I heard a radio broadcast tonight by a patient advocate. I remember speaking with him in 2005. I remember precisely where I was during this conversation. In 2005, he stated that FUE was not equal to strip surgery (FUT). Apparently, he has not kept up with the literature because we have shown over and over that FUE produces better yields without the negatives of strips. The negatives of strips include the potential for wide scars, changes in hair growth angles, the marriage of fine hair with coarse hair, the inability to trim your hair short, persistent tightness in your scalp, persistent loss of sensation in your donor area along with the number one negative, which is strips kill hair in your donor area. Strips create traction alopecia in the donor area. I presented this data in 2014, but no strip surgeon nor any patient advocate has acknowledged this compelling data. Strips kill hair. FUE does not kill hair. Of course, these same advocates and mentors have always failed to recognize all the other problems that strips cause dating back to 2003.
Thus, the question remains, why don’t these advocates recognize the truth. The fact is that they all promote strip surgeons for a fee. I found this radio broadcast so ridiculous because it was the exact opposite of what I’ve preached since 2003. In the radio show the host states that if the surgeon believes that you are a candidate for a strip, but the surgeon still promotes FUE, you should walk out the door. I’ve reiterated since 2003 that if the patient is a candidate for FUE and your surgeon does not offer or suggest FUE by a doctor skilled in FUE (all the time), you should walk out the door. The host goes on to state that tool makers are only interested in making money, so they promote them. However, he fails to mention that he makes money off of helping his strip surgeons and his FUE surgeons and making money is his objective. What this radio host failed to mention was that tools for FUE did not exist in 2003 so I had to create them and other manufacturers followed. Does this host even bother to give us credit for inventing tools to carry out advancements in medicine? No! This host is interested solely in advancing his message, which is to scare patients into accepting his advice and supporting the doctors, who financially compensate him for this embrace.
Most of the individuals claiming to be advisors or consumer advocates are making money in their promotions. Thus, all of their advice should recognize that money is involved.
I can recall when these patient advisors and patient advocates promoted strips over FUE. Then the tide turned, and they had not recourse other than to accept FUE as if they invented it. Now they still claim strips are still beneficial in some instances. There is never a case in which FUT are useful. Strips cause harm in every case.
I would not take the advice of these individuals. They offer poor judgment for financial reasons. They remind me of Cramer on CNBC. Sometimes Cramer makes good recommendations and sometimes he does not. I’ve never seen him come on TV to apologize for his bad advice, and Cramer does not cover your losses. Cramer appears to still sell advice for a fee. That’s all these patient advocates, and patient mentors do. When advocates and mentors give you bad advice, only the patient has negative consequences. Remember, the best doctors do not need anyone to recommend them. Only bad doctors need an advocate or mentor to obtain surgeries. Sure, these advocates and mentors suggest some good doctors, but they also support some atrocious ones and losers just as Cramer does. No advocate nor mentor recommends all top doctors because the many top doctors don’t need advocates nor mentors to push their practices.
It is time for advocates and mentors to find a new avenue to make money because the internet has leveled the playing field. We don’t need these advocates and mentors any longer. There was a time when these scoundrels served a purpose, so we had to put up with these fear mongers. Now we don’t need them, and they have become a nuisance.
I’d suggest that if your advocate recommends ARTAS in any way, you should run away from his advice. Some of the worst results and greatest damage to the donor area are ARTAS results. Advocates don’t publish these negatives because they have financial incentive to suppress these bad results.