Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Free

Physicians only - .75 instrument before feb 03\'


#1

PHYSICIANS ONLY

IF ANY PHYSICIAN HAS USED THE .75 INSTRUMENT BEFORE THE WINTER OF 2003, PLEASE COME FORWARD.


#2

» PHYSICIANS ONLY
»
» IF ANY PHYSICIAN HAS USED THE .75 INSTRUMENT BEFORE THE WINTER OF 2003,
» PLEASE COME FORWARD.

The thread remains without any response. This thread has been open since June 20, 2008.


#3

» » PHYSICIANS ONLY
» »
» » IF ANY PHYSICIAN HAS USED THE .75 INSTRUMENT BEFORE THE WINTER OF 2003,
» » PLEASE COME FORWARD.
»
» The thread remains without any response. This thread has been open since
» June 20, 2008.
I guess no doctors want to engage you in conversation on this thread.
Have you got proof that you were the first.
Bigmac


#4

» » » PHYSICIANS ONLY
» » »
» » » IF ANY PHYSICIAN HAS USED THE .75 INSTRUMENT BEFORE THE WINTER OF
» 2003,
» » » PLEASE COME FORWARD.
» »
» » The thread remains without any response. This thread has been open
» since
» » June 20, 2008.
» I guess no doctors want to engage you in conversation on this thread.
» Have you got proof that you were the first.
» Bigmac

Let me reiterate, IF ANY PHYSICIAN HAS USED THE .75 INSTRUMENT BEFORE THE WINTER OF 2003, PLEASE COME FORWARD.:lookaround:


#5

CIT,
You initially posted that any doctor can corroborate the fact that you introduced the .75mm punch. Presumably you realized that no doctor can or will corroborate this. Did you believe this sort of back-peddling would go unnoticed. This is a red flag and a manipulative tactic in my opinion. Rather than asking doctors to substantiate your initial claims, you are now cleverly reframing the question. You are now asking them to claim that they used the .75mm prior to 2003. Here is the problem. THE FACT THAT OTHERS DOCS MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE USED THE .75MM IN 2003 DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU DID. TO DATE, YOU - DR COLE - ARE THE ONLY DOCTOR IN THE WORLD WHO STATES THAT YOU INTRODUCED THIS PUNCH. Even if you did use the .75mm punch (which I doubt), it is far more important for the public to know that you are the pioneer of 1.1mm, 1.2mm, and 1.3mm punch FUE, also called CIT.

Let me illustrate how your above argument is flawed. I could easily tell you that I invented magnetic resonance imaging in 1965. I could then “prove” it by challenging every doctor and scientist in the world to state that they invented it prior to 1965. And I would do it on an obscure message board too. Most likely, nobody would claim to have invented it prior to 1965. So what this means is that I invented MRI in 1965, right? No, clearly not! It probably means that nobody else is willing to lie. Or that the challenge is so preposterous that no doctor wishes to grace it with a reply. Not even the true inventor who got the patent years later.

I did actually pioneer the MRI in 1965 by the way. But like you, I just could not get my invention to work. Still, I feel I ‘introduced’ it. Just kidding with you. I am sure you see my point though.

Did you use a .75 mm punch in 2003. Perhaps and perhaps not. I imagine that Dr Woods the inventor of FUE and BHT was using it prior. He started doing FUE 10 years before you. In fact Dr Woods was probably using the .75mm punch when Dr Cole was still working as a strip surgeon for MHR (Medical Hair Restoration). But, per your prior postings on this very site on this very subject the .75mm did not work well in your/Dr Cole’s hands. Additionally, you previously stated the proponents of the tool were just marketeering. Are you Dr Cole - supposed “introducer” of the .75 - marketeering then. You cannot have it both ways.

Did you talk about the .75mm in 2003. Perhaps and perhaps not. Did you even purchase such a punch. Perhaps and perhaps not.

HERE IS WHAT I WISH TO KNOW: WHICH DOCTOR CREDITS YOU AS THE INVENTOR OF THE .75MM?. HOW MUCH DID YOU ACTUALLY USE THIS NORMAL SIZE PUNCH IF AT ALL. THEN AND NOW. HOW MANY OF THE 2 MILLION + MCGRAFTS, IF ANY, THAT YOU CLAIM TO HAVE EXTRACTED WERE WITH THIS NORMAL SIZE PUNCH. HOW MANY WITH YOUR 1.1MM, YOUR 1.2MM, AND YOUR 1.3MM CIT PUNCHES. ON A TYPICAL CASE, WHAT IS THE SMALLEST PUNCH THAT YOU USE. WHAT IS THE LARGEST. SIZES SHOULD NOT BE PROPRIETY INFO UNLESS THE ONLY DISTRINCT BETWEEN CIT AND FUE IS THAT CIT USES 1.1MM, 1.2MM, AND 1.3MM PUNCHES.

