-
The truth about shock loss
So I often see the claim that if a person is a victim of permanent shock loss (native hair a person has falling out and not returning) - then that hair was on its "last legs" and would have been lost anyway. I'm not convinced that this is evidence based, and it's much more likely that the native hair was damaged/transected during the transplant and that this person wasn't going to suddenly lose hair that was normal hair thickness (hair that hasn't become fine/transparent bum-fluff) even if they didn't have the transplant.
Does anyone have any evidence to the contrary, because I see this as an excuse to avoid blame if there is a high transection rate.
Similar Threads
-
By David s in forum Introduce Yourself & Share Your Story
Replies: 12
Last Post: 06-30-2022, 05:29 AM
-
By jetfan11 in forum Introduce Yourself & Share Your Story
Replies: 2
Last Post: 01-23-2016, 01:31 PM
-
By Hair sir in forum Hair Transplant: Start Your Own Topic
Replies: 4
Last Post: 07-02-2014, 06:21 PM
-
By Carra-Legend in forum Hair Transplant: Start Your Own Topic
Replies: 0
Last Post: 06-09-2010, 01:27 PM
-
By wb280 in forum Introduce Yourself & Share Your Story
Replies: 3
Last Post: 11-09-2009, 09:36 AM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules
|
» IAHRS
» The Bald Truth
» americanhairloss.org
|
Bookmarks