Hair Transplant donor transection biopsy photo

Hair Transplant
1

Found this in the archives.

When it comes to donor transection, the only way to know for sure is to perform a biopsy. Unfortunately, that is usually not practical.

Below is a photo taken by Dr. Cole / Dr. Rose several years ago. It provides an excellent view of what’s happening underneath the skin. Great photo.

2

Thats a great photos. Looks good.

3

» Found this in the archives.
»
» When it comes to donor transection, the only way to know for sure is to
» perform a biopsy. Unfortunately, that is usually not practical.
»
» Below is a photo taken by Dr. Cole / Dr. Rose several years ago. It
» provides an excellent view of what’s happening underneath the skin. Great
» photo.
»
»

Awsome photo. I just wana dip it in some sauce and bite it.

4

So the doctor did fue on the patient and then took out a chunk of the patient’s flesh in order to examine the follicles under the skin? why would anyone let the doctor do that?

5

This one is a keeper, you can even see the fat tissue coating each follicle.

6

» So the doctor did fue on the patient and then took out a chunk of the
» patient’s flesh in order to examine the follicles under the skin? why
» would anyone let the doctor do that?

No thats not the case. Common sense tells me they’re using a portion of the strip removed during FUSS procedure. The “strip”.

7

This is “Direct Vision”.
Very good

BUT, you still cannot see what is behind the follicle you are cutting…are there bulbs there ?? You can’t see . And this is as good as direct vision gets

Now slice it up. Dissecting individual follicles is possible.

But in my 20 years of my observations, it is my opinion that it is impossible to do so without damage to follicular units suurrouding the target unit.

That is why countless guys have massive strip scars and very little to show for it.

That is not to deny there are lucky guys out there who have good results compared to the size of the scar and tissue removed.

FUE does not have this luxoury.
The doctor needs to have the right skills, magnification and tools…and many many years of individual effort in learning how to FEEL their way around a follicle.
They need to recognize through their finger tips the most minute changes telling them if they are one tenth of a millimeter off course, and every split second, re adust to make sure transection is less than 5% and no damage is done to the neighbouring follicles

That is why after all these years, Dr Campbell and I can , with 500 genuine follicular units, provide better results and significantly less damage, than clinics offering many more grafts at a so called cheaper rate.

The cost of destroyed follicles cannot be valued because they are gone forever

Dr Ray Woods

8

I assume the “bulbs” Woods talked about are the tiny black dots at the root of the follicle, this is what the doctor needs to preserve? I don’t understand the purpose of this picture, is the purpose to show fue transection or strip transection or something entirely different?

» This is “Direct Vision”.
» Very good
»
» BUT, you still cannot see what is behind the follicle you are cutting…are
» there bulbs there ?? You can’t see . And this is as good as direct vision
» gets
»
» Now slice it up. Dissecting individual follicles is possible.
»
» But in my 20 years of my observations, it is my opinion that it is
» impossible to do so without damage to follicular units suurrouding the
» target unit.
»
» That is why countless guys have massive strip scars and very little to
» show for it.
»
» That is not to deny there are lucky guys out there who have good results
» compared to the size of the scar and tissue removed.
»
» FUE does not have this luxoury.
» The doctor needs to have the right skills, magnification and tools…and
» many many years of individual effort in learning how to FEEL their way
» around a follicle.
» They need to recognize through their finger tips the most minute changes
» telling them if they are one tenth of a millimeter off course, and every
» split second, re adust to make sure transection is less than 5% and no
» damage is done to the neighbouring follicles
»
» That is why after all these years, Dr Campbell and I can , with 500
» genuine follicular units, provide better results and significantly less
» damage, than clinics offering many more grafts at a so called cheaper
» rate.
»
» The cost of destroyed follicles cannot be valued because they are gone
» forever
»
» Dr Ray Woods

9

» I assume the “bulbs” Woods talked about are the tiny black dots at the root
» of the follicle, this is what the doctor needs to preserve? I don’t
» understand the purpose of this picture, is the purpose to show fue
» transection or strip transection or something entirely different?
»
» » This is “Direct Vision”.
» » Very good
» »
» » BUT, you still cannot see what is behind the follicle you are
» cutting…are
» » there bulbs there ?? You can’t see . And this is as good as direct
» vision
» » gets
» »
» » Now slice it up. Dissecting individual follicles is possible.
» »
» » But in my 20 years of my observations, it is my opinion that it is
» » impossible to do so without damage to follicular units suurrouding the
» » target unit.
» »
» » That is why countless guys have massive strip scars and very little to
» » show for it.
» »
» » That is not to deny there are lucky guys out there who have good
» results
» » compared to the size of the scar and tissue removed.
» »
» » FUE does not have this luxoury.
» » The doctor needs to have the right skills, magnification and tools…and
» » many many years of individual effort in learning how to FEEL their way
» » around a follicle.
» » They need to recognize through their finger tips the most minute
» changes
» » telling them if they are one tenth of a millimeter off course, and
» every
» » split second, re adust to make sure transection is less than 5% and no
» » damage is done to the neighbouring follicles
» »
» » That is why after all these years, Dr Campbell and I can , with 500
» » genuine follicular units, provide better results and significantly less
» » damage, than clinics offering many more grafts at a so called cheaper
» » rate.
» »
» » The cost of destroyed follicles cannot be valued because they are gone
» » forever
» »
» » Dr Ray Woods

