rather "patchy" looking hairs in my front area (without these hairs, I would be completel bald in the front area), which you can see in the pic, especially those in the temple areas, these transplanted hairs are now 22 years old - and have still completely the same characteristics as the hairs in the donor area. They are not thinner or something.

[clarence]

I'm just saying, the conditions and consequences of hair transplantation seem fairly easy to grasp even without being some Socrates of hair restoration, but this Rassman seems to have some superior understanding which allows him to transplant most people in such a way, that their hair pattern will look completely natural forever, even if additional surgery is excluded.

[DepressedByHairLoss]

Burtandernie, I couldn't agree with you more. That ISHRS is so full of shit. I get such a kick out of how they say that stem cell therapy won't be available in the near future. They are so full of it, and I have no doubt that they are saying this because it is in the best interest of a lot of these HT surgeons to put forth this misleading propaganda. They figure that if people are told that stem cell hair therapy or non-invasive hair regrowth methods will not be available anytime soon, then more people will rush out and get hair transplants rather than wait for new, more innovative, and much less invasive ways to regrow hair. And we all know that when these stem cell therapies become available, these archaic hair transplants will become nearly obsolete and many doctors that are performing them will take huge hit in their pocketbook and lose so many potential customers/patients. And when these new treatments come to fruition, a lot of these HT doctors will lose lots of business and a ton of money. And no one wants to lose money or stop making as much money, and that's why the ISHRS spreads this kind of misleading information.

I don't think that the ISHRS is a very reputable organization either. I mean, look at some of the doctors who are members. Dr. Orentreich is a member and this is the same doctor who tried to convince Spencer (who almost had a full head of hair at the time) to "try out" a few plugs. And the doctor who defamed the American Hair Loss Association and butchered and disfigured many HT patients was also a member until he had his practice shut down not too long ago.

I remember hearing Spencer say that he felt compelled to start up the American Hair Loss Association partly as a response to all of bullshit and corruption that he saw within the hair restoration industry. Although I'm no advocate of Spencer's stature at all, I feel the need to write what I write on this forum because of all the bullshit and corruption that I still see going on in the hair restoration industry.

Alright, I'll get off of my soapbox now. (--:

[DepressedByHairLoss]

Seriously!!!!!!!!!

If Aderans initiates its Phase 3 by Dec 2013 we will have it on the market by Dec 2015!

Where did these guys get 8-10 years from?!

If Histogen initiates its Phase 3 by Dec 2013 we will have it FDA approved by Dec 2015!!!!

Guys, this meeting sounds like a bunch of hair transplant fanboys getting together and counting how much money they made this year giving ppl limited hair and ruining their lives once their hairloss progresses!

Regardless of all this, we will know where Histogen and Aderans stand by June this year! Stay positive guys!

You really hit the nail on the head, Desmond, and I totally agree with you.