Get over it, every doctor has something to hide, Dr. Woods never discloses his tools or punch size too, what are you gonna do? He’s still regarded as the best for fue/bht, I agree with the poster who said that punch size is irrelevant, Woods’ waiting list is probably half a year long and I bet none of his patients cares whether his tools are 1.o mm or 5.0 mm.
» 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.
bigmac,
You’re persistence to know our clinic’s inner workings not productive even to yourself. Your “what if” scenarios and skewed opinions of our clinic are not benenficial unless you have a motive. You will find that our clinic is not as other clinic do. You won’t see the infomercial, pop-ups, or banners as the many hair transplant clinics have. Your constant magnification of our operations is somewhat alarming to say the least. To begin a new indeavor, you should research other FUE clinics and compare the results one by one. Our clinic has far more cases of results that we would like to publish, but we must protect each patients’ rights. We also are unable to publish information because many patients have chosen not to allow any results to be published. You agenda is becoming clearer by the minute. For a newbie to HairSite, you surely have your own agenda. Our patients are recieving excellent patient care and that should be your concern. You should put your focus on the results, not our instruments. Please look forward to more results.
» Get over it, every doctor has something to hide, Dr. Woods never discloses
» his tools or punch size too, what are you gonna do? He’s still regarded as
» the best for fue/bht, I agree with the poster who said that punch size is
» irrelevant, Woods’ waiting list is probably half a year long and I bet none
» of his patients cares whether his tools are 1.o mm or 5.0 mm.
More fool them then as if there hairloss progresses and they need more work done they will find there donor area to be depleted and have extensive scarring.
According to CIT they are best,now you say Dr woods is the best.
You should do more research on scarring via fue/cit/fit when bigger than a 1mm punch is used.Ive read back through some of your posts where you ask and question certain aspects of posts but i dont know how and where yo pulled this reply from.
Thanks for your opinion though even though imo you are way off.
CIT,
hang on a minute, if your tools are a trade secret (which is your prerogative) then it seems unreasonable to expect other clinics to tell you the details of any of their instruments and when they might have started using them.
You cannot expect to have it both ways.
» » Get over it, every doctor has something to hide, Dr. Woods never
» discloses
» » his tools or punch size too, what are you gonna do? He’s still regarded
» as
» » the best for fue/bht, I agree with the poster who said that punch size
» is
» » irrelevant, Woods’ waiting list is probably half a year long and I bet
» none
» » of his patients cares whether his tools are 1.o mm or 5.0 mm.
»
» More fool them then as if there hairloss progresses and they need more
» work done they will find there donor area to be depleted and have extensive
» scarring.
» According to CIT they are best,now you say Dr woods is the best.
» You should do more research on scarring via fue/cit/fit when bigger than a
» 1mm punch is used.Ive read back through some of your posts where you ask
» and question certain aspects of posts but i dont know how and where yo
» pulled this reply from.
»
» Thanks for your opinion though even though imo you are way off.
You are funny, why must I go by what CIT (cole’s salesman) says as the best? Obviously you are new and confused.
Yup im funny rf but new im certainly not,maybe new to posting on here but thats all.
Have a nice day
» Yup im funny rf but new im certainly not,maybe new to posting on here but
» thats all.
»
» Have a nice day
Hair loss is and should be taken seriously as if it was a disability. Doctors should properly treat each patient based on their goals and ethically handle the unrealistic patients to be treated as unique cases. Otherwise, the patient is better off going to get a hair system or going with the short trimmed look.
Our clinic is not concerned with disclosing the size of our devices nor are we concerned about knowing the particulars of any other clinics’ aspects of practicing FUE.
readyfreddy,
If you would rather consider me to be a salesman/ consultant then you should expect to see more posting from me about insignificant aspects of a procedure and devices that equate to “nothing” or inconsistent results. I don’t consider myself a salesman when I am on the phone with patients who need someone to talk to just to feel better. Call the clinic sometime if you feel that you have already been taken advantage of in regard to your expectations. I believe in a service only because I see the information, data, study material, tools, in-person behaviors of patients, smiles and frowns. Maybe you should try telling a patient that they have a linear scar in the back of their head and then hearing them say “they told me it would be pencil thin” I will continue to promote this service (CIT) that doesn’t involve or involve the “pencil thin” scar that certain salesmen disclose, the numbness or loss of feeling in the donor area for years after the procedure, the post-op tightness in the donor area, and the fractionated number of grafts. I happen to believe in a service and see the patients faces after every follow-up and after the procedure.