Happy 4th of July

Bigmac


#6

» CIT,
» You initially posted that any doctor can corroborate the fact that you
» introduced the .75mm punch. Presumably you realized that no doctor can or
» will corroborate this. Did you believe this sort of back-peddling would go
» unnoticed. This is a red flag and a manipulative tactic in my opinion.
» Rather than asking doctors to substantiate your initial claims, you are now
» cleverly reframing the question. You are now asking them to claim that they
» used the .75mm prior to 2003. Here is the problem. THE FACT THAT OTHERS
» DOCS MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE USED THE .75MM IN 2003 DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU DID.
» TO DATE, YOU - DR COLE - ARE THE ONLY DOCTOR IN THE WORLD WHO STATES THAT
» YOU INTRODUCED THIS PUNCH. Even if you did use the .75mm punch (which I
» doubt), it is far more important for the public to know that you are the
» pioneer of 1.1mm, 1.2mm, and 1.3mm punch FUE, also called CIT.
»
» Let me illustrate how your above argument is flawed. I could easily tell
» you that I invented magnetic resonance imaging in 1965. I could then
» “prove” it by challenging every doctor and scientist in the world to state
» that they invented it prior to 1965. And I would do it on an obscure
» message board too. Most likely, nobody would claim to have invented it
» prior to 1965. So what this means is that I invented MRI in 1965, right?
» No, clearly not! It probably means that nobody else is willing to lie. Or
» that the challenge is so preposterous that no doctor wishes to grace it
» with a reply. Not even the true inventor who got the patent years later.
»
» I did actually pioneer the MRI in 1965 by the way. But like you, I just
» could not get my invention to work. Still, I feel I ‘introduced’ it. Just
» kidding with you. I am sure you see my point though.
»
» Did you use a .75 mm punch in 2003. Perhaps and perhaps not. I imagine
» that Dr Woods the inventor of FUE and BHT was using it prior. He started
» doing FUE 10 years before you. In fact Dr Woods was probably using the
» .75mm punch when Dr Cole was still working as a strip surgeon for MHR
» (Medical Hair Restoration). But, per your prior postings on this very site
» on this very subject the .75mm did not work well in your/Dr Cole’s hands.
» Additionally, you previously stated the proponents of the tool were just
» marketeering. Are you Dr Cole - supposed “introducer” of the .75 -
» marketeering then. You cannot have it both ways.
»
» Did you talk about the .75mm in 2003. Perhaps and perhaps not. Did you
» even purchase such a punch. Perhaps and perhaps not.
»
» HERE IS WHAT I WISH TO KNOW: WHICH DOCTOR CREDITS YOU AS THE INVENTOR OF
» THE .75MM?. HOW MUCH DID YOU ACTUALLY USE THIS NORMAL SIZE PUNCH IF AT ALL.
» THEN AND NOW. HOW MANY OF THE 2 MILLION + MCGRAFTS, IF ANY, THAT YOU CLAIM
» TO HAVE EXTRACTED WERE WITH THIS NORMAL SIZE PUNCH. HOW MANY WITH YOUR
» 1.1MM, YOUR 1.2MM, AND YOUR 1.3MM CIT PUNCHES. ON A TYPICAL CASE, WHAT IS
» THE SMALLEST PUNCH THAT YOU USE. WHAT IS THE LARGEST. SIZES SHOULD NOT BE
» PROPRIETY INFO UNLESS THE ONLY DISTRINCT BETWEEN CIT AND FUE IS THAT CIT
» USES 1.1MM, 1.2MM, AND 1.3MM PUNCHES.
»
»
» Happy 4th of July
»
» Bigmac

Your obsession with Dr. Cole is very weird, who cares what size punch they use, the truth is in the results.


#7

Why do none of you on here delete text as its annoying.

No obsession mate as its quite simple,why cant they disclose what size punch`s they use.

Simple as.

The larger the punch ,the more scarring you will have

You understand now.


#8

“who cares what size punch they use, the truth is in the results” I have to agree with Therapy here. Tools size and how a doc is doing it has been around for years on the interenet forums and usually comes from competing doctors. Us as patients only care about results. It’s really quite simple. If you research a doc see many of his past patients and you like the looks of the recipient and donor areas. You go for it.


#9

» “who cares what size punch they use, the truth is in the results” I have to
» agree with Therapy here. Tools size and how a doc is doing it has been
» around for years on the interenet forums and usually comes from competing
» doctors. Us as patients only care about results. It’s really quite simple.
» If you research a doc see many of his past patients and you like the looks
» of the recipient and donor areas. You go for it.

Bigmac,

You won’t be satisfied until you have a CIT procedure performed. Our instruments are custom made to effectively harvest FUs with a transection rate of 3% or less. The size of the instruments is trade secret.