When a strip is cut out , it is then cut into blocks, like the one shown

The techs then , hopefully under a stereoscope, start dissecting out the individual follicular units.

As stated, you can see the follicle your are going for, but not bulbs behind it, as the blade cuts through.

And cutting the bulbs, or transection, is game over.

You have just destroyed the follicle.

And planting such transected follicles is the FRAUD of the industry.

Makes the numbers look good and you can claim megasessions…but it is a con.

Complicit “patients” and some clever photoshop does the rest.

That is not to say some guys are lucky…

And FUE in some ways is even worse. It gives a false sense of security while a "plague of locust " punch away at your head, while some assistant stands there with a CLICKER, counting the moment an instrument touches the head, with no regard as to what actually is removed, be it intact follicle, or useless fragment.

No regulation, no dissent, and ISHRS buddies stick together.

Dr Ray Woods

10

» Found this in the archives.
»
» When it comes to donor transection, the only way to know for sure is to
» perform a biopsy. Unfortunately, that is usually not practical.
»
» Below is a photo taken by Dr. Cole / Dr. Rose several years ago. It
» provides an excellent view of what’s happening underneath the skin. Great
» photo.
»

I believe that, if this photo is meant to show the safety of FUE and lack of transection then it should be treated with caution. To some extent the photo is quite deceptive without any acompanying qualification.

1: It is clear that the follicles extracted by FUE were performed after the strip was removed. Little or no inflamitory responce would be likely in that scenario wheras it could be significant if performed in situ. In other words the surrounding follicles may be effected very diferently when the extraction is performed on the living sclap.

2: If you look at the follicles that can be seen in the forground of the photo then two of thos are very close at the matrix / bulb. Even though they are well peperated at the dermis, it would be imposible to be confident of seperating those be sharp disection without damage.

3: From looking at the photo, it may be that the disection was made only half as deep as the actual follicle and then it was pulled out and this is a common practice in FUE. There can be tearing and pulling that can also disrupt surrounding follicles even though there is no obvious damage.

11

» » Found this in the archives.
» »
» » When it comes to donor transection, the only way to know for sure is to
» » perform a biopsy. Unfortunately, that is usually not practical.
» »
» » Below is a photo taken by Dr. Cole / Dr. Rose several years ago. It
» » provides an excellent view of what’s happening underneath the skin.
» Great
» » photo.
» »
»
» I believe that, if this photo is meant to show the safety of FUE and lack
» of transection then it should be treated with caution. To some extent the
» photo is quite deceptive without any acompanying qualification.
»
» 1: It is clear that the follicles extracted by FUE were performed after
» the strip was removed. Little or no inflamitory responce would be likely in
» that scenario wheras it could be significant if performed in situ. In other
» words the surrounding follicles may be effected very diferently when the
» extraction is performed on the living sclap.
»
» 2: If you look at the follicles that can be seen in the forground of the
» photo then two of thos are very close at the matrix / bulb. Even though
» they are well peperated at the dermis, it would be imposible to be
» confident of seperating those be sharp disection without damage.
»
» 3: From looking at the photo, it may be that the disection was made only
» half as deep as the actual follicle and then it was pulled out and this is
» a common practice in FUE. There can be tearing and pulling that can also
» disrupt surrounding follicles even though there is no obvious damage.

I was going to say the EXACT samething.

