Current Advancements in The ARTAS Hair Transplant System - Dr. Craig Ziering - Page 2 - BaldTruthTalk.com
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tron View Post
    It's far more profitable for a Doc to talk a patient into any other procedure besides ARTAS. That's because ARTAS gets $1 for every punch. Not to mention the fact that these machines cost doctors 1/4 million dollars. I'd bet the company is not as cash strapped (at least their financials don't indicate so) as you think.

    I had multiple docs try and steer me away from the ARTAS, completely based on cost/ profit. It's a buisness man, docs gotta make their Tesla payment.

    Lastly, I'm not aware of any industry where robots do a lesser job than humans and professionals continue to buy them. Robots are doing actual life saving surgeries currently too.

    From what is being presented I would say that at this point the ARTAS does a good job extracting on patients who are candidates for larger punch sizes. Even with the smallest punches the robot uses the scaring is a bit larger than other instruments. (I’m assuming this based on the size of the holes left behind) I was a fan and I’m really into the technology, but the results seem to fall short except by the doctors who know what they are doing, which seem to be only a few. I disagree about it being more profitable for doctors to talk you out of the ARTAS. Since they can charge more it’s really a wash, unless the robot limits their ability to transplant more grafts in a single session, which might be the case, so if that is then it’s better for both the doctor and the patients to get more grafts in one session as long as it is a reasonable amount. They either talk the person out of it because they know the results will fall short for that particular patient or because it might be easier to perform a strip or FUE using other methods and offer the patient a “discount”.
    I would love to see their financials, can you point me to where I can find them?

    As far a robots performing life saving surgery today, from all the research I have done, if I was going to have urological surgery or some other life saving surgery, I’d far prefer to go to a true expert in laparoscopic surgery than a place that uses a robot. After 15 years in use, outcomes still seem to be better doing surgery by hand. and far less of a burden on the healthcare system.

    An example is the da Vinci robot.
    “This is a technology that is costing the healthcare system hundreds of millions of dollars and has been marketed as a miracle — and it’s not,” said Dr. John Santa, medical director at Consumer Reports Health. “It’s a fancier way of doing what we’ve always been able to do.”

    Da Vinci was originally designed to do cardiovascular surgery, but it’s fallen out of favor for heart surgeries. Next it was picked up for gynecological surgeries. In 2013, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) said it wasn’t the best, or even the second-best option, for noncancerous gynecological surgeries.

    Here’s the whole article. I’ve read some very scary things about it.

    http://www.healthline.com/health-new...ipoff-021215#1

  2. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Delphi View Post
    I disagree about it being more profitable for doctors to talk you out of the ARTAS. Since they can charge more it’s really a wash, unless the robot limits their ability to transplant more grafts in a single session, which might be the case, so if that is then it’s better for both the doctor and the patients to get more [/url]
    If your business buys a $250,000 machine mine buys a $5,500 handheld machine for FUE extraction and we do the same number of surgeries, which is more profitable? Who's balance sheet would you rather have?

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tron View Post
    If your business buys a $250,000 machine mine buys a $5,500 handheld machine for FUE extraction and we do the same number of surgeries, which is more profitable? Who's balance sheet would you rather have?
    It’s not that cut and dry. Remember, even if a doctor charges only $2 more per graft for an ARTAS hair transplant, he needs less staff then say for strip and he if he has a cheaper machine he has to pay the techs to extract, so he makes even less money per operation. Say he only does small cases of 1500 grafts, multiply that by 200 surgeries a year and the machine is paid for. The reality is that these doctors are charging sometimes 3 or 4 dollars more per graft for ARTAS. Iíve heard of a clinic charging $9 per graft.

    This show opened my eyes to how things work. Itís very enlightening.

    http://www.thebaldtruth.com/hair-tra...ess-stressful/

  4. #14
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Delphi View Post
    It’s not that cut and dry. Remember, even if a doctor charges only $2 more per graft for an ARTAS hair transplant, he needs less staff then say for strip and he if he has a cheaper machine he has to pay the techs to extract, so he makes even less money per operation. Say he only does small cases of 1500 grafts, multiply that by 200 surgeries a year and the machine is paid for. The reality is that these doctors are charging sometimes 3 or 4 dollars more per graft for ARTAS. I’ve heard of a clinic charging $9 per graft.This show opened my eyes to how things work. It’s very enlightening.

    http://www.thebaldtruth.com/hair-tra...ess-stressful/
    Wrong again, I had ARTAS last week and the techs stood around and dabbed blood, moved the extraction square around my head and asked how I was doing. Once the machine was done they all started implanting after the doc made the sites. The same 3 techs who would be doing the manual extraction were still there and still had to manually implant.

