Hippocratic Oath or Hypocritical Oaf?

bald_gossipWhen I was a teen I had an incredible Doctor. Incredible because he could balance the ash on the end of his cigarette until it was at least twice as long as the butt he kept constantly between his lips.

He was one of life’s characters. He was a good doctor and I trusted him.

It wasn’t until I entered the hair transplant Industry years later that my respect toward some of my ‘learned friends’ within my industry has diminished somewhat.

Who can blame me? (Mal) practice is rife in my industry!! They may well have named it after me! It’s my ‘pet’ subject.

Nothing’s change. The hair transplant industry is as littered by misinformation and misrepresentation as it ever was. In fact, I find myself right in the middle of it!! Let me explain….

Many people choose to have an F.U.E. (Follicular Unit Extraction) hair transplants based on price. Their priority used to be the Clinic and the ‘team’s’ experience but these days it’s predominantly the cost.

Then how do does one evaluate the cost when most prospective patients don’t even realise that there are 2 ENTIRELY DIFFERENT WAYS of Performing F.U.E. (Follicular Unit Extraction)?

The ‘legitimate’ F.U.E. method is to take the time to ‘select’ the bigger grafts to give patient’s as much density/volume as is possible.

The ‘Selection’ Process.

‘Selection’ is when the doctor and his team scan the patient’s scalp, use magnifying visors to locate and select the grafts with the bigger 3/4 and 4/5 hair grafts, even 6 hair grafts. This ensures their patients get the best density/volume results possible.

‘Density is King’ to most patient’s. You only achieve density by selecting the higher content grafts.

Which is why using the ‘selection’ process 2000 grafts can give patients up to 5200 hairs.

Then there’s the ‘Alternative Method’ 

You may have noticed some clinics are advertising 2000 grafts = 4000 hairs = £2000?

On the face of it, it sounds like great value for your money. Until you take a closer look at how they do it?

They’ve have scrapped the ‘selection’ process. The single most important aspect of the procedure that ensures their patients achieve good density results. It’s gone? Why?

The straight answer is to save time. At least an hour of operating time. Allowing them to greatly reduce their costs and to corner the market on price and to a degree, they’ve succeeded. Mostly because people assume that they do what everybody else does, but cheaper?

They have replaced the ‘selection’ process with predominantly single and 2 hair grafts, ‘plucked’ ad hoc from the patient’s scalp, generally using low paid trainees, So their patients get lower density/volume result.

Had they harvested 4000 hairs using the ‘selection’ process, they would have only needed 1600 grafts and saved their patients up to 400 wasted grafts. 400 grafts equate to an estimated 1200 extra hairs

What they’re doing is offering a ‘watered-down’ version of what the members of the I.S.H.R.S (International Society of Hair Restoration Surgeons) clinics offer Simply by using low-density single and 2 hair grafts.AND it’s loaded against their patient’s best interests.

Need a second procedure for ‘thickening-up’? Because you didn’t get the density you thought you would get? There goes another 400 wasted, valuable grafts?

So what at first looks like a great deal 2000 grafts = 4000 hair = £2000 is not the value it first seemed?

Who could have envisaged doctors offering their patient’s a procedure they know only too well, has had its most valuable asset stripped?

A procedure that can reduce their patient’s density/volume results and can waste up to 20% of their patient’s potential donor areas.

A procedure that can limit their patient’s having further hair transplants. Simply by running out of ‘wasted’ donor grafts?

Can you really trust your doctor?

 

Thank you to for allowing Bald Gossip to use his article

Senior Marketing Consultant/Partner at High Density Hair Transplant