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

What happens to people in the Hair Transplant "Industry"


#1

Hello everyone
I am a new member and I am here to educate potential patients/customers
what can happen,what happens,in the 21 Century ,overhere,in the USA,regulary to thousands of people.

I say the medical field Hair Transplant,that many of you here call HT “Industry” has no ethic and has no established criteria among the surgeons,what should be acceptable standard of care for the potential patient.
You could be abused,butchered,abandoned by the surgeon in the midle of the surgery,non qualified personel could perform medical tasks on you,etc etc.WITHOUT ANY consequences for them.

So if you consider to put you future in the hands of the HT "Industry "read this first.

NO ETHICS

It is assertion pertaining to the VAST majority of HT surgeons.(in fact I don’t know of any HT surgeon who does not exercise habitual practices prohibited by law as I will describe in my post).

Some of you have already, like me, undergone HT surgery, so you will know what I am talking about because you will recognize that in fact what I say is true.

Some of you are thinking about having HT surgery
and I recommend before you decide to do so, check for a HT doctor who will answer NO to the questions I ask below. So far no one did .

here it is:
For the doctors claiming (having/practicing) ethics as opposed to someone else who doesn’t.I ask you:

A.
1.How many of you personally evaluate the patient sufficiently so you could formulate an appropriate pre-operative diagnosis, and how many of you use “consultant” non medical person to do it for you? In addition and related to this how many of you explain pros and cons of HT surgery so patient intelligently can decide about his options (informed consent) and how many of you give that to the “consultant” as well?

  1. How many of you perform or personally supervise all aspects of the surgery? Including placement of the grafts in the receptor sites? And how many of you carve the patient, take the strip, suture the wound, make incisions (holes) in patient head and then leave the surgical room and patient and leave the rest to the "surgical technicians”? Do you have in other words, aspects of the surgery outside of your supervision performed or supervised by another qualified surgeon with the consent of the patient?

  2. How many of you fail to personally perform post-operative medical care? How many of you delegate post-operative medical care to a non-qualified medical professional or to a non medical professional at all?

  3. Do you recklessly delegate medical tasks in violation of the Administrative Codes in your states?

5.Does any of you negligently and recklessly delegate the tasks of selecting the donor site to harvest the hair follicles for transplant in the preceptor site by letting the "surgical technicians” choose the location of the same by shaving and preparing patient just before surgery?

6.Do you and how many of you negligently and recklessly and ILLEGALY delegate the tasks of administering anesthesia to patient to persons not qualified under your state law? (everywhere in USA it is a law only DOCTOR can administer anesthesia)

  1. How many of you negligently and recklessly delegate the tasks of preparing the donor grafts, and insertion of the donor grafts into the surgically prepared receptor sites ,with your supervision ,to your "surgical technicians”? How many of you negligently and recklessly delegate the tasks of preparing the donor grafts, and insertion of the donor grafts into the surgically prepared receptor sites ,WITHOUT your supervision ,to your "surgical technicians” while you chill outside the surgical room for hours? In violation of your administrative laws of your state.

  2. How many of you have never seen the patient until just before surgery and therefore Lack Informed Consent in Violation of the Law in your state?

  3. How many of you have “surgical technicians” engaged in the practice of medicine and surgery without the appropriate certificate from the State Medical Board in your state, in violation of the law in your state?

B.This questions are for the HT experts that post on this forum.

C.If you answer NO we don’t do it…reply to me please I want to talk to you. However I doubt that any of you will.

D.Let me tell you something about YOUR standard of CARE .As long as ANY of you physicians think that you can successfully pretend that you are ignorant of, what common people,(like for example some jury would be consisted of), knows, which is, abandoning patient,“surgical technicians” giving anesthesia…doing the whole surgery in fact, while Surgeon is somewhere else,” Consultants" playing doctor on patients, leaving "surgical technicians determine where doctor will carve someone’s head…etc etc is not care YOU are businesman,not a physician, and the HT surgery is busines,not medical field of elective surgery.

Because I know ,and hopefully many others soon will know, that conducts as such are disgusting violations of patient rights and abuse, resulting in butchery on the MAJORITY oh HT patients (customers).

And when some disfigured patient wants to seek justice in Court, none of you will dare to say the obvious, that conducts described above are not ,are forbidden to be, considered as a standard of care.
ANY REPLY DOCTORS?

I write a long post but I won’t apologize suppose if one does not like what I write one can skip reading. I have not even started writing yet.