I can understand the fact that you may or may not have ulterior motives, but do you understand my statement written in English? The size of our instruments is trade secret.


#10

I would never go to a place that cant tell a patient the size of punch he is going to use on his head.


#11

» I would never go to a place that cant tell a patient the size of punch he
» is going to use on his head.

How thoughtful, i’m assuming you haven’t seen a donor area while being harvested via strip. I mean really, you have seen the results in the donors. That’s no trade secret.


#12

» I would never go to a place that cant tell a patient the size of punch he
» is going to use on his head.

It’s funny a lot of new guys are getting so hung up on the punch size, don’t be so naive, the doctor can tell you anything you want to hear and if you think that fue is totally scar free you are dead wrong.


#13

Cit if you ever get sick of the HT industry you would make a great politician.


#14

» “who cares what size punch they use, the truth is in the results” I have to
» agree with Therapy here. Tools size and how a doc is doing it has been
» around for years on the interenet forums and usually comes from competing
» doctors. Us as patients only care about results. It’s really quite simple.
» If you research a doc see many of his past patients and you like the looks
» of the recipient and donor areas. You go for it.

Franklin,
Of course it matters what size punch is used,its not just about the result but the effect on your donor area.Bigger punch=more scarring.

How can you research a trade secret:confused:


#15

"Franklin,
Of course it matters what size punch is used,its not just about the result but the effect on your donor area.Bigger punch=more scarr " "bigmac. Heres how I see it because I have been researching FUE for over 8 years. Met all the docs that said it was not a viable solution for ht. (B.S) I knew better and funny thing is they offer it today . I did not get caught up in all the internet bashing by copmeting docs. I just got out there made contact with former patients and met them. Checked out there donor areas end yield and results. Effect of the donor you say?. Some of these patients had Fue done back in the late 90’s. and went for more afterwards there donor was fine.


#16

Franklin:

In future posts, PLEASE separate (with several blank lines) the quote from the post you are replying to and your response. Your replies are difficult to read, because it is unclear where your response begins.

Thank you!


#17

Yep. See what you mean. Sorry about that.


#18

» » “who cares what size punch they use, the truth is in the results” I have
» to
» » agree with Therapy here. Tools size and how a doc is doing it has been
» » around for years on the interenet forums and usually comes from
» competing
» » doctors. Us as patients only care about results. It’s really quite
» simple.
» » If you research a doc see many of his past patients and you like the
» looks
» » of the recipient and donor areas. You go for it.
»
» Franklin,
» Of course it matters what size punch is used,its not just about the result
» but the effect on your donor area.Bigger punch=more scarring.
»
» How can you research a trade secret:confused:

You still don’t get it. Of course it is about the result, the result includes both the donor and the recipient. Do you just walk into a clinic because they tell you they use .75 punch? Punch size is becoming a sales gimmick, it has no value if the doctor can’t back it up with good results.


#19

Cool…Thanks, Franklin!


#20

Franklin,
Your opinion is noted but it is hard for me to accept since you went to the inventor of FUE himself. Surely Dr Woods uses small punch technology. Dr woods obviously performs FUE to reduce overall scarring in hair transplants. It isn’t just Dr Cole’s large punch sizes that concern me and so many others. We are concerned about the clinics willingness to not be too truthful about anything that may adversely affect business. Full disclosure is part of what keeps patients safe. I am also concerned about the following,

  1. Questionable in-house studies that are not repeated outside of the clinic or peer reviewed. These are however used for marketing and acquiring patients.

  2. Complaints about the doctor and staff disrespecting patients.

  3. Disrespect to peers and anyone that performs FUE. CIT as being superior, but only by the CIT clinic of coarse. One need only look at results from Dr Bisanga, Dr Wolf and Dr Woods to start with to see this is wrong.

  4. Several CIT body hair mega session results that have been hidden from the public which i would love to see and hazard a guess that many others would.

  5. The CIT mega session patient who on his own furnished photos of his devastating result. He stated that he has less hair after 14,000 CIT grafts as a result of scalp trauma. The photos clearly support this claim.

  6. The clinic’s claim of extracting 1 million grafts last week and then this week claiming that 2 million Mcgrafts have been served.

  7. Avoiding questions relating to non-propriety aspects of the 1.1mm+ punch technology.

  8. Over-marketing.

  9. Generally hiding information from patients.

Now if i was a newbie coming on here and reading Cits posts i would be brainwashed into thinking his results and techniques were far superior than any other doctor which is not true.There is nothing wrong in believing that you have invented the best procedure but to constantly berate other doctors results and methods is wrong.
Why not just post results without slating others and let these results do the talking and answer simple questions which in no way would allow your competitors to find out your trade secrets ie punch size gain.