MEGA session - 5000 ARTAS FUE- ONE DAY Surgery - More grafts than STRIP

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]
Not true at all. Woods was/is not inventor of fue.

[postedby]Originally Posted by HairSite[/postedby]

Dr. Arvind, can you let us know who was the first doctor who invented FUE as a commercially viable mainstream treatment for hair loss?

[postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]

Dr Okuda, Japan .[/quote]

I have never heard of Dr. Okuda before, Dr. Woods always says that he is the inventor of FUE, it’s even on his website, how did he manage to get away with this for so many years?

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]
Not true at all. Woods was/is not inventor of fue.

[postedby]Originally Posted by HairSite[/postedby]

Dr. Arvind, can you let us know who was the first doctor who invented FUE as a commercially viable mainstream treatment for hair loss?

[postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]

Dr Okuda, Japan .[/quote]

Surely you are not talking about Shoji Okuda, who died in 1962, whose works were not even translated into English until the 2000s.

http://blog.americanhairloss.org/hair-loss/history-hair-transplant-surgery/

He was obviously pioneering but it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest that his work led to FUE as the commercially viable it is today.

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]
Not true at all. Woods was/is not inventor of fue.

[postedby]Originally Posted by HairSite[/postedby]

Dr. Arvind, can you let us know who was the first doctor who invented FUE as a commercially viable mainstream treatment for hair loss?

[postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]

Dr Okuda, Japan .[/quote]

[1] The technique was in fact much older than this and Japanese dermatologists Sasagawa,[2] Okuda,[3] Tamura[4] and Fujita[5] were using small autografts containing hair follicles for the correction of scars and cicatricial alopecias. It is not known whether they used these techniques for the correction of androgenetic alopecia, but if they did, they certainly did not mention it in their medical papers. In any case their publications, written in Japanese did not reach Western eyes for decades.

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]
Not true at all. Woods was/is not inventor of fue.

[postedby]Originally Posted by HairSite[/postedby]

Dr. Arvind, can you let us know who was the first doctor who invented FUE as a commercially viable mainstream treatment for hair loss?

[postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]

Dr Okuda, Japan .

[postedby]Originally Posted by licht[/postedby]

Surely you are not talking about Shoji Okuda, who died in 1962, whose works were not even translated into English until the 2000s.

http://blog.americanhairloss.org/hair-loss/history-hair-transplant-surgery/

He was obviously pioneering but it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest that his work led to FUE as the commercially viable it is today.[/quote]

Dear licht,
Am I missing something here?
The person who does a technique first is the inventor. The people who come later to popularize/reinvent the technique can be called pioneers at best.

Lets not put the cart in front of the horse.

  1. Were the Japanese patients not consumers?

  2. Did the Japanese doctors not invent and make it available to their Japanese patients in 1930s.

  3. If a person not conversant in the Japanese language does not come to know about this does NOT take the credit away from the rightful inventor.

  4. Truly, I do feel sad that Dr. Woods did not acknowledge this fact himself. In his place most others would have acknowledged this little fact which I assume he knows.

If he wants to say he was not aware of Dr Okuda till 5 years ago (just for example),I would like him to write it here himself.

Regards,
Dr. A

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]
Not true at all. Woods was/is not inventor of fue.

[postedby]Originally Posted by HairSite[/postedby]

Dr. Arvind, can you let us know who was the first doctor who invented FUE as a commercially viable mainstream treatment for hair loss?

[postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]

Dr Okuda, Japan .

[postedby]Originally Posted by hairdar[/postedby]

[1] The technique was in fact much older than this and Japanese dermatologists Sasagawa,[2] Okuda,[3] Tamura[4] and Fujita[5] were using small autografts containing hair follicles for the correction of scars and cicatricial alopecias. It is not known whether they used these techniques for the correction of androgenetic alopecia, but if they did, they certainly did not mention it in their medical papers. In any case their publications, written in Japanese did not reach Western eyes for decades.[/quote]

And my question, just why is so important that it did not reach the Western eyes?

An invention is an invention. Too bad if Western people did not know the language. That is no reason to take the credit away from the original inventor.
Sorry, but I do not buy this line of argument.

All right. Let’s play this game.

[quote][postedby]
[postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]

Dear licht,
Am I missing something here?
The person who does a technique first is the inventor. The people who come later to popularize/reinvent the technique can be called pioneers at best.

Lets not put the cart in front of the horse.

  1. Were the Japanese patients not consumers?

[/quote]

Please demonstrate any sort of definitive evidence that Japanese patients received something equivalent to modern FUE from Dr. Okuda.

See above.