If one reads my previous post one would notice that described conducts (by commission and omission) are violations of certain laws (either administrative laws of medical boards or the Law codes of the states).

Now that premise considered I will try to argue, what was never argued before.

In most medical malpractice Law suits plaintiff needs a doctor to state in writing that in that doctors opinion his colleague breached the standard of care. That is necessary (in most cases) element to FILE claim for med malpractice. Most doctors in the HT “industry” unfortunately brake all those things that I mentioned in my previous post, although illegal, they do brake them.

So when one, like for example me, goes to other HT doctors and tells them the story, no HT doctor wants to sign affidavit of merit (because I assume such conducts are epidemic in the HT industry).
Thus, grieved patient, can not even start the law suit, because does not have the element of affidavit of merit from another doctor that the standard of care was breached.

That is why there is NOT MANY LAW SUITS AGAINST HT DOCTORS,

They protect each other by the simple fact that it is almost impossible to find HT doctor willing to testify against another.

That has been exceedingly successful shield they have against law suits.

However, I will try to argue something that never was argued before.

Like I said in most cases expert is needed to testify in Med malpractice case. But not all cases.

It is well-settled with the Courts that expert testimony is required only when the asserted negligence does not lie within the jury’s comprehension as a matter of common knowledge, when the applicable standard of care is not a matter of common knowledge, and when the jury must have the assistance of experts to decide the issue of negligence.

In other words, why need an expert when it is obvious that negligence or recklessness or even intend to purposely disfigure is obvious to a common guy" That doctrine in the law is called res ipsa…
Res ipsa loquitur is a legal term from the Latin meaning, “the thing itself speaks” but is more often translated “the thing speaks for itself.” It signifies that further details are unnecessary; the proof of the case is self-evident.

Now, The one who filed law suit (plaintiff) has to show to the court, without any expert, that:

(1)
That the instrumentality causing the injury was, at the time of the injury, or at the time of the creation of the condition causing the injury, under the exclusive management and control of the defendant; "

(2) that the injury occurred under such circumstances that in the ordinary course of events it would not have occurred if ordinary care had been observed."

Like I said HT surgeons will never say that another HT breached the standard because most of them do the same thing.

But I ask this, Surgical facilities (not licensed),surgical staff and their competence as surgeons team (not licensed to administer anesthesia and select where doctor will carve patient, donor site),pre-medical consultation and explanation of pros and cons of surgery (done by consultant),Pre med diagnosis (for example, blood work not done),Actual carving and suturing donor site being only action done on patient by the surgeon and all other aspects of the surgery delegated to “surgical technicians” (non qualified licensed),postoperative treatment of wound infection via telephone (because most of the time patients and doctors are miles away)are all instrumentality in exclusive control of the Surgeon.

The surgeon has the control, but he chose to abandon the control, and leave the pre operative diagnosis, actual surgery, post operative care to be performed not by him directly, not even with his supervision (how it is done).

He makes that choice unilaterally (without patients consent) and illegally, abandoning patient in middle of surgery.

So I disagree that "those facts are exceedingly difficult to satisfy/prove and one needs another HT surgeon to testify that the standard was breached”. The surgeons have control, they (some of them or most of them as you please) chose not to have control and surgeon had control not to choose to delegate his control, illegally.

The second requirement ,The second argument that “that the injury occurred under such circumstances that in the ordinary course of events it would not have occurred if ordinary care had been observed.”

I would argue that if HT surgeon told patient pros and cons of surgery as he should have, patient might not undergo it, that if patient knew he, the surgeon, would not perform the surgery him self patient might have decided , should have not agreed to, under go it, If he would have chosen, because it was in his control to choose it, and it was his duty to choose it, the donor site incision, he would have chosen it in higher or lower position on patients head because of reasons that HT surgeons know where location should be and risks of significant scaring occurring if not positioned properly. If surgeon had performed, or at least supervised the performance of placing the grafts in the receptors sites ,the injury, the adverse outcome would not have occurred because HT surgeons know and should know how those grafts are placed properly in order to appear natural when they grow, in the direction of how hair grows naturally as advertised by them. Had surgeon been there he would know did the “surgical technicians” place all the grafts, or maybe only 1000 or maybe only 200.Had he ,(surgeon) provided qualified person to dig in the postoperative wound on the donors site, to try to recognize and find absorbable sutures, with scissors, it would not for example (mine example)be done by hairdresser lady who did not have clue what those are,digged with scissors 40 minutes and caused me extreme pain and possibly worsening the scar. No all that would not have occurred if ordinary care had been observed. I don’t understand why is that so difficult to see. Why is difficult to see that I disagree that medical expert needs to say that all of the above must not have happened, and adverse effects and injury would not have happened had the control HT surgeons had and by law must have ,chose to abandon having the control, to unilaterally, and illegally make that choice.Ignorantia legis non excusat – ignorance of the law does not excuse.