12

» » I assume the “bulbs” Woods talked about are the tiny black dots at the
» root
» » of the follicle, this is what the doctor needs to preserve? I don’t
» » understand the purpose of this picture, is the purpose to show fue
» » transection or strip transection or something entirely different?
» »
» » » This is “Direct Vision”.
» » » Very good
» » »
» » » BUT, you still cannot see what is behind the follicle you are
» » cutting…are
» » » there bulbs there ?? You can’t see . And this is as good as direct
» » vision
» » » gets
» » »
» » » Now slice it up. Dissecting individual follicles is possible.
» » »
» » » But in my 20 years of my observations, it is my opinion that it is
» » » impossible to do so without damage to follicular units suurrouding
» the
» » » target unit.
» » »
» » » That is why countless guys have massive strip scars and very little
» to
» » » show for it.
» » »
» » » That is not to deny there are lucky guys out there who have good
» » results
» » » compared to the size of the scar and tissue removed.
» » »
» » » FUE does not have this luxoury.
» » » The doctor needs to have the right skills, magnification and
» tools…and
» » » many many years of individual effort in learning how to FEEL their
» way
» » » around a follicle.
» » » They need to recognize through their finger tips the most minute
» » changes
» » » telling them if they are one tenth of a millimeter off course, and
» » every
» » » split second, re adust to make sure transection is less than 5% and
» no
» » » damage is done to the neighbouring follicles
» » »
» » » That is why after all these years, Dr Campbell and I can , with 500
» » » genuine follicular units, provide better results and significantly
» less
» » » damage, than clinics offering many more grafts at a so called cheaper
» » » rate.
» » »
» » » The cost of destroyed follicles cannot be valued because they are
» gone
» » » forever
» » »
» » » Dr Ray Woods
»
»
» When a strip is cut out , it is then cut into blocks, like the one shown
»
» The techs then , hopefully under a stereoscope, start dissecting out the
» individual follicular units.
»
» As stated, you can see the follicle your are going for, but not bulbs
» behind it, as the blade cuts through.
»
» And cutting the bulbs, or transection, is game over.
»
» You have just destroyed the follicle.
»
» And planting such transected follicles is the FRAUD of the industry.
»
» Makes the numbers look good and you can claim megasessions…but it is a
» con.
»
» Complicit “patients” and some clever photoshop does the rest.
»
» That is not to say some guys are lucky…
»
» And FUE in some ways is even worse. It gives a false sense of security
» while a "plague of locust " punch away at your head, while some assistant
» stands there with a CLICKER, counting the moment an instrument touches the
» head, with no regard as to what actually is removed, be it intact follicle,
» or useless fragment.
»
» No regulation, no dissent, and ISHRS buddies stick together.
»
» Dr Ray Woods

Dr. Woods good to see that you are posting here. I have a question. Let’ s say if a follicle is transected during fue but the bulb is left inside the skin. Will the bulb be able to regenerate into a new terminal hair? thanks.

13

»
» Dr. Woods good to see that you are posting here. I have a question. Let’ s
» say if a follicle is transected during fue but the bulb is left inside the
» skin. Will the bulb be able to regenerate into a new terminal hair?
» thanks.

I thought the follicle was the bulb? But I know what you mean, and it’s a good question.

14

» I thought the follicle was the bulb? But I know what you mean, and it’s a
» good question.

I am sorry I am new to this. You know how the hair that grows upward out of the bulb (at the bottom), I assume if a fue transection takes place, the hair will get chopped off and the bulb at the bottom will stay in deep inside the skin, so my question is whether the bulb can regenerate a full terminal hair later on after the transection took place?

Sorry I am still having a hard time explaining this, I don’t know the proper terms for the different parts of a hair follicle.

15

» »
» » Dr. Woods good to see that you are posting here. I have a question. Let’
» s
» » say if a follicle is transected during fue but the bulb is left inside
» the
» » skin. Will the bulb be able to regenerate into a new terminal hair?
» » thanks.
»
» I thought the follicle was the bulb? But I know what you mean, and it’s a
» good question.

First of all, this was a strip excision. Not FUE

The strip was cut into “blocks”,of varying sizes, and each block is given to a tech.

The number and size of the blocks is dependent on how many techs show up that day.

IT IS THAT SIMPLE. AND THE BLOCK PRESENTED IS A VERY GOOD EXAMPLE.

I have seen it hundreds of times when excising tumors or skin cancer from the scalp. A wide excision is neccessary and I often examined the tissue removed.

I felt bad about removing hair but it was imperative to make sure cancer cells were removed…

As for the BULB. Here is a weird, but somehow appropriate analogy

Stand upright…arms together…for a moment imagine you are a hair follicle

You are placed upside down in the skin…then some idiot cuts your head off

The bulb is the “brain”

“If the bulb is left can it re generate a new follicle”…That depends upon how much follicle is left above the bulb , but don’t count on it

The overwhelming proof is out there. I would confidently say, in 95 to 100% of cases, NO…Its like saying you can amputate your leg, but don’t worry, a new one will sprout…

