Dear Heliboy,
I appreciate your comments. Some things disappoint me deeply. One is the failure to meet a patient’s expectations. Yet another is to loose a patient. Loss of a patient generally means you performed poorly or you treated a valued customer without the respect they deserve. In your case I had no idea what you needed financial consideration until after you had left my practice. We were keeping all body hair prices high at the time to discouarge patients from jumping into a procedure that had a limited track record. I’m no quitter so I like to finish what I start. After it was apparent that you had sought alternative options, I explored your file. Needless to say, I was exceedingly disappointed. I often perform pro-bono work or discounted work. I have no problem doing extra work if needed at no charge. For instance, I performed over 1000 grafts at no extra charge last Tuesday because I had the time and it was something my patients needed in order to accomplish the mission. You have to realize that when we first began offering FUE at the end of 2002. The response to this offertory was immense. At the time we honestly had few options, instruments, and techniques. At times we had to send patients back home because we could not acquire enough quality grafts to achieve the results we expect. I recall one patient who came to us from Israel. We actually sent him home with 20 grafts in his head because I could not discern an affective way to harvest a substantial number of quality grafts. It is not in my chemistry to cheat a patient. In 2003 we had limited options available for our customers, but an enormous interest in what we were trying to do. We also had a surgery team accustomed to 6000 strip grafts per day at that time. We had no protocol for FUE. The growing pains were very hard on this seasoned staff and cost us a few of them as they saw no future in FUE.
As I recall you had your first procedure with us in April of 2003. Of course I could be wrong in this date. We were trying to use a large surgery microscope at that time, but could not make it work to a degree of satisfaction that meets our high standards. We did some hair line work for you and some redistribution of pitted larger grafts. Our technique at the time was stone age then compared to what we can accomplish today. It was during this period of high demand and limited tools/techniques that I would spend long hours trying to harvest fewer than 500 grafts in some individuals. The evolution of the process was in the trenches work that sometimes would yield only a few hundred grafts because quantity without quality was not an option for us Gradually over 6 months time I developed instrumentation that would allow for a growing successful patient base. The development did not stop there. We still had some cases that stumped us so we continued to develop instruments and capitalize on the depth control aspects of our instrumentation. Most of the development was trial and error, but some of it was fortuitous luck that was a consequence of long hours punctuated by mistakes. Ever so gradually, the procedure evolved and continues to advance even today. We recognized that no one technique or instrument works equally well for all individuals so we evolved into 32 different basic instruments that can be modified infinitely based on individual characteristics. Beyond these 32 instruments we added modifiers that speed the process and the quality of the result.
You are concerned about scarring, but it is actually a good thing that punch size up to a limit does not affect healing because you need multiple options to treat all patients. Recipient site size up to a certain size does not affect healing either. The ablity to vary instruments is the reason we are able to acheive consitent results.
Repair work with DJ evolved slowly as well. I had to invent techniques to overcome the problems here, take out everything and then put it back so that he had a natural appearance. He had almost no donor area because it had been cut out and thrown away by agressive scalp reduction procedures called a Lift. Even today, however, I am sure he would like more density. There is a limited supply of body hair remaining. Much of his body hair grew well. i do not think it did as well in his strip scars. Sometimes it grows well in strip scars and sometimes it doesn’t.
We were very impressed by the early body hair results of Dr. Wood. Therefore, we sought methods to remove body hair safely and affectively. Pricing was initially high to discourage patients from choosing this method of hair restoration while we worked on technique. We had a few patients who could afford large sessions and were willing to take chances that it would work. I honestly told people that I could not gurantee growth at all and i could not predict scarring. It did work very well in our first large case, but not as good in some other very large cases.
Heliboy, you are fortunate to have found a physician that achieved a very good result for you. I am happy that you have such a wonderful result that pleases you greatly. I’m sorry to loose a patient, but much happier that you have a satisfying result. I am pleased for both you and Dr. Umar and sincerely hope he will continue building on such success stories as you and So Far So Good.
With regard to Las Vegas, I planned to go out Saturday morning, but cancelled at the last minute. I stayed home with my younger children and played golf with my 11 year old son and 9 year old daughter. We did have a booth at the meeting where we promoted many of our surgical instruments that are either patented or patent pending. I think they have had 13 meetings thus far and I’ve missed only two. I’ve done well over my share of presenting including body hair results. I brought 6 patients to the meeting last year. Two had body hair results. I intentionally brought one who had a great result and on who had a subtle result to show that one cannot always guarantee great results with body hair. I did not want to over promote the procedure to other physicians. Unfortunately, the great result did not come so I fear that many left with a disappointed outlook on body hair. I’ve also presented many cases via slides showing body hair results and study data that document some of the challenges and limitations we face with body hair. I know that the slide presentations have been well received in the past.
My personal take on body hair is that it is good filler hair. One should use head hair first and then body hair. One should not over sell the potential as sometimes the result is quite subtle. One of the problems with body hair is that it often begins to grow quite fine. It may never reach the original diameter prior to transplantation and this will definately affect the end result, which will be much thinner. We also know that high densities do not always produce the desired yield, based on a study I performed comparing high density yeild to low density yeild. Therefore, I no longer transplant body hair at a density higher than 30 per sq cm. Obviously, this will not produce as much coverage as 70 per sq cm, but the yield seems to be better in some. I’ve seen it grow well at densities approaching 70 per sq cm, but this does not always occur. Body hair is useful to those with repair work where the donor area is essentially exhausted. I wish it worked equally well for all individuals, but this simply does not seem to be the case. We have always told patients that we cannot guarantee any results with body hair.