The degree of skill and learning ordinarily possessed and used by any members of the medical profession ,engaged in the same (or any) type of medical practice or specialty in the locality (or anywhere in USA)in which he practices or in a similar locality; first and most, makes them aware (that skill and learning does),that like every other member of the community, every citizen, by provisions of the law, delimits certain actions that he can or must (physicians )do by commission or omission .Physicians, like everyone else must obey the law .

This is the definition of acceptable standard of care :

The degree of skill and learning ordinarily possessed and used by members of the profession of the medical care provider in good standing, engaged in the same type of practice or specialty in the locality in which he practices or in a similar locality;

So far this definition was interpreted by the lawyers that doctors only determine The degree of skill and learning. I disagree.

While I agree that The degree of skill and learning ordinarily possessed and used by the doctors is determined statistically(how the majority does it) law provisions delimit certain actions used by doctors (even though if it happens that majority of them does it) as ILLEGAL!

The Law provisions forbidding certain conduct, have supremacy over the Certain forbidden conducts and make them VOID to be considered any kind of care.

So to simplify this definition (standard of care),so far has been interpreted that doctors only determine The degree of skill and learning. I disagree. While I agree that The degree of skill and learning ordinarily possessed and used by the doctors is determined statistically (how the majority does it) law provisions delimit certain actions used by doctors (even though if it happens that majority of them does it) as ILLEGAL! And thus makes them VOID to be considered any kind of care.

They can’t be care, they are illegal.

No one ever argued the obvious - that violations of the things that I state above automatically(without the need of expert)makes those violations medical negligence. If any of this elements exist med negligence should be presumed! And the burden should be shifted to defendant to prove how the law which delimited certain actions forbidden because are considered dangerous for patient,can be in his case considered acceptable care.

So, while I am aware that lack of informed consent is different ground for seeking remedies, as well as unlicensed practice of medicine, battery derived from lack of inf consent, abandoning patient etc…are all different grounds in the Law suit (I am aware of that ) I am saying it should be argued this (never argued before but so obvious to me )

By law doctor is required to inform patient about pros cons of surgery so patient intelligently can exercise his Informing potential patient of that is (can anyone argue otherwise) the pre-operative care!

By Law doctor can not delegate certain medical tasks ( as he did in my case) to certain people. The performance of surgical tasks (can anyone argue otherwise) is the essence of the activities where most of the medical care and skill is exercised on patient! Same for the rest .

So yes doctors do determine “this is common
practice and done by most in our field" as long as does not violate the law

No one ever argued the obvious that violations of the things that I state above automatically(without the need of expert)makes those violations medical negligence.

If any of this elements exist med negligence should be presumed!
And the burden should be shifted to defendant to prove how the law which delimited certain actions forbidden because are considered dangerous for patient, can be in his case considered acceptable care.

This argument if prevails gives a chance for future plaintiffs can by-pass the shield made by the doctors lobby which simplified is" if you want to sue us one of us has to tell on the other he he he …good luck.

You who read this may ask your self…But why? Why would Physicians (lets say some physicians)
brake the laws and violate patients rights? Why someone who spent 10 years to become M.D or D.O, highly educated, would brake the laws continually, would violate patients rights continually? What is the MOTIVE?

Fair enough, good question, and I will tell you why.

The motive is, like in any business ,or as they call it now "Industry ",money, profit.

What makes business successfull?To be competitive against same entities offering the same services or product on the market, to the consumer.
How do you become and stay competitive?
By making the product or service cost effective so you could offer to the consumer low prices.

And how is that possible related to the Hair Transplant surgery, called now, most appropriately, Industry?

By delegating physicians tasks to non physician, very often non medical personnel.

That is extremely cost effective. One hour of physician time is worth 200 - 400 dollars an hour. One hour of "surgical technician "time is worth 20 - 40 dollars per hour.