Take care

Dr Ray Woods

16

» » I assume the “bulbs” Woods talked about are the tiny black dots at the
» root
» » of the follicle, this is what the doctor needs to preserve? I don’t
» » understand the purpose of this picture, is the purpose to show fue
» » transection or strip transection or something entirely different?
» »
» » » This is “Direct Vision”.
» » » Very good
» » »
» » » BUT, you still cannot see what is behind the follicle you are
» » cutting…are
» » » there bulbs there ?? You can’t see . And this is as good as direct
» » vision
» » » gets
» » »
» » » Now slice it up. Dissecting individual follicles is possible.
» » »
» » » But in my 20 years of my observations, it is my opinion that it is
» » » impossible to do so without damage to follicular units suurrouding
» the
» » » target unit.
» » »
» » » That is why countless guys have massive strip scars and very little
» to
» » » show for it.
» » »
» » » That is not to deny there are lucky guys out there who have good
» » results
» » » compared to the size of the scar and tissue removed.
» » »
» » » FUE does not have this luxoury.
» » » The doctor needs to have the right skills, magnification and
» tools…and
» » » many many years of individual effort in learning how to FEEL their
» way
» » » around a follicle.
» » » They need to recognize through their finger tips the most minute
» » changes
» » » telling them if they are one tenth of a millimeter off course, and
» » every
» » » split second, re adust to make sure transection is less than 5% and
» no
» » » damage is done to the neighbouring follicles
» » »
» » » That is why after all these years, Dr Campbell and I can , with 500
» » » genuine follicular units, provide better results and significantly
» less
» » » damage, than clinics offering many more grafts at a so called cheaper
» » » rate.
» » »
» » » The cost of destroyed follicles cannot be valued because they are
» gone
» » » forever
» » »
» » » Dr Ray Woods
»
»
» When a strip is cut out , it is then cut into blocks, like the one shown
»
» The techs then , hopefully under a stereoscope, start dissecting out the
» individual follicular units.
»
» As stated, you can see the follicle your are going for, but not bulbs
» behind it, as the blade cuts through.
»
» And cutting the bulbs, or transection, is game over.
»
» You have just destroyed the follicle.
»
» And planting such transected follicles is the FRAUD of the industry.
»
» Makes the numbers look good and you can claim megasessions…but it is a
» con.
»
» Complicit “patients” and some clever photoshop does the rest.
»
» That is not to say some guys are lucky…
»
» And FUE in some ways is even worse. It gives a false sense of security
» while a "plague of locust " punch away at your head, while some assistant
» stands there with a CLICKER, counting the moment an instrument touches the
» head, with no regard as to what actually is removed, be it intact follicle,
» or useless fragment.
»
» No regulation, no dissent, and ISHRS buddies stick together.
»
» Dr Ray Woods

To sustain a claim of fraud, one is required to plead and prove each of the nine elements of fraud. One does not need affidavit of merit from another HT doctor (needed in medical malpractice suit).The court will not require expert testimony like in a malpractice suit
So , in theory, they sticking together would not stop grieved patient/customer to proceed to discovery and proof if he thinks he is defrauded.

17

Marco,

Unfortunately, I do not recall under what circumstances this photo was taken. My goal was to simply help people appreciate how easy it would be for transection to take place. The profile shot illustrates very clearly that there is no margin for error under the skin.

18

» The profile shot illustrates very clearly
» that there is no margin for error under the skin.

Correct… Now tell that to the megasession production line “experts” peddling their “numbers fraud”.

But they know it

Its the sucker patient who needs to WAKE UP and start asking some serious questions instead of blind submission to “medical authority”

But good luck. You are more likely to get the truth from bush, cheney or rumsfeld

Dr Ray Woods

19

»
» Correct… Now tell that to the megasession production line “experts”
» peddling their “numbers fraud”.
»
» But they know it
»
» Its the sucker patient who needs to WAKE UP and start asking some serious
» questions instead of blind submission to “medical authority”
»
» But good luck. You are more likely to get the truth from bush, cheney or
» rumsfeld
»
» Dr Ray Woods

In theory a lot of these problems have been overcome by Jim harris’s SAFE technique using blunt disection below the dermis. Would you agree?

20

» »
» » Correct… Now tell that to the megasession production line “experts”
» » peddling their “numbers fraud”.
» »
» » But they know it
» »
» » Its the sucker patient who needs to WAKE UP and start asking some
» serious
» » questions instead of blind submission to “medical authority”
» »
» » But good luck. You are more likely to get the truth from bush, cheney
» or
» » rumsfeld
» »
» » Dr Ray Woods
»
»
» In theory a lot of these problems have been overcome by Jim harris’s SAFE
» technique using blunt disection below the dermis. Would you agree?

How does that work? Doesn’t Feller have a patented tool for fue too?