    I didn't read about my experience with a robot online, I had a procedure done by one. I am going off my experience not someone else.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tron View Post
    Wrong again, I had ARTIS last week and the techs stood around and dabbed blood, moved the extraction square around my head and asked how I was doing. Once the machine was done they all started implanting after the doc made the sites. The same 3 techs who would be doing the manual extraction were still there and still had to manually implant.

    I didn't read about my experience with a robot online, I had a procedure done by one. I am going off my experience not someone else.
    It’s not about being right or wrong, it’s about what is. In 99% of clinics Techs do all the implantation of the grafts, that’s common knowledge If you were not aware of that going in, then you didn’t do the appropriate amount of research. That’s their job. they are either paid hourly or on salary. When Techs are hired to do extractions, they are paid differently and a lot more money in general. If you feel the need to be right, that’s fine, I’m just attempting to give you the facts. Spreading misinformation does not help anyone. You may have had your ARTAS experience, but it’s clear that you don’t really understand how these doctors and clinics work. I doubt that you asked how much the technicians who were dabbing your blood and implanting your grafts were being paid, so your experience does not really relate to your assumptions about how much more or less doctors make, etc. It’s spelled out in that video I linked to and if you listen to The Bald Truth show, you would have a better understanding of it. They talk about this all the time.

  6. #16
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Delphi View Post
    It’s not about being right or wrong, it’s about what is. In 99% of clinics Techs do all the implantation of the grafts, that’s common knowledge If you were not aware of that going in, then you didn’t do the appropriate amount of research. That’s their job. they are either paid hourly or on salary. When Techs are hired to do extractions, they are paid differently and a lot more money in general. If you feel the need to be right, that’s fine, I’m just attempting to give you the facts. Spreading misinformation does not help anyone. You may have had your ARTAS experience, but it’s clear that you don’t really understand how these doctors and clinics work. I doubt that you asked how much the technicians who were dabbing your blood and implanting your grafts were being paid, so your experience does not really relate to your assumptions about how much more or less doctors make, etc. It’s spelled out in that video I linked to and if you listen to The Bald Truth show, you would have a better understanding of it. They talk about this all the time.

    I asked you a simple.....business.... question. All things being equal, which balance sheet would you rather own? Thats it.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tron View Post
    I asked you a simple.....business.... question. All things being equal, which balance sheet would you rather own? Thats it.
    The point is that all things are not equal. If it were a simple question, then I would be able to give you a simple answer.

  8. #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    6

    Default

    Delphi not to sound disrespectful but to sit there and try to discredit and comepare Da vinci to manual surgery just shows the level of your bias. 90% of surgery in that field is done robotically...FACT not opinion. Patients who don't have the procedure done robotically(da vinci) are simply getting a 2nd class outcome/surgical procedure. IS the Artas perfect yet no, but it's a work in progress that continues to improve over time. It takes time and effort to get close o perfection. But to ignore the fact of the importance of surgical robotics is ignorant. It's no coincidence that Tech giants like Google, and mega life science brands like Johnson & Johnson are pumping billions upon billions of dollars into the field of surgical robotics. I think if you do some actual homework on the sector and not allow outside opinions and pre determined biases to cloud your judgement, you may actually agree. Surgical robotics are going to continue to improve and dominate their respective markets, and those that don't embrace/adopt will eventually be left behind.
    Quote Originally Posted by Delphi View Post
    From what is being presented I would say that at this point the ARTAS does a good job extracting on patients who are candidates for larger punch sizes. Even with the smallest punches the robot uses the scaring is a bit larger than other instruments. (I’m assuming this based on the size of the holes left behind) I was a fan and I’m really into the technology, but the results seem to fall short except by the doctors who know what they are doing, which seem to be only a few. I disagree about it being more profitable for doctors to talk you out of the ARTAS. Since they can charge more it’s really a wash, unless the robot limits their ability to transplant more grafts in a single session, which might be the case, so if that is then it’s better for both the doctor and the patients to get more grafts in one session as long as it is a reasonable amount. They either talk the person out of it because they know the results will fall short for that particular patient or because it might be easier to perform a strip or FUE using other methods and offer the patient a “discount”.
    I would love to see their financials, can you point me to where I can find them?

    As far a robots performing life saving surgery today, from all the research I have done, if I was going to have urological surgery or some other life saving surgery, I’d far prefer to go to a true expert in laparoscopic surgery than a place that uses a robot. After 15 years in use, outcomes still seem to be better doing surgery by hand. and far less of a burden on the healthcare system.

    An example is the da Vinci robot.
    “This is a technology that is costing the healthcare system hundreds of millions of dollars and has been marketed as a miracle — and it’s not,” said Dr. John Santa, medical director at Consumer Reports Health. “It’s a fancier way of doing what we’ve always been able to do.”