You may feel that I am a salesman but if you actually talked to me one-on-one or read every sinle one of my posts, I bet you would change your opinion. I do not tell the advantages of CIT without disclosing the disadvantages. There is the difference in ethics from a salesman to advocate but, the results we produce simply solidify the literature that you read in the forum.
Kindest regards,
CIT
My advice is not medical advice
» » Yup im funny rf but new im certainly not,maybe new to posting on here
» but
» » thats all.
» »
» » Have a nice day
»
» Hair loss is and should be taken seriously as if it was a disability.
» Doctors should properly treat each patient based on their goals and
» ethically handle the unrealistic patients to be treated as unique cases.
» Otherwise, the patient is better off going to get a hair system or going
» with the short trimmed look.
»
» Our clinic is not concerned with disclosing the size of our devices nor
» are we concerned about knowing the particulars of any other clinics’
» aspects of practicing FUE.
»
» readyfreddy,
»
» If you would rather consider me to be a salesman/ consultant
» then you should expect to see more posting from me about insignificant
» aspects of a procedure and devices that equate to “nothing” or inconsistent
» results. I don’t consider myself a salesman when I am on the phone with
» patients who need someone to talk to just to feel better. Call the clinic
» sometime if you feel that you have already been taken advantage of in
» regard to your expectations. I believe in a service only because I see the
» information, data, study material, tools, in-person behaviors of patients,
» smiles and frowns. Maybe you should try telling a patient that they have a
» linear scar in the back of their head and then hearing them say “they told
» me it would be pencil thin” I will continue to promote this service (CIT)
» that doesn’t involve or involve the “pencil thin” scar that certain
» salesmen disclose, the numbness or loss of feeling in the donor area for
» years after the procedure, the post-op tightness in the donor area, and the
» fractionated number of grafts. I happen to believe in a service and see
» the patients faces after every follow-up and after the procedure.
»
» You may feel that I am a salesman but if you actually talked to me
» one-on-one or read every sinle one of my posts, I bet you would change your
» opinion. I do not tell the advantages of CIT without disclosing the
» disadvantages. There is the difference in ethics from a salesman to
» advocate but, the results we produce simply solidify the literature that
» you read in the forum.
»
»
»
» Kindest regards,
»
» CIT
»
»
»
»
»
»
» My advice is not medical advice
Well you guys, I want to start by saying that I really appreciate the exchange of opinions that I’m reading on this forum. I do not feel “sold” at all. I feel more informed than anything else. I personally wear my hair and probably always will. It’s refreshing to know that if I’m not really a candidate for surgery there are doctors out there that would turn me down. Instead of ruin my head for life.
Thanks
» PHYSICIANS ONLY
»
» IF ANY PHYSICIAN HAS USED THE .75 INSTRUMENT BEFORE THE WINTER OF 2003,
» PLEASE COME FORWARD.
Dr. Gho used it long before then and now uses the .5 instrument.
» Did you talk about the .75mm in 2003. Perhaps and perhaps not. Did you
» even purchase such a punch. Perhaps and perhaps not.
What is this BS about the .75mm being pioneered in 2003? Gho’s FM was pioneered years before then. Here’s proof from his 2002 interview with hairsite. Note that Gho’s new HST procedure uses an 0.5mm needle and is the least invasive procedure available. It is virtually scar free compared to traditional FUE.
(year = 2002)
" How are donor follicles extracted?
Patients are asked to lie on a table (much like a massage table) with their face toward the floor. Local anesthetics are applied to the donor area without using syringes or needles. The donor follicles are extracted one at a time using a gauge 23 needle (0.75 mm). No scalpels are used in the entire process. It is the most labor intensive part of the entire procedure. On average, over 60% of the time is spent on extracting the follicles. This is also the part of the procedure when things can become uncomfortable for the patient. Even though there is no pain associated with the extraction process, somehow the feeling of lying flat on the stomach for hours can be surprisingly unbearable for some people. There is no pain, but patients may get very irritable as a result of the discomfort.
