I have enclosed a depiction of a highly stylised and theoretical, but relevant all the same, pictorial demonstration of the effect of FUE Vs strip. A shows a section of scalp with 100Fu (dots). B shows the effect of removing some of the dots to achieve a 50% removal such as might be performed by FUE. C shows the effect of “stretching the area” to remove 50% which approximates more closely to strip. Obviously this is not exact but it shows a potential limitation of FUE when talking bigger numbers.
Interesting Marco.
Im surprized no one else has said anything about this>??
» I have enclosed a depiction of a highly stylised and theoretical, but
» relevant all the same, pictorial demonstration of the effect of FUE Vs
» strip. A shows a section of scalp with 100Fu (dots). B shows the effect of
» removing some of the dots to achieve a 50% removal such as might be
» performed by FUE. C shows the effect of “stretching the area” to remove
» 50% which approximates more closely to strip. Obviously this is not exact
» but it shows a potential limitation of FUE when talking bigger numbers.
»
Shit are we back to the density debate again? 
» Im surprized no one else has said anything about this>??
This is an area in which the strip proponents, would disagree if they could look closely and see what this diagram says
I have always said that STRIP DOES REDUCE DENSITY PER SQ CM
and the strip guys screech and scream that the density remains the same, which there is no way in hell that this can be possible.
If you stretch half the number of hairs over the same area of scalp, the density has to be cut in half
» » Im surprized no one else has said anything about this>??
»
» This is an area in which the strip proponents, would disagree if they
» could look closely and see what this diagram says
»
» I have always said that STRIP DOES REDUCE DENSITY PER SQ CM
»
» and the strip guys screech and scream that the density remains the same,
» which there is no way in hell that this can be possible.
»
» If you stretch half the number of hairs over the same area of scalp, the
» density has to be cut in half
Again, I would agree with you Hangin… if there were no laxity. Marco’s diagram fails to account for this.
» » » Im surprized no one else has said anything about this>??
» »
» » This is an area in which the strip proponents, would disagree if they
» » could look closely and see what this diagram says
» »
» » I have always said that STRIP DOES REDUCE DENSITY PER SQ CM
» »
» » and the strip guys screech and scream that the density remains the
» same,
» » which there is no way in hell that this can be possible.
» »
» » If you stretch half the number of hairs over the same area of scalp,
» the
» » density has to be cut in half
»
»
» Again, I would agree with you Hangin… if there were no laxity. Marco’s
» diagram fails to account for this.
laxity is irrelevant…of course the scalp has laxity, unless you are assuming that all of the stretching occurs within the scar itself instead of the remaining scalp. which is another horror unto itself
» Again, I would agree with you Hangin… if there were no laxity. Marco’s
» diagram fails to account for this.
Not really MPB, the effect of laxity Vs density AFTER any hair transplant has implications for both FUE and strip. This is also a VERY complex area. To explain this in the context of an effect on FUE bear in mind that a “loose” area of scalp can be said to have additional Fu / Cm2 but that is a whole other issue.
The issue in this post relates to evenly redistributing hairs Vs the necessary UNEVEN redistribution in FUE.
»
» Shit are we back to the density debate again? 
No, as I have said above this is about the pattern of redistribution; even Vs uneven and it is about the limitation of FUE imposed by uneven redistribution.
» » » » Im surprized no one else has said anything about this>??
» » »
» » » This is an area in which the strip proponents, would disagree if they
» » » could look closely and see what this diagram says
» » »
» » » I have always said that STRIP DOES REDUCE DENSITY PER SQ CM
» » »
» » » and the strip guys screech and scream that the density remains the
» » same,
» » » which there is no way in hell that this can be possible.
» » »
» » » If you stretch half the number of hairs over the same area of scalp,
» » the
» » » density has to be cut in half
» »
» »
» » Again, I would agree with you Hangin… if there were no laxity.
» Marco’s
» » diagram fails to account for this.
»
» laxity is irrelevant…of course the scalp has laxity, unless you
» are assuming that all of the stretching occurs within the scar itself
» instead of the remaining scalp. which is another horror unto itself
Yep and that horror is exactly what I am experiencing. I am not a strip advocate… at least I was not a candidate for it. I disagree, however, on laxity being irrelevant. Had I had it, my scalp wouldn’t be disfigured like it is now.