    Da Vinci was originally designed to do cardiovascular surgery, but it’s fallen out of favor for heart surgeries. Next it was picked up for gynecological surgeries. In 2013, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) said it wasn’t the best, or even the second-best option, for noncancerous gynecological surgeries.

    Here’s the whole article. I’ve read some very scary things about it.

    http://www.healthline.com/health-new...ipoff-021215#1

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    545

    Default

    No disrespect taken. As far as showing my ďlevel of bias,Ē I'm not a share holder in the company like you are, so I have no axe to grind and feel no bias either way. Iím just a guy voicing my opinion on what is being presented to the public by renowned experts and studies on the subject. Iím also a bit of a technology geek who has hair loss, so I was very excited about the prospect of robotics being used for hair transplant surgery.

    I donít think the 90% statistic you are pointing to equates to the quality of surgery being performed. I would say, however, that it is ďopinion" that people who choose not to have robotic surgery are getting second class outcome/surgical procedures based on the current studies being published on the subject. Perhaps these studies and reports are bias, but I have no reason to believe that these reports are inaccurate.

    What do you think of these reports and studies?

    https://www.drugwatch.com/davinci-surgery/

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/robotic...ows-1412715786

    https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/...urgeries/?_r=0

    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/810490

  10. #20
    Senior Member PayDay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Delphi View Post
    No disrespect taken. As far as showing my “level of bias,” I'm not a share holder in the company like you are, so I have no axe to grind and feel no bias either way. I’m just a guy voicing my opinion on what is being presented to the public by renowned experts and studies on the subject. I’m also a bit of a technology geek who has hair loss, so I was very excited about the prospect of robotics being used for hair transplant surgery.

    I don’t think the 90% statistic you are pointing to equates to the quality of surgery being performed. I would say, however, that it is “opinion" that people who choose not to have robotic surgery are getting second class outcome/surgical procedures based on the current studies being published on the subject. Perhaps these studies and reports are bias, but I have no reason to believe that these reports are inaccurate.

    What do you think of these reports and studies?

    https://www.drugwatch.com/davinci-surgery/

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/robotic...ows-1412715786

    https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/...urgeries/?_r=0

    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/810490
    I find it to be a bit curious that one of the owners of the ARTAS company seems so upset about some very valid questions too. Spencer Kobren seems to speak highly of the technology and that it keeps improving, but he’s been very consistent over the past couple of years in cautioning people to research the doctors and the clinics who buy all of these new machines and robots. Even last week he said the he believes robots should play a big role in the future of hair transplants, so I see that as a positive, but like I said in my last post, I don’t think it’s smart to just think the ARtas is some magical new way to have a better hair transplant. The technicians and doctor are still doing the work and even if the ARTAS can be a little more precise or faster, if the people in the clinic are not good, your hair transplant won’t be good. Like I pointed out if people who know what they are doing and actually own one are still using other methods like in this video with Dr. Arocha https://www.baldtruthtalk.com/thread...ant-DocuSeries there has to be a good reason. Dr. Ziering obviously believes in it too, but it does not seem like most of his hair transplants are done with the ARTAS. Why? This puts a big question mark in my mind. But like I said, Spencer seems to believe the technology keeps improving and I don’t think he would even discuss it if he didn’t believe it was at least as good as other methods for certain specific people. He mentioned something about certain advantages to the patient if the operation takes less time, but I forgot exactly what he said and the podcast has not been posted yet.

    I think you make some very strong points about the De vinci robot Delphi and those article are not too favorable.

Similar Threads

  1. Jason Gardiner's Hair Transplant with Dr. Craig Ziering
    By tbtadmin in forum Hair Transplant: Start Your Own Topic
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 01-06-2013, 01:41 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

» IAHRS

hair transplant surgeons

» The Bald Truth

» Recent Threads

The Bald Truth - September 24th, 2021
Today 12:41 PM
Last Post By JoeTillman
Today 12:41 PM
Fashion Zone Today
02-26-2021 12:07 AM
Last Post By HarryJohnson
Today 08:03 AM
Valproic acid with 10% minoxidil
02-03-2021 02:56 AM
by doke
Last Post By doke
Today 07:42 AM
New io games on the baldtruthtalk forum
04-28-2021 11:36 PM
Last Post By JackBriggs
Today 07:15 AM
Should i worry about this?
05-17-2021 07:19 AM
by Cyclist
Last Post By Greta Hintz
Today 04:50 AM
Can Someone Do My Essay Cheap ?
Yesterday 03:18 AM
Last Post By frederickgragg
Today 03:09 AM