How is the scar in the donor area different from that associated with conventional hair transplantation?
In traditional hair transplantation, the donor follicles are extracted by removing a strip of hair and flesh bearing skin in the donor site. Traditional hair transplantation leaves patient with a linear scar that can easily measure up to 4 or 5 inches wide. In Follicle Transplantation, the scars are in the form of multiple 0.75mm needle holes which will subsequently shrink to about 0.5mm in diameter scattered throughout the donor site."
Thanks for that.
Now your turn Cit ???
» Thanks for that.
»
» Now your turn Cit ???
Bigmac,
Thanks for the appreciated invite.
James Bond,
If the inside diameter of a 23 guage needle is smaller than .53mm while the size of the folliclar units is between .5 to .8mm, how can this procedure function? Needles have only 1 sharp pointed edge. Take a needle and try to insert it in the scalp around the follicle. Can you imagine what it would do to the follicular unit? How can this process be FUE? The .75mm punch is a tool that extracts intact grafts and this tool was first introduced to the FUE industry in spring of 03’. The concept in spring of 03’ was that the donor site will shrink after harvesting. You may need to study the differences because this process of Dr. Gho is not FUE and the method of extraction cannot be accomplished by a .75 needle. You have misunderstood Dr. Gho’s needles and approach to FUE.
A 23 guage needle is .64mm in outside diameter. The 23 guage needle cannot harvest a 2 to 4 hair follicular unit if Dr. Gho’s quote below is true.
Dr. Gho: "Follicular Units consists of 2 to 4 hairs. Since one hair follicle has a diameter of at least 0.5 mm . the diameter of a follicular unit is at least 0.8 to 0.9mm. Hairs consists of dead material and have a harder consistency than the hair follicle itself.
Because we use special needles between 0.5 and 0.6mm., depending on the size of the hair follicles, we are able to use the “dead hard hairs” (black arrows as a guidance to obtain the hair stem cells (blue arrows) present in the hair follicles between the “dead hard hairs”."
baldnessbattlers . com / JBInterviewGho . htm
Below, is the actual Gho-FUE description:
It is only for historical reasons that we speak of the transplantation of hair. In fact in the GHO-FUE method it is a matter of multiplication of the hairs. As opposed to all preceding methods this method does not destroy the hairs in the donor area. A small part of the follicle removed remains in the original area and a complete new hair grows out of it again. Reference: http://www.ghoclinicpraha.cz/hair-loss/gho-hair-transplants-benefits.html
As previously posted, Dr. Cole introduced the .75mm punch to FUEin Feb. 03’.
“In the spring of 2003 I first introduced the 0.75 mm punch to FUE. I immediately noted that I it had certain advantages and certain disadvantages. I also noted that no single method or instrument worked equally well on all individuals. I found quickly that no one technique or procedure worked equally well for ever patient. It became apparent that every donor area was different and one had to be able to adapt to these difference. For this reason, I began developing a number of different devices of a variety of geometric shapes. All of this development was quite costly. Therefore, we were quite careful about our disclosures and we also sought patent protection on a number of the instruments. From the early days we planned to offer our procedure and instruments through a license so that we can continue developing better tools and instruments that we hoped would encourage more physicians to abandon the invasive, unpredictable scar prone strip procedure. That time is near.”
Reference: forhair . com / Articles / Punch_Size_Comparison_Study_in_Hair_Transplant_Surgery . htm
This information may clear up some confusion for you.
My advice is not medical advice
Hi Cit,you are welcome and thanks for your answers.
However for the past few weeks we have been debating some issues that seem to unfortunately plague your clinic. Just to remind everyone of some of these issues,they are as follows.
A. Transparency of anything related to your services,there seems to be a lack there of.
B. Acknowledgement of the right of patients to have full disclosure,again there seems to be a lack there of.
C. Hyperactivity involving bloated marketing on your services.
D. Irritibility and anger when asked any questions concerning anything related to anything of your clinic.
E. Strange claims to discovery and use of small punch technology of the 0.75mm (despite the known and confirmed use of YOUR 1.mm, 1.2mm, 1.3mm large plug-like punch technology.)
