aFranklin- It was premature on the part of any doc to offer clinical FUE back in 2000. It’s premature now for any clinic to offer FUE megasessions in 2008.
Sux- Are making up statistics and attacking me personally really going to help anyone reading this post? Come on, you’re better than that. Besides, I never liked ice cream. Let’s get back on track:
Your wrote with respect to Dr. Woods:
“ When you’re getting the same or better yield as the top strip docs of the world (over 90%), which they do…”
Where did you get this incredible statistic? I’ve not seen any evidence to support this. In fact, I’ve not even seen Dr. Woods himself make such a grand statement.
Dr. Woods-
I only get interested in particular competitors when they make questionable claims or intimations. You claim loudly that your technique is better than the FUE technique of any competitor. That may or may not be true. I simply challenge your claim. If you are going to go public with such a pronouncement, then I can certainly challenge it on a public forum. Which I have done, and continue to do. To date you have only attacked me instead of supporting your claim.
I wonder, for all your “patient’s rights” rhetoric, do you provide complete “Informed Consent”? Specifically, the fact that FUE grafts must undergo 3 traumatic forces that strip grafts never endure:
- Torsion
- Traction
- Compression
(and a few other minor ones).
For those of you out there who have wondered why FUE has not yet put an end to STRIP, it is because of these 3 detrimental forces. In the best of hands these forces are minimized, that’s what my patents are all about, but even so, yields are STILL lower than with strip surgery and is why I believe that if large procedures are needed, they should be done with strip, not FUE. ( The exception, of course, being patients like Franklin who would rather never have a strip surgery again. That’s a different matter).
Personally, I couldn’t care less what techniques Dr. Woods uses. I doubt they are revolutionary or even interesting. But if he is going to claim superiority in this field, he is going to have start by at least telling his patients before surgery the true differences between strip surgery and FUE surgery. Specifically, the limitations of FUE surgery.
Well, Dr. Woods. How about it? Do you inform your patients of these three destructive FUE forces prior to surgery? 1. Torsion 2. Traction 3. Compression ?
You see, HT doctors do not make patients sign “waivers” as Dr. Woods loves to claim in his never ending effort to vilify other HT doctors. What he clearly doesn’t understand is that patients CAN’T “waive” their rights. That’s what makes them “rights”. And what he calls “rights” aren’t actually “rights”.
What HT doctors actually give patients is an INFORMED CONSENT document that TELL them what possible problems they might face should they decide to go ahead with a procedure. It also INFORMS them, specifically, of the downside of any procedure and that ALTERNATIVE treatments were discussed (in some states). The three detrimental forces of FUE and their resulting lower yields for FUE procedures must be included to have offered full informed consent.
Bverotti,
Does your doctor give informed consent that makes it clear that FUE yields are consistently lower than strip yields because of 1. Torsion 2. Traction 3. Compression ?
Does your doctor inform patients of this during consultation?
Dr. Woods,
Do you inform your patients of the detrimental forces FUE grafts must endure when compared to strip dissection? Or do you claim that your particular FUE technique does not inflict the three detrimental forces of 1. Torsion 2. Traction 3. Compression ?
Even your most dedicated supporter will be waiting for your answer.