You seem to have missed the point. While it’s almost certain that Dr. Okuda was doing ground-breaking work, and was pioneering in the field of hair replacement surgery, I don’t believe there is any evidence whatsoever that he was performing single graft FUE surgery for male pattern baldness as we know it today. Even if he were, it did not lead the to the viable commercial procedure which we are using today, which was pioneered in the early 1990s (as far as I know). The surgery that you are doing today doesn’t come from Dr. Okuda. It comes from transplant doctors such as Woods in the last couple of decades.

I don’t really know who you are, or if there is some sort of personal or professional conflict going on here, but it seems obvious that you are clutching at straws to take credit away from Woods for his part in pioneering FUE.

Anyway, please cite source material, in either Japanese or English, that conclusively shows that Dr Okuda was performing hair restoration surgery in the 1930s for male pattern baldness that is the equivalent of today’s FUE, and that this led to or had influence on developments in transplant surgery that occurred decades later.

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]
Not true at all. Woods was/is not inventor of fue.

[postedby]Originally Posted by HairSite[/postedby]

Dr. Arvind, can you let us know who was the first doctor who invented FUE as a commercially viable mainstream treatment for hair loss?

[postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]

Dr Okuda, Japan .

[postedby]Originally Posted by licht[/postedby]

Surely you are not talking about Shoji Okuda, who died in 1962, whose works were not even translated into English until the 2000s.

http://blog.americanhairloss.org/hair-loss/history-hair-transplant-surgery/

He was obviously pioneering but it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest that his work led to FUE as the commercially viable it is today.

[postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]

Dear licht,
Am I missing something here?
The person who does a technique first is the inventor. The people who come later to popularize/reinvent the technique can be called pioneers at best.

Lets not put the cart in front of the horse.

  1. Were the Japanese patients not consumers?

  2. Did the Japanese doctors not invent and make it available to their Japanese patients in 1930s.

  3. If a person not conversant in the Japanese language does not come to know about this does NOT take the credit away from the rightful inventor.

  4. Truly, I do feel sad that Dr. Woods did not acknowledge this fact himself. In his place most others would have acknowledged this little fact which I assume he knows.

If he wants to say he was not aware of Dr Okuda till 5 years ago (just for example),I would like him to write it here himself.

Regards,
Dr. A[/quote]

http://www.fusehair.com/about_us

About us

Dr. (ex-Capt) Arvind Poswal

Dr. Arvind Poswal, MBBS (AFMC), is widely regarded as one of the best hair transplant surgeon in the world. He is the inventor of the FUSE technique and instrumentation and has pioneered many of the latest advances in hair restoration surgeries.

Dr. Okuda invented punch-graft technique. Let’s see if punch graft fits the definition of FUE as we know it today.

It is universally accepted that in order to be labeled as FUE, the doctor performing the procedure must accomplish the following (or at least has the intention of accomplishing the following):

  1. Minimally Invasive - contrary to FUE, the old punch-graft technique was as invasive as it can get for the patient’s well being. As a matter of fact, the punch-graft technique was so intrusive that the patient’s donor site was commonly referred to as bullet holes. See picture below.

Picture taken from The Hair Transplant Industry is a Disgrace for illustration purposes.

  1. Little or No Visible Scars - One of the indisputable benefits of FUE is that it produces little or no visible scars. The objective of the invention was to offer patients an alternative to unsightly strip scars and allow patients the luxury of wearing their hair short.

But based on the picture above, clearly this was not something that punch-graft technique could accomplish by any stretch of imagination.

  1. Single Follicular Unit Extraction - in order to be labeled as FUE, the technique must also be capable of isolating a single follicular unit for extraction. This is also the beauty of FUE as it allows the doctor to cherry pick the follicular units that are best suited for the patient’s needs. In contrast, punch-graft adopts a one size fits all technique in harvesting. The picture below shows what a typical punch graft looks like.

Picture taken via external link from New Hair Institute website (http://www.newhair.com/procedures/fut/strip-harvesting/). Below is for illustration purposes only and do NOT represent the work of NHI.

Based on the above, it is obvious that punch-graft embodies none of the essence of FUE and does not fit the definition of FUE as we know it today. Punch graft was born in a different era with radically different objectives serving substantially different goals and expectations.

It would be a bit far fetched to attribute Dr Okuda as the inventor of FUE that is commonly performed nowadays.

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by HairSite[/postedby]
Dr. Okuda invented punch-graft technique.

It is universally accepted that in order to be labeled as FUE, the doctor performing the procedure must accomplish the following (or at least has the intention of accomplishing the following):

  1. Minimally Invasive - contrary to FUE, the old punch-graft technique was as invasive as it can get for the patient’s well being. As a matter of fact, the punch-graft technique was so intrusive that the patient’s donor site was commonly referred to as bullet holes. See picture below.