Since your sponsorship paid fees may have allowed for the locking of a previous debate thread and combining this with your repetition of your touted claims of discovery of the 0.75mm punch without colleague support, I will also repeat some simple questions that I hope you will answer.
I am so intrigued by your claim to have introduced the 0.75mm punch several years ago. So let me ask a few questions based on this claim and ask about patient rights in the US.
-
What is the size range of your punches. We now know the lower end size of your punch size. Apparently since you introduced the 0.75mm punch (allegedly) and you are quick to admit this publically, then what would be the largest size punch you have used in the past and or present to accommodate ANY follicular unit. You are always saying that your tools are customized to the ever so dynamic donor characteristics of follicular unit sizes of individual patients. So in other words, what is the max punch size. You have now admitted the lower size, so it is only fair that I ask this question so I can be educated in what it takes to extract the largest follicular unit you have ever encountered while performing FIT/CIT/C2G (only).
-
Do US patients have the right to full disclosure of the procedures performed as well as the tools used in each and every clinical application on humans in US medicine.
-
This question is the most important one. Recently MYWHTC a poster here on hairsite admitted on a thread that the punch sizes of THAT clinic do indeed reach and may go over 1.0mm as need be in their procedure of FIT(FOLLICULAR ISOLATION TECHNIQUE). Does this mean your FIT and CIT and C2G all may include the same specifications of punch sizes to accommodate all punch sizes.I have to assume this is the case if you were the source of FIT development and teaching this technique to the clinic of MYWHTC.
I trust that you will answer questions 1, 2, and 3 for me and not leave out any question. I ask these questions based on the postings that you have posted and other posters. Thank you in advance.
Thanks bigmac
» Hi Cit,you are welcome and thanks for your answers.
»
» However for the past few weeks we have been debating some issues that seem
» to unfortunately plague your clinic. Just to remind everyone of some of
» these issues,they are as follows.
»
» A. Transparency of anything related to your services,there seems to be a
» lack there of.
» B. Acknowledgement of the right of patients to have full disclosure,again
» there seems to be a lack there of.
» C. Hyperactivity involving bloated marketing on your services.
» D. Irritibility and anger when asked any questions concerning anything
» related to anything of your clinic.
» E. Strange claims to discovery and use of small punch technology of the
» 0.75mm (despite the known and confirmed use of YOUR 1.mm, 1.2mm, 1.3mm
» large plug-like punch technology.)
»
» Since your sponsorship paid fees may have allowed for the locking of a
» previous debate thread and combining this with your repetition of your
» touted claims of discovery of the 0.75mm punch without colleague support, I
» will also repeat some simple questions that I hope you will answer.
»
» I am so intrigued by your claim to have introduced the 0.75mm punch
» several years ago. So let me ask a few questions based on this claim and
» ask about patient rights in the US.
»
» 1. What is the size range of your punches. We now know the lower end size
» of your punch size. Apparently since you introduced the 0.75mm punch
» (allegedly) and you are quick to admit this publically, then what would be
» the largest size punch you have used in the past and or present to
» accommodate ANY follicular unit. You are always saying that your tools are
» customized to the ever so dynamic donor characteristics of follicular unit
» sizes of individual patients. So in other words, what is the max punch
» size. You have now admitted the lower size, so it is only fair that I ask
» this question so I can be educated in what it takes to extract the largest
» follicular unit you have ever encountered while performing FIT/CIT/C2G
» (only).
»
» 2. Do US patients have the right to full disclosure of the procedures
» performed as well as the tools used in each and every clinical application
» on humans in US medicine.
»
» 3. This question is the most important one. Recently MYWHTC a poster here
» on hairsite admitted on a thread that the punch sizes of THAT clinic do
» indeed reach and may go over 1.0mm as need be in their procedure of
» FIT(FOLLICULAR ISOLATION TECHNIQUE). Does this mean your FIT and CIT and
» C2G all may include the same specifications of punch sizes to accommodate
» all punch sizes.I have to assume this is the case if you were the source of
» FIT development and teaching this technique to the clinic of MYWHTC.
»
» I trust that you will answer questions 1, 2, and 3 for me and not leave
» out any question. I ask these questions based on the postings that you have
» posted and other posters. Thank you in advance.