So to get more cost effective service/product, the businessman/physician in order to stay in the “business” is forced to delegate more and more tasks that he has duty to perform him self, to “surgical technicians” and “consultants”.

You may say…but that is illegal. And you are right. It is. But who cares .HT “Industry” made a code, Never give a chance victim of malpractice in HT surgery to go to Court and expose the illegal practice.

The legislator presumed that there is no business code ,but rather, medical and ethical code so gave the physicians initial power of determination to decide, was it or not breach to duty of care.

However the paradox now is to stay competitive in the game, most surgeons have to do the same thing.


#2

John35 although your message is well meant, it falls upon deaf ears. What you say about the hair transplant industry is true about every specialty in medicine. In fact in applies to most every business. Capitalism by it’s very nature is corrupt.

When your doctor tells you, you need a heart operation, do you reall need a heart operation or does he need to make a payment on his yacht. You really don’t know, and chances are, he needs to make a payment on his yacht.

Media in general is also corrupt, including websites. They depend on ad revenue to exist. Use your experience to not make the same mistake again, especially when it comes to medicine. Your life may depend on it. If your doctor tells you, you need a prescription, chances are you don’t, you need a lifestyle change. But a lifestyle change does not generate recurring income that comes with repeated office visits. It just the way the world works at this moment in time.

If you get a chance try and get a copy of zeitgeist the addendum on dvd or watch it on the web.


#3

» John35 although your message is well meant, it falls upon deaf ears. What
» you say about the hair transplant industry is true about every specialty in
» medicine. In fact in applies to most every business. Capitalism by it’s
» very nature is corrupt.
»
» When your doctor tells you, you need a heart operation, do you reall need
» a heart operation or does he need to make a payment on his yacht. You
» really don’t know, and chances are, he needs to make a payment on his
» yacht.
»
» Media in general is also corrupt, including websites. They depend on ad
» revenue to exist. Use your experience to not make the same mistake again,
» especially when it comes to medicine. Your life may depend on it. If your
» doctor tells you, you need a prescription, chances are you don’t, you need
» a lifestyle change. But a lifestyle change does not generate recurring
» income that comes with repeated office visits. It just the way the world
» works at this moment in time.
»
» If you get a chance try and get a copy of zeitgeist the addendum on dvd or
» watch it on the web.


#4

john,

Like many people here i’m sure, i’ve followed your posts on another forum.
I feel for you…you went to a rubbish surgeon and got a rubbish result.
But…and i mean this with the greatest respect, you have got to take a certain amount of responsibility for what has happened.
This is elective cosmetic surgery. You couldn’t and surely didn’t research properly otherwise you most certainly would not have went to dr ‘rubbish’.
Its like jaywalking across a busy road and a car hits you. Is it entirely the fault of the car? no, its partly your fault as well.

There are plenty of repair patients far worse off than you who eventually went to a quality doctor and got the result they wanted.
You’re on the forums now so i urge you to forget this futile costly legal crusade you’re on and spend the money on a repair with a well researched quality doctor.

i very sincerely wish you all the best :slight_smile:


#5

» john,
»
» Like many people here i’m sure, i’ve followed your posts on another
» forum.
» I feel for you…you went to a rubbish surgeon and got a rubbish result.
» But…and i mean this with the greatest respect, you have got to take a
» certain amount of responsibility for what has happened.
» This is elective cosmetic surgery. You couldn’t and surely didn’t research
» properly otherwise you most certainly would not have went to dr ‘rubbish’.
» Its like jaywalking across a busy road and a car hits you. Is it entirely
» the fault of the car? no, its partly your fault as well.
»
» There are plenty of repair patients far worse off than you who eventually
» went to a quality doctor and got the result they wanted.
» You’re on the forums now so i urge you to forget this futile costly legal
» crusade you’re on and spend the money on a repair with a well researched
» quality doctor.
»
» i very sincerely wish you all the best :slight_smile:

thank you boru

True,I could have done more research before,then now,after.

But responsibility I don’t take for not doing so.I will give you my reasoning about your premise,that is a duty of potential candidate for HT to do through research WHOM doctor to pick,and your analogy with busy highway and careles pedestrian crossing it.

The goverment put a sign for pedestrians,SAFETY ZONE" when issued the physicians title MD and DO.Most people,believe it or not,trust doctor A PRIORI (in advance).
So I assumed every doctor,and Weiss publicly advertises he is specialist in HT,and board cetrtified to perform Ht,was competent I assumed there is no adverse efects as that is adverised all over the internet.

