» » » CIT, was 1.0 mm punch used on this guy ? What about Cole’s new
» » technology?
» » » What’s that all about?
» »
» » Is CIT harvesting filling up your donor area with body hair?
»
» No. That should be “farming”, I believe.
Mwinston,
There is a method of recharging the donor area on the scalp called “CIT Farming”. This method entails replacing each transplanted scalp follicular unit with another follicular unit found on regions other than the scalp. Most larger cases can demand this method be used. We have seen the results that suggests CIT farming to be benefical for most patients suffering from degrees of hair loss.
» CIT can you answer my question? Was 1.0 mm punch used on this guy?
Reiner,
CIT technology is trade secret and it’s secrecy must be maintained. Our clinic has a full-time engineer on staff who manages the development of custom surgical instruments for each of our patients. This particular patient’s donor area was possibly harvested with an instrument of more than one spec. based on his hair characteristics. Dr. Cole would extract the follicles with the appropriate instrument needed to ensure the best yeild and least amount of damage to the follicles.
» » CIT can you answer my question? Was 1.0 mm punch used on this guy?
»
» Reiner,
»
» CIT technology is trade secret and it’s secrecy must be maintained. Our
» clinic has a full-time engineer on staff who manages the development of
» custom surgical instruments for each of our patients. This particular
» patient’s donor area was possibly harvested with an instrument of more
» than one spec. based on his hair characteristics. Dr. Cole would extract
» the follicles with the appropriate instrument needed to ensure the best
» yeild and least amount of damage to the follicles.
» » » It looks pretty nice the way it is. No way anyone would ever notice
» » » anything fishy if they weren’t trained to know about FUE scars.
» » »
» » » But on the other hand, I don’t see any possible way for another
» couple
» » » thousand grafts to come out of that area.
» » »
» » »
» » »
» » » FUE’s ultimate donor limits are nothing like with strip.
» »
» » That guy has very good donor density. I bet he can take out another
» 2700
» » grafts and his donor will still look ok.
»
» One could assume that it would be possible to go for another pass in this
» case after observing the hair characteristics of this patient. CIT or FUE
» extraction can be performed on the entire donor area to achieve maximal
» harvesting. The visibility of a thinning look could be more visible as
» additionl harvesting is performed. The donor harvesting could be just as
» unnoticeable with a second pass but still isn’t guaranteed. FUE / CIT
» generally is better with harvesting hair. In Strip (FUT), so many
» precious hairs will be damaged just to harvest the strip from the donor.
Dr Cole
Is it plausible that you use a 1mm and higher punch size and that using this tool could be deemed as not FUE infact that is why you chose a different name; the fact it is a secret does nothing for the end result. You now compare CIT and FUE as if the same but in many posts you and your posters extol the virtues of FIT/CIT above FUE.
The fact is I would suggest that it is very possible to remove a follicular unit with a smaller punch than you use and with your method you not only remove more but transect more natural groups but explain by saying the number of hairs per graft is more; with that logic we can go back to 4mm punches.
» » » » It looks pretty nice the way it is. No way anyone would ever notice
» » » » anything fishy if they weren’t trained to know about FUE scars.
» » » »
» » » » But on the other hand, I don’t see any possible way for another
» » couple
» » » » thousand grafts to come out of that area.
» » » »
» » » »
» » » »
» » » » FUE’s ultimate donor limits are nothing like with strip.
» » »
» » » That guy has very good donor density. I bet he can take out another
» » 2700
» » » grafts and his donor will still look ok.
» »
» » One could assume that it would be possible to go for another pass in
» this
» » case after observing the hair characteristics of this patient. CIT or
» FUE
» » extraction can be performed on the entire donor area to achieve maximal
» » harvesting. The visibility of a thinning look could be more visible as
» » additionl harvesting is performed. The donor harvesting could be just
» as
» » unnoticeable with a second pass but still isn’t guaranteed. FUE / CIT
» » generally is better with harvesting hair. In Strip (FUT), so many
» » precious hairs will be damaged just to harvest the strip from the
» donor.
»
» Dr Cole
»
» Is it plausible that you use a 1mm and higher punch size and that using
» this tool could be deemed as not FUE infact that is why you chose a
» different name; the fact it is a secret does nothing for the end result.
» You now compare CIT and FUE as if the same but in many posts you and your
» posters extol the virtues of FIT/CIT above FUE.
»
» The fact is I would suggest that it is very possible to remove a
» follicular unit with a smaller punch than you use and with your method you
» not only remove more but transect more natural groups but explain by saying
» the number of hairs per graft is more; with that logic we can go back to
» 4mm punches.
FUE, like CIT is a method that involves the extraction of a single follicular unit at a time, not extraction of large units containing 12 or more hairs. In CIT, naturally grouped follicular units are extracted and placed in the most natural fashion possible. CIT involves more than an extraction tool whereas FUE is a common method. A tool cannot guarantee a result, hence the reason there is CIT. It is common knowledge that a smaller device is to be used to extract smaller units. A transection rate of 2% or less is common in regard to CIT and is considered to be minimal. Not one specific instrument is used on each patient and that is the logic that delivers the results.
The fact that some viewers assume to have substantiated knowledge of CIT only suggests that there is a lack of knowledge. A matter of opinion suggests that some viewers believe CIT to be regarded above FUE. We produce the results that uphold CIT as a technique and that is a fact.
» » » CIT can you answer my question? Was 1.0 mm punch used on this guy?