Picture taken from The Hair Transplant Industry is a Disgrace for illustration purposes.

  1. Little or No Visible Scars - One of the indisputable benefits of FUE is that it produces little or no visible scars. The objective of the invention was to offer patients an alternative to the unsightly strip scars and allow patients the luxury of wearing their hair short.

But based on the picture above, clearly this was not something that punch-graft technique could accomplish by any stretch of imagination.

  1. Single Follicular Unit Extraction - in order to be labeled as FUE, the technique must also be capable of isolating a single follicular unit for extraction. This is also the beauty of FUE as it allows the doctor to cherry pick the follicular units that are best suited for the patient’s needs. In contrast, punch-graft adopts a one size fits all technique in harvesting. The picture below shows what a typical punch graft looks like.

Picture taken via external link from New Hair Institute website (Resources | NHI Medical - World Renowned Hair Restoration). Below is for illustration purposes only and do NOT represent the work of NHI.

Based on the above, it is obvious that punch-graft embodies none of the essence of FUE and does not fit the definition of FUE as we know it today. Punch graft was born in a different era with radically different objectives serving substantially different goals and expectations.

It would be a bit far fetched to attribute Dr Okuda as the inventor of FUE that is commonly performed nowadays.[/quote]

Dear Hairsite,

You are quoting from blogs when you quote angelfire.
Is the picture that you have shown a work of Dr. Okuda?

I have known all these years that you keep a balanced and open perspective. So, please consult the textbooks and old journals of hair restoration before posting material like this.

I hope I do not have to be more explicit.
Regards,
Dr. A

[quote]All right. Let’s play this game.

[postedby]
[postedby] I don’t believe there is any evidence whatsoever that he was performing single graft FUE surgery for male pattern baldness as we know it today.

I don’t really know who you are, [/quote]

Dear Licht,
The above 2 sentences of yours are sufficient for me. You seem not to know me but do seem to believe there is no evidence of DR. Okuda performing fue (by whatever name).

That convinces me that I do not need to answer you.


As for the genuine readers… a simple analogy
Edison invented the electric bulb
Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone

(Samsung did not invent the telephone nor do they claim too - ethical behavior)

Its easy to get the drift if a person wants to. Paid shills can come up with loads of sentences etc., but sorry I am not going to waste my time on this.


For genuine readers, all they have to do is read up some comprehensive textbooks on hair transplants and they will know that what I am saying is correct.

Regards,
Dr. A

I’m sorry. I don’t quite get what you are saying here. Because I don’t know your biography in detail, I am somehow not a “genuine reader”.

I take it then you have no evidence whatsoever that Dr Okuda invented FUE as we know it today?

You’ve made an extraordinary claim, and I asked you a series of simply questions asking for proof of that claim. You offer none.

We don’t want spurious analogies. Just prove what you are saying.

Sorry if that’s not “genuine” enough for you.

Also, although it isn’t in the slightest bit relevant, Edison didn’t invent the light-bulb.

[quote]

[postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Arvind[/postedby]

Dear Hairsite,

You are quoting from blogs when you quote angelfire.
Is the picture that you have shown a work of Dr. Okuda?

I have known all these years that you keep a balanced and open perspective. So, please consult the textbooks and old journals of hair restoration before posting material like this.

I hope I do not have to be more explicit.
Regards,
Dr. A[/quote]

Yes, actually you do have to be more explicit. Hairsite never implied that those pictures were the work of Dr. Okuda. He was showing an example of a plug graft, of the type that Okuda might have been using, along with a definition of what FUE is.

You’ve made a simple claim, that Dr. Okuda invented FUE. All we’re asking you to do is show us evidence. You say “consult the textbooks and old journals”. I presume that in some forgotten, dusty tome you have lying around, you have evidence that Dr. Okuda was performing single graft FUE (and not small skin plugs) as we know it today. Great. Post us a snap of it. We’ll all have an open and balanced perspective once you give us reason to.

“While most of the 200 patients [Dr. Okuda] reported were treated for traumatic alopecia, his technique was almost identical to that first reported in the United States in 1959 to treat androgenetic alopecia”. In other words, he was doing in the 30s and 40s what American physicians were doing in the late 50s. Not FUE.

http://www.ishrs.org/mediacenter/media-history.htm

[quote]

[postedby]Originally Posted by hairdar[/postedby]

http://www.fusehair.com/about_us

About us

Dr. (ex-Capt) Arvind Poswal

Dr. Arvind Poswal, MBBS (AFMC), is widely regarded as one of the best hair transplant surgeon in the world. He is the inventor of the FUSE technique and instrumentation and has pioneered many of the latest advances in hair restoration surgeries.[/quote]

LOL :smiley: am i the only one who picked up on this? how come dr arvind can call himself inventor of fuse but dr woods can’t call himself inventor of fue?