»
» Thanks bigmac
I think besides balloonman and hairtech, you are the only idiot who is so hung up with tis 0.75mm thing, if gho is really using 0.75 like jb said, then he is solid proof that it is a bad idea to use 0.75 on everyone, go read all the complaints from gho patients.
» »
» » Thanks bigmac
»
» I think besides balloonman and hairtech, you are the only idiot who is so
» hung up with tis 0.75mm thing, if gho is really using 0.75 like jb said,
» then he is solid proof that it is a bad idea to use 0.75 on everyone, go
» read all the complaints from gho patients.
The trick with using small punch sizes (0.75 external D and below) is to disect the erector pili muscle and stop at that point. The bulb is then easily pulled away either by blunt disection or just by a gentle tug. The dificulty is knowing the depth of the muscle which is individual to each patient. Only a few have mastered this with confidence.
I think besides balloonman and hairtech, you are the only idiot who is so hung up with tis 0.75mm thing, if gho is really using 0.75 like jb said, then he is solid proof that it is a bad idea to use 0.75 on everyone, go read all the complaints from gho patients.
Hey saddo i mean frodo,if you`ve nothing constructive to add to this post ,then dont bother and go watch americas dumbest,you may see yourself on there.
Please let Cit answer as he did answer regarding gho.
» PHYSICIANS ONLY
»
» IF ANY PHYSICIAN HAS USED THE .75 INSTRUMENT BEFORE THE WINTER OF 2003,
» PLEASE COME FORWARD.
lol this “I am the inventor” is pathetic 
I mean. Really. Is it so important who was the first to try smaller then usual?
» I think besides balloonman and hairtech, you are the only idiot who is so
» hung up with tis 0.75mm thing, if gho is really using 0.75 like jb said,
» then he is solid proof that it is a bad idea to use 0.75 on everyone, go
» read all the complaints from gho patients.
» **************************************************************************
»
» Hey saddo i mean frodo,if you`ve nothing constructive to add to this post
» ,then dont bother and go watch americas dumbest,you may see yourself on
» there.
» Please let Cit answer as he did answer regarding gho.
Hi Bigmac,
When and where did “MyWHTC” actually mention Mwamba’s instrument sizes in the forum and have you asked MyWHTC these same question’s by chance? Also, Are you trying to find these answers from every reputable clinic as well to compare each clinics’ methods and instrument sizes?
There are lots of differences from FUE clinic to FUE clinic and IMHO the results aren’t based on one specific tool so it would seem that results would be based on a range of tools along with the surgeon’s insight.
Do you know where Dr.Gho’s patient gallery is and what do you take from CIT’s response on Dr. Gho?
Thanks
Thanks
» » PHYSICIANS ONLY
» »
» » IF ANY PHYSICIAN HAS USED THE .75 INSTRUMENT BEFORE THE WINTER OF 2003,
» » PLEASE COME FORWARD.
»
» lol this “I am the inventor” is pathetic I mean. Really. Is it so
» important who was the first to try smaller then usual?
Tell me about it. I am trying to figure out what happend to Dr. Gho’s patient’s and why Dr. Cole’s clinic stated his introduction of the smaller instrument and has hundreds of good results.
» » » PHYSICIANS ONLY
» » »
» » » IF ANY PHYSICIAN HAS USED THE .75 INSTRUMENT BEFORE THE WINTER OF
» 2003,
» » » PLEASE COME FORWARD.
» »
» » lol this “I am the inventor” is pathetic I mean. Really. Is it so
» » important who was the first to try smaller then usual?
»
» Tell me about it. I am trying to figure out what happend to Dr. Gho’s
» patient’s and why Dr. Cole’s clinic stated his introduction of the smaller
» instrument and has hundreds of good results.
We were misrepresented by a few posters as a clinic that didn’t associate ourselves with small instruments. Most of these posters have made claims as to the particulars of CIT and have now disappeared into the desert. It goes to show you that there are lots of forum members who have their own personal agenda. In this case, unsubstatiated information was repeatedly quoted either from word of mouth or users who like to discredit surgeons and clinics. As many posters already know, we don’t brag about introducing something, we let our results do the talking.