So I did not know of the possibility of such outcome,and I did not know that inspite the sign "safety zone for pedestrians,cross ,it is safe’ legislated by the legislator,there indeed is busy highway with doctors driving over the speed limit,never getting a ticked for speeding.

Thanks for good wishes


#6

» » john,
» »
» » Like many people here i’m sure, i’ve followed your posts on another
» » forum.
» » I feel for you…you went to a rubbish surgeon and got a rubbish
» result.
» » But…and i mean this with the greatest respect, you have got to take a
» » certain amount of responsibility for what has happened.
» » This is elective cosmetic surgery. You couldn’t and surely didn’t
» research
» » properly otherwise you most certainly would not have went to dr
» ‘rubbish’.
» » Its like jaywalking across a busy road and a car hits you. Is it
» entirely
» » the fault of the car? no, its partly your fault as well.
» »
» » There are plenty of repair patients far worse off than you who
» eventually
» » went to a quality doctor and got the result they wanted.
» » You’re on the forums now so i urge you to forget this futile costly
» legal
» » crusade you’re on and spend the money on a repair with a well
» researched
» » quality doctor.
» »
» » i very sincerely wish you all the best :slight_smile:
»
» thank you boru
»
» True,I could have done more research before,then now,after.
»
» But responsibility I don’t take for not doing so.I will give you my
» reasoning about your premise,that is a duty of potential candidate for HT
» to do through research WHOM doctor to pick,and your analogy with busy
» highway and careles pedestrian crossing it.
»
» The goverment put a sign for pedestrians,SAFETY ZONE" when issued the
» physicians title MD and DO.Most people,believe it or not,trust doctor A
» PRIORI (in advance).
» So I assumed every doctor,and Weiss publicly advertises he is specialist
» in HT,and board cetrtified to perform Ht,was competent I assumed there is
» no adverse efects as that is adverised all over the internet.
»
» So I did not know of the possibility of such outcome,and I did not know
» that inspite the sign "safety zone for pedestrians,cross ,it is safe’
» legislated by the legislator,there indeed is busy highway with doctors
» driving over the speed limit,never getting a ticked for speeding.
»
» Thanks for good wishes

I totally agree with you John. The real problem is that the HT industry isn’t regulated enough. Any doctor from any speciality can start doing HT tomorrow. It is a cosmetic proceadure, and as such, it should be restricted to liscenced cosmetic surgeons. No matter how much hair I lose, I will NEVER get an HT - I just don’t trust any of the people in that industry. I really feel for you guys; if not for finnasteride, monoxidil, and nizoral, I could be in your shoes. “There but the grace of God go I…” Good luck on all fronts.


#7

» I feel for you…you went to a rubbish surgeon and got a rubbish result.
» But…and i mean this with the greatest respect, you have got to take a
» certain amount of responsibility for what has happened.
» This is elective cosmetic surgery. You couldn’t and surely didn’t research
» properly otherwise you most certainly would not have went to dr ‘rubbish’.
» Its like jaywalking across a busy road and a car hits you. Is it entirely
» the fault of the car? no, its partly your fault as well.

You can do all the research you want, but it’s still a crap shoot. You might increase your odds for a better result slightly. The stellar results you constantly see posted represent less then 0.1% of the hair transplant work that’s out there. The rest you will never see.

Some of us are just products of the technology at that particular time. The longer you can wait, the better the technology. The work being done today will look just as bad as the work done 10 years ago, when it’s seen 10 years into the future. People that will see it, will be saying what the hell were you thinking, didn’t you do any research?


#8

I don’t entirely agree that 98 or 99% of people can’t expect to look like the gorgeous pics in the ads for HT clinics. At least when we’re talking about the couple dozen reasonably ethical HT clinics and not Bosley/MHR mills.

Yeah, at least 3/4ths of patients probably can’t. The ads are a minority.

But at the same time, people just don’t educate themselves enough. You don’t have to be a HT surgeon to understand that a finite # of grafts covers more and less space with more and less density. Even if you can’t visualize the numbers, surely you can visualize the size of your donor strip versus the size of your balding area.

I don’t expect every patient to be able to accurately picture their final result on their own beforehand. But a patient that expects 1500 grafts to cover their shiny-bald NW#6 like Elvis’s hair is just not using any common sense. You will know roughly what disappeared from the back, I’m sure you already knew exactly how much it had to cover in the front. If you’re not even expecting a result in the same ballpark then that’s your own fault.