It seems rather silly to suggest that Dr. Woods did not invent FUE. Punch grafting is not the same as removing a graft with a micropscope. I remember when some said in 2000-2002 that what Dr. Woods was doing was impossible. Dr. Woods rightly deserves the credit as the inventor.

This thread is a train wreck

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Wylie[/postedby]
This thread is a train wreck[/quote]

A train wreck for sure and ever so entertaining :slight_smile:

What s strange is that Woods has not said a word, is he even aware of this thread?

[quote]

[postedby]Originally Posted by ipod[/postedby]

LOL :smiley: am i the only one who picked up on this? how come dr arvind can call himself inventor of fuse but dr woods can’t call himself inventor of fue?[/quote]

Haha no, I caught it too, and thought it was very funny.

I just wanted to focus on giving Arvind the chance to explain his claims before even going there…

How long have skin punches been around for…probably for as long as scalpels. Maybe a few hundred years , where doctors were punching out follicles and studying them under early microscopes. Maybe Hippocrates had one a few thousand years ago.

I heard of Dr Okuda in around 2005, and understood he was moving follicles around but not to treat baldness per se , and not micro surgically.

Dr Orentrich used punches in the late fifties to treat androgenic Alopecia , or male pattern baldness, and this led to the industrial scale destruction of donors and devastated the lives of countless men.

So along comes strip surgery, which, as traumatic as it was, allowed more cracks at the donor before it too was wiped out. Punch gave horrible large round plugs. The strip was chopped up into horrible large “square” plugs, which were jamed into large punched out holes.

Along comes Dr Bob Limmer in 1988 and he began dissecting the strip into follicular units under a stereoscopic microscope. And that is still the gold standard in strip surgery to this day and is known as FUT, of which Dr Bob Limmer is the founder. Others, especially Dr Rassman , try to take credit .

In 1989 I decided that follicular units should be removed micro surgically, directly from the donor.
I actually thought of it when I was 17 years old as I saw family members going bald. “remove them one by one, and place them one by one…that logical.”…and to be fair , many non medical people would have thought similarly. I just actually made it happen

I rang and spoke to Dr Limmer in 1993 and shared with him my work and hoped for a collaboration, as I found it incredibly slow and difficult.
Dr Bob Limmer was a thorough gentleman but felt my ideas were impractical . He wished me luck and I promised to give him updates, as I did in 1994 . Our last contact was in 1995, when he wrote to me, and I still have the letter.

To distinguish my work from Dr Orentreich (and yes, Dr Okuda, even though I didnt hear of him at the time) … I called it FOLLICULAR SINGLE UNIT EXTRACTION, or FSUE, and Micro Direct Implantation.
I decided that hair transplantation should be entirely microsurgical.

And I stated that transection rates should be under 5%, verifiable and accountable.

The industry thought this was an impossible joke. When I began presenting irrefutable consistent evidence, they got worried as it made their bloody gravy train obsolete. So a vicious campaign to discredit me and FsUE began.
They said that I was doing nothing new and it was the same as the old punch surgery, which is obviously a ridiculous lie.

And they all knew what the real "secret " was, and it was more horrific and threatening to the industry than any fancy “tool”…

It was 7 years of constant 7 days a week round the clock commitment and practice, without hurting anyone…and that’s something this corrupt industry could never condone. Most couldn’t do it, and the few who could would loose too much money…

Dr Ray Woods

Ps…15 years later, .Arvind took my FSUE, and swapped two letters around to make FUSE . He knows this will confuse people , as he calls himself the inventor, but regardless of technique, it is the removal of individual follicular units. He is positioning himself to take ultimate credit and having a Mumbai call/info center at his disposal, he may pull it off.
And others who write the history of the industry are often those I have accused of crimes against humanity…so they leave Orentrich in, and don’t mention me. Which is embarrassing for them as every HT doc in the world knows what happened, with the exception of Dr Arvind, of course

As Henry Ford said…\\" history CAN be bunk\\"

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Dr. Woods[/postedby]
Ps…15 years later, .Arvind took my FSUE, and swapped two letters around to make FUSE . He knows this will confuse people , as he calls himself the inventor, but regardless of technique, it is the removal of individual follicular units. He is positioning himself to take ultimate credit and having a Mumbai call/info center at his disposal, he may pull it off.

[/quote]

Dr. Woods, for the record, Dr. Arvind does indeed have a surgical clinic in Mumbai in addition to his headquarter in Delhi. It is not a call center that he has in Mumbai. The Mumbai clinic was set up about 1-2 years ago.

Word of advice for Dr. Woods: don’t ever retire. The moment you disappear from the industry your competitors will bury your name and legacy in the blink of an eye.