Had a conversation with an IAHRS doctor in SoCal today and was told a lot of information, that while I assume is correct, I wanted to run by everyone here. He stated that FUT was really the only game in town due to a number of things including but not limited to:
1. Much higher harvestability (2:1 was the number he gave me)
2. Almost no transectioning of hair
3. Higher stem cells in the follicular units extracted.
4. Scars heal better than the round holes
5. Preserving as much tissue as possible (the main goal in surgery)
6. Hair actually grows back thicker using FUT vs FUE
He also said I should plan for multiple surgeries as he would only reinforce my current receded hairline as opposed to lower it as he didn't want to do anything more than necessary at first to preserve my donor. Depending on how it looked he would do more a year after the first surgery.
It wasn't that anything he said struck me as wrong or dishonest, but I had been pretty certain that FUE had better results than he seemed to indicate. Thoughts?
A little about me:
1. I have PFS and am on TRT because of it so I am not able to take an anti-androgen (not up for debate).
2. On my way to be a Norwood 3A, but right now more like a Norwood 2.5/3.
3. Looking like I will be diffuse patterned as I have VERY light miniaturization from my front to my vertex. This is the same pattern as my grandpa on ym moms side, and he is at about 40% density now if I had to guess.
4. As far as I can tell I have not had much hairloss since getting off Finasteride in 2018, as far as I can tell.
5. Will be 33 in May
1. Much higher harvestability (2:1 was the number he gave me)
2. Almost no transectioning of hair
3. Higher stem cells in the follicular units extracted.
4. Scars heal better than the round holes
5. Preserving as much tissue as possible (the main goal in surgery)
6. Hair actually grows back thicker using FUT vs FUE
He also said I should plan for multiple surgeries as he would only reinforce my current receded hairline as opposed to lower it as he didn't want to do anything more than necessary at first to preserve my donor. Depending on how it looked he would do more a year after the first surgery.
It wasn't that anything he said struck me as wrong or dishonest, but I had been pretty certain that FUE had better results than he seemed to indicate. Thoughts?
A little about me:
1. I have PFS and am on TRT because of it so I am not able to take an anti-androgen (not up for debate).
2. On my way to be a Norwood 3A, but right now more like a Norwood 2.5/3.
3. Looking like I will be diffuse patterned as I have VERY light miniaturization from my front to my vertex. This is the same pattern as my grandpa on ym moms side, and he is at about 40% density now if I had to guess.
4. As far as I can tell I have not had much hairloss since getting off Finasteride in 2018, as far as I can tell.
5. Will be 33 in May