You havent addressed the hair coming from the sweet spot.
Or more fatty tissue protecting the dermal papillae, which decreases transection rates.
Also it's a fact you can get more grafts lifetime if you do FUT first followed by FUE after being stripped out.
My question to you is why would u pay MORE money to get LESS hair. It appears to me to be a mathematical fallacy.
If i get a hair transplant i will not shave my head. Scar wont matta
It won't matter assuming the transplant turns out good and stays good. It's the people who eventually lose enough to just want to give up on the whole thing that then have the problem with a scar that stops them shaving down completely. Which is a way better look than the monk-style bald on top with hair at the back and sides unshaved.
02-09-2016 05:01 AM
tedwuji
Quote:
Originally Posted by allTheGoodNamesAreTaken
It won't matter assuming the transplant turns out good and stays good. It's the people who eventually lose enough to just want to give up on the whole thing that then have the problem with a scar that stops them shaving down completely. Which is a way better look than the monk-style bald on top with hair at the back and sides unshaved.
Im 32 w/ mild loss & 5 years stable on fin
02-09-2016 06:21 AM
HTsoon
Because a lot of FUSS surgeons tell you its an inferior procedure, the grafts are more fragile and the yield is up to 30% less, i've had only FUE so I can speak from my own experience the growth has been anything but amazing, doctors like Feller have an anti-FUE agenda they push hard and often times you see people simply regurgitating what he says verbatim, the truth is you can have amazing results with either procedure, does FUE have draw backs yes the price is one of them and you have to do more surgeries to get the same amount of grafts, the whole lifetime grafts is a load of bologne its logical fallacy based on a supposed "universal" donor zone, the truth is everyone's universal zone is different, there are man who die norwood 3 in their 90's so the hair outside of their "universal" zone was permanent, if they'd had a transplant and used this hair it would last a lifetime, in the same token there are men like Steve Ballmer who's hair is so sensitive to DHT that his temples have nearly completed receded and he has only a thin whispy ring of hair, the hair taken from a large strip would not be permanent on his case.
02-09-2016 08:27 AM
tedwuji
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTsoon
Because a lot of FUSS surgeons tell you its an inferior procedure, the grafts are more fragile and the yield is up to 30% less, i've had only FUE so I can speak from my own experience the growth has been anything but amazing, doctors like Feller have an anti-FUE agenda they push hard and often times you see people simply regurgitating what he says verbatim, the truth is you can have amazing results with either procedure, does FUE have draw backs yes the price is one of them and you have to do more surgeries to get the same amount of grafts, the whole lifetime grafts is a load of bologne its logical fallacy based on a supposed "universal" donor zone, the truth is everyone's universal zone is different, there are man who die norwood 3 in their 90's so the hair outside of their "universal" zone was permanent, if they'd had a transplant and used this hair it would last a lifetime, in the same token there are men like Steve Ballmer who's hair is so sensitive to DHT that his temples have nearly completed receded and he has only a thin whispy ring of hair, the hair taken from a large strip would not be permanent on his case.
Imma strip out and then scour the zone w/ FUE in a nearly beligrent manner to get my 10k grafts lifetime while popping Fin daily from a Pez dispenser. Play2win
02-10-2016 05:26 AM
tedwuji
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTsoon
Because a lot of FUSS surgeons tell you its an inferior procedure, the grafts are more fragile and the yield is up to 30% less, i've had only FUE so I can speak from my own experience the growth has been anything but amazing, doctors like Feller have an anti-FUE agenda they push hard and often times you see people simply regurgitating what he says verbatim, the truth is you can have amazing results with either procedure, does FUE have draw backs yes the price is one of them and you have to do more surgeries to get the same amount of grafts, the whole lifetime grafts is a load of bologne its logical fallacy based on a supposed "universal" donor zone, the truth is everyone's universal zone is different, there are man who die norwood 3 in their 90's so the hair outside of their "universal" zone was permanent, if they'd had a transplant and used this hair it would last a lifetime, in the same token there are men like Steve Ballmer who's hair is so sensitive to DHT that his temples have nearly completed receded and he has only a thin whispy ring of hair, the hair taken from a large strip would not be permanent on his case.
Because a lot of FUSS surgeons tell you its an inferior procedure, the grafts are more fragile and the yield is up to 30% less, i've had only FUE so I can speak from my own experience the growth has been anything but amazing, doctors like Feller have an anti-FUE agenda they push hard and often times you see people simply regurgitating what he says verbatim, the truth is you can have amazing results with either procedure, does FUE have draw backs yes the price is one of them and you have to do more surgeries to get the same amount of grafts, the whole lifetime grafts is a load of bologne its logical fallacy based on a supposed "universal" donor zone, the truth is everyone's universal zone is different, there are man who die norwood 3 in their 90's so the hair outside of their "universal" zone was permanent, if they'd had a transplant and used this hair it would last a lifetime, in the same token there are men like Steve Ballmer who's hair is so sensitive to DHT that his temples have nearly completed receded and he has only a thin whispy ring of hair, the hair taken from a large strip would not be permanent on his case.
Simple: It's expensive, it doesn't produce a full head of hair, and there's a chance you can be disfigured. A fourth issue is this: will previous surgeries interfere with future new protocols (particularly the wounding protocols like Follica's)? Surgeries cause scaring - can the new protocols in the pipeline (CB, HSC, etc.) grow hair in that scared tissue, or does scaring make hair growth impossible? Like Spencer says: Once you're cut, you're cut.
If I were a NW 4 or worse, I'd get an HT; there's nothing coming out anytime soon that's going to grow a NW4 into a NW 2 or better. But if I were a NW3 or less, I wouldn't get an HT in the near future; there are too many promising treatments coming out in the next three to five years to risk a surgery.
bump
just think its funny that people always think a miracle is always around the corner, "in the next few years."
people have been saying that for years
06-15-2017 08:23 PM
Handbeezy
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSix
bump
just think its funny that people always think a miracle is always around the corner, "in the next few years."
people have been saying that for years
There has also been a bunch of encouraging developments in recent years, some new approaches have actually grown new hair and companies are pushing ahead with further trials.