» »
» » Reiner,
» »
» » CIT technology is trade secret and it’s secrecy must be maintained. Our
» » clinic has a full-time engineer on staff who manages the development of
» » custom surgical instruments for each of our patients. This particular
» » patient’s donor area was possibly harvested with an instrument of more
» » than one spec. based on his hair characteristics. Dr. Cole would
» extract
» » the follicles with the appropriate instrument needed to ensure the best
» » yeild and least amount of damage to the follicles.
»
» wasnt this called FIT farming not long ago?
As techniques update, as they should, they can be regarded with new names. Extraction of naturally grouped follicular units is still the function of the technique.
» There is a method of recharging the donor area on the scalp called “CIT
» Farming”. This method entails replacing each transplanted scalp
» follicular unit with another follicular unit found on regions other than
» the scalp.
CIT,
What is the typical survival rate of body hair that is farmed to replace scalp donor hair?
Also, I have seen the price list, including the per graft farming cost. Does that “per graft” cost include the extraction of 1 scalp follicle and the implantation of a body hair replacement? If not, it seems to be more expensive to “farm” than to do strictly scalp hair or body hair procedures.
» » There is a method of recharging the donor area on the scalp called “CIT
» » Farming”. This method entails replacing each transplanted scalp
» » follicular unit with another follicular unit found on regions other
» than
» » the scalp.
»
»
»
» CIT,
»
» What is the typical survival rate of body hair that is farmed to replace
» scalp donor hair?
»
» Also, I have seen the price list, including the per graft farming cost.
» Does that “per graft” cost include the extraction of 1 scalp follicle and
» the implantation of a body hair replacement? If not, it seems to be more
» expensive to “farm” than to do strictly scalp hair or body hair
» procedures.
RickH,
Yes, CIT farming includes each scalp hair and non-scalp hair to be transplanted at once. The non-scalp (body hair) cost is actually $2 per graft less by choosing this method. The farming grafts are subject to the same limitations of body hair transplants and grow with the same limitations.
Many patients who have this method performed don’t return and we don’t see many of the end results of farming. The yields cannot be predicted as farming remains a source of non-scalp hair. CIT farming is not always a 1 to 1 exchange and there are also many cases where only a percentage of the donor received CIT farming. The objective of the farming is to replete the donor, camouflage missing scalp hair and stimulate the production of melanin. Patients who use CIT farming are those who have extensive hair loss, need repair, and may expect significant hair loss at a later time.
The photos below depict the result of approx. 2600 CIT farming grafts to the donor area of a class 6 patient. The patient received approx. 6000 CIT grafts to the top and frontal scalp.
» » » » » It looks pretty nice the way it is. No way anyone would ever
» notice
» » » » » anything fishy if they weren’t trained to know about FUE scars.
» » » » »
» » » » » But on the other hand, I don’t see any possible way for another
» » » couple
» » » » » thousand grafts to come out of that area.
» » » » »
» » » » »
» » » » »
» » » » » FUE’s ultimate donor limits are nothing like with strip.
» » » »
» » » » That guy has very good donor density. I bet he can take out another
» » » 2700
» » » » grafts and his donor will still look ok.
» » »
» » » One could assume that it would be possible to go for another pass in
» » this
» » » case after observing the hair characteristics of this patient. CIT
» or
» » FUE
» » » extraction can be performed on the entire donor area to achieve
» maximal
» » » harvesting. The visibility of a thinning look could be more visible
» as
» » » additionl harvesting is performed. The donor harvesting could be
» just
» » as
» » » unnoticeable with a second pass but still isn’t guaranteed. FUE /
» CIT
» » » generally is better with harvesting hair. In Strip (FUT), so many
» » » precious hairs will be damaged just to harvest the strip from the
» » donor.
» »
» » Dr Cole
» »
» » Is it plausible that you use a 1mm and higher punch size and that using
» » this tool could be deemed as not FUE infact that is why you chose a
» » different name; the fact it is a secret does nothing for the end
» result.
» » You now compare CIT and FUE as if the same but in many posts you and
» your
» » posters extol the virtues of FIT/CIT above FUE.
» »
» » The fact is I would suggest that it is very possible to remove a
» » follicular unit with a smaller punch than you use and with your method
» you
» » not only remove more but transect more natural groups but explain by
» saying
» » the number of hairs per graft is more; with that logic we can go back
» to
» » 4mm punches.
»
» FUE, like CIT is a method that involves the extraction of a single
» follicular unit at a time, not extraction of large units containing 12 or
» more hairs. In CIT, naturally grouped follicular units are extracted and
» placed in the most natural fashion possible. CIT involves more than an
» extraction tool whereas FUE is a common method. A tool cannot guarantee a
» result, hence the reason there is CIT. It is common knowledge that a
» smaller device is to be used to extract smaller units. A transection rate
» of 2% or less is common in regard to CIT and is considered to be minimal.
» Not one specific instrument is used on each patient and that is the logic
» that delivers the results.
»
»
» The fact that some viewers assume to have substantiated knowledge of CIT
» only suggests that there is a lack of knowledge. A matter of opinion
» suggests that some viewers believe CIT to be regarded above FUE. We
» produce the results that uphold CIT as a technique and that is a fact.
This is an advertising site for paid
advertisers to showcase successful hair restoration results only. It is not the
mandate of this site to engage in the discussion of failed, unsuccessful
procedures, lawsuits, litigations, refunds or complaint cases. Surgical hair
restoration procedures carry risks. Please do thorough research, consult your
own physician and investigate a doctor's background carefully before making a
decision. By proceeding to use our site, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy at http://hairsite.com/terms-of-use/ where you can also find a list of HairSite's sponsoring physicians.