#9

» I totally agree with you John. The real problem is that the HT industry
» isn’t regulated enough. Any doctor from any speciality can start doing HT
» tomorrow. It is a cosmetic proceadure, and as such, it should be
» restricted to liscenced cosmetic surgeons. No matter how much hair I lose,
» I will NEVER get an HT - I just don’t trust any of the people in that
» industry. I really feel for you guys; if not for finnasteride, monoxidil,
» and nizoral, I could be in your shoes. “There but the grace of God go
» I…” Good luck on all fronts.

The sad thing is that if they don’t come up with a viable HM solution soon I might have to go down the HT path.


#10

» » I totally agree with you John. The real problem is that the HT industry
» » isn’t regulated enough. Any doctor from any speciality can start doing
» HT
» » tomorrow. It is a cosmetic proceadure, and as such, it should be
» » restricted to liscenced cosmetic surgeons. No matter how much hair I
» lose,
» » I will NEVER get an HT - I just don’t trust any of the people in that
» » industry. I really feel for you guys; if not for finnasteride,
» monoxidil,
» » and nizoral, I could be in your shoes. “There but the grace of God go
» » I…” Good luck on all fronts.
»
» The sad thing is that if they don’t come up with a viable HM solution soon
» I might have to go down the HT path.

I agree, they should be licensed. All of them! I would never have a procedure done by someone who isn’t educated as a surgeon. HTs are fine but you gotta stick to a reputable doc and stay on the conservative side.


#11

»
» I totally agree with you John. The real problem is that the HT industry
» isn’t regulated enough. Any doctor from any speciality can start doing HT
» tomorrow. It is a cosmetic proceadure, and as such, it should be
» restricted to liscenced cosmetic surgeons. No matter how much hair I lose,
» I will NEVER get an HT - I just don’t trust any of the people in that
» industry. I really feel for you guys; if not for finnasteride, monoxidil,
» and nizoral, I could be in your shoes. “There but the grace of God go
» I…” Good luck on all fronts.

It’s not necessarily a HT industry issue. It’s a societal issue, profit at any cost. One only needs to watch corporate America at work and read the latest headlines.


#12

» »
» » I totally agree with you John. The real problem is that the HT
» industry
» » isn’t regulated enough. Any doctor from any speciality can start doing
» HT
» » tomorrow. It is a cosmetic proceadure, and as such, it should be
» » restricted to liscenced cosmetic surgeons. No matter how much hair I
» lose,
» » I will NEVER get an HT - I just don’t trust any of the people in that
» » industry. I really feel for you guys; if not for finnasteride,
» monoxidil,
» » and nizoral, I could be in your shoes. “There but the grace of God go
» » I…” Good luck on all fronts.
»
» It’s not necessarily a HT industry issue. It’s a societal issue, profit at
» any cost. One only needs to watch corporate America at work and read the
» latest headlines.

Education is everything 4 ht patients. Experience,competence,&artistry is the rest of the game 4 the docs. The concept of transplanting FUs at natural density won’t be replaced for many many years


#13

Do you think that during the consultation the doctor has the obligation to tell the patient that FUE is available even though his clinic does not offer FUE? Do you think strip doctors violate the law if they do not tell their patients that FUE is available elsewhere?


#14

» Do you think that during the consultation the doctor has the obligation to
» tell the patient that FUE is available even though his clinic does not
» offer FUE? Do you think strip doctors violate the law if they do not tell
» their patients that FUE is available elsewhere?

What do I think :slight_smile:
I think that they do.
Does it coun’t?
No.
you all read about all violations done in my HT case.

Could I find 1 doctor to say that was breach of care?
No.
That is care they say.


#15

» Do you think that during the consultation the doctor has the obligation to
» tell the patient that FUE is available even though his clinic does not
» offer FUE? Do you think strip doctors violate the law if they do not tell
» their patients that FUE is available elsewhere?

This was discussed before in another thread. When you place your order at McDonalds, do they have the obligation to tell you that Burger King offers onion rings?


#16

» » Do you think that during the consultation the doctor has the obligation
» to
» » tell the patient that FUE is available even though his clinic does not
» » offer FUE? Do you think strip doctors violate the law if they do not
» tell
» » their patients that FUE is available elsewhere?
»
» This was discussed before in another thread