FUE for young patient... negatives??

[leverkusen]

I understand the negatives of getting strip surgery for a young patient (early 20s)

With a scar and already depleted donor area, there obviously will be a need for further surgeries down the road, which may or may not be possible


But what exactly are the negatives with FUE?
As far as I can see, it could do exactly what I want- keep my young look for at least another few years or so (I just want to live my 20s with hair!). After that, it seems like the hair could be buzzed relatively short and still hide the FUE scars.


So why exactly does everyone freak out when a 22 or 23 yr old looks into this? To me, having hair until 30, and then having weird balding after that (in which I wouldn't mind shaving down) is preferable to this nonsense comb-forward/ toppik nightmare that I am living

 

[JDW]

several reasons but for me the main one is that whilst you think being in your 30s is a long way off, it isn't and from experience you will still want to "live your 30s" with hair as much as you wanted to "live your 20s"...the goalposts will keep moving.

 

[leverkusen]

This is an interesting point, and certainly hard for me to speak to


Though I do find there to be a difference. I do not have unrealistic expectations. For example, even now I would be fine with a look that indicated a receding hairline, so long as I didn't have to go through all the pain to hide the thinning front area as much as I do.

As far as 30s... at least it is no longer abnormal to be balding. I think my tune would change then, especially if married at that point. Anyway, are there any other cases against it? I see footballers like Wesley Sneijder and Wayne Rooney getting FUE at a young age (and I definitely have a bit more hair than they did when they got theirs), and wonder

 

[leverkusen]

I really appreciate hearing your take on this

I feel like most criticisms I have seen of young patients getting an FUE have two serious flaws
-they do not identify the really tough psychological impact of losing hair so young
-they take their own perceptions of hairloss at a more advanced age (30s, 40s, etc) and assume that the young person in question will feel the same way that they do (aka, dissatisfied with a balding look once in their 30s or 40s.... believe me, I would be OK with that if I could keep hair for my 20s!)

Still wondering if there are any other valid medical/ surgical negatives

 

[Rawtashk]

I'm not a doctor, so I'll just tell you why I'm not getting hair transplant work done.

I'm 27, and I've been on finasteride/Rogaine for a bit over 3 years. I have a small thin spot on my crown (hasn't gotten any bigger in 3 years) and some thinning on the hairline. finasteride/Rogaine have helped me keep my hair very well. ALL OTHER MALES in my my family (mother and father's side) were no better than an NW3.5 by the time they were 27, and several of them were NW5.

The baldness pattern that runs in my family is NW5/6, IE: "Old Man Horseshoe". I have really think doner hair density, but I am absolutely certain that I don't have enough to provide any sort of decent coverage for an NW6 scalp.

I also know that finasteride/Rogaine will only work for so long. Sooner or later I will still go bald, and I don't want to have to worry about scars on my scalp, I'd rather just shave it all off when it gets to that point.

Here's what I don't want to end up with

Yes, I know that those are old plugs, but you can see my point. I don't want to be NW6...with a hairline


Just my $0.02

 

[Rutt]

finasteride doesn't stop working. That's literally not biologically possible, no mechanism to sidestep 5-AR production of T->DHT in the body has ever been documented. It always works, cutting DHT to ~85-90%. any advancement in hair loss is either DUPA, or that 10-15% continuing to kill hair.

dutasteride cuts it to 98-99% at about the 1mg level.