» » Again, I would agree with you Hangin… if there were no laxity. Marco’s
» » diagram fails to account for this.
»
» Not really MPB, the effect of laxity Vs density AFTER any hair transplant
» has implications for both FUE and strip. This is also a VERY complex area.
» To explain this in the context of an effect on FUE bear in mind that a
» “loose” area of scalp can be said to have additional Fu / Cm2 but that is
» a whole other issue.
»
» The issue in this post relates to evenly redistributing hairs Vs the
» necessary UNEVEN redistribution in FUE.
I understand your argument Marco (Uniformity). The density issue is something that I was reminded of when I saw the diagram. It was intended as a joke… between Hangin and me. It goes back to one of those heated debates we had months ago.
» »
» » Shit are we back to the density debate again?
»
» No, as I have said above this is about the pattern of redistribution; even
» Vs uneven and it is about the limitation of FUE imposed by uneven
» redistribution.
Again I appologize. I didn’t mean to get your thread off track.
»
» I understand your argument Marco (Uniformity). The density issue is
» something that I was reminded of when I saw the diagram. It was intended
» as a joke… between Hangin and me. It goes back to one of those heated
» debates we had months ago.
No problem but after 24 / 7 christmas carols two turkeys 30 relatives and two christmas puddings I may have lost my ability to take a joke. Have a great New year!
» »
» » I understand your argument Marco (Uniformity). The density issue is
» » something that I was reminded of when I saw the diagram. It was
» intended
» » as a joke… between Hangin and me. It goes back to one of those heated
» » debates we had months ago.
»
» No problem but after 24 / 7 christmas carols two turkeys 30 relatives and
» two christmas puddings I may have lost my ability to take a joke. Have a
» great New year!
Lol. Back at ya bud!
1+2 cannot equal 3.
Same skull size + donor area has not shrank on the skull + fewer grafts in the donor area = thinner donor density.
The thinning is probably spread througout the scalp as it is “pulled” tight to close the wound and that is probably why the strip HTs don’t show thinning as obviously as FUE work does. But if you pulled FUE grafts from all over the head, you’d have the same result as a strip HT in terms of thinning.
» But if you pulled FUE grafts from
» all over the head, you’d have the same result as a strip HT in terms of
» thinning.
The point that i was trying to make is that counter to common sense, it is noty actually possible to remove 50% Fu by FUE from the scalp evenly and it therefore leaves more noticable holes
» 1+2 cannot equal 3.
»
» Same skull size + donor area has not shrank on the skull + fewer grafts in
» the donor area = thinner donor density.
»
»
» The thinning is probably spread througout the scalp as it is “pulled”
» tight to close the wound and that is probably why the strip HTs don’t show
» thinning as obviously as FUE work does. But if you pulled FUE grafts from
» all over the head, you’d have the same result as a strip HT in terms of
» thinning.
eXACTLy What I said in a bunch of posts about 6 months ago and the strip enthusiasts INSISTED that I Was dead WRONG And that strip does not reduce density
I said,
example, take a balloon with 10,000 hairs on it, it has a certain density per sq cm
remove half the hairs, on the balloon
the surface area of the balloon remains the same
the number of hairs on that surface area is now half what it was before
therefore the density is half what it was previously
guys insisted that if the scalp has LAXITY, the density is unchanged, I said it does not matter if the scalp has laxity, the only reason that would be important is if all the stretching is done within the scar itself, which is a horror.
so yes the density of the hair will not change , providing your SCAR STRETCHES THE SAME AMOUNT that was removed from your scalp. otherwise the density is greatly reduced
Hi Marco, I am lost, I understand picture 1 and 2 but I don’t know why picture 3 is trying to show.
» Hi Marco, I am lost, I understand picture 1 and 2 but I don’t know why
» picture 3 is trying to show.
Yey, it’s just shows a “cut” across the head horizontally ie the normal direction of a strip. The last pic would be a vertical cut which, of cause doesn’t happen. The last two pics are just a bit too simple and they are in a different plane to the first two so it’s confusing.
» Hi Marco, I am lost, I understand picture 1 and 2 but I don’t know why
» picture 3 is trying to show.
the last picture shows a horizontal scar from STRIP
but it also illustrates the decrease in density that would result from strip, by the stretching of the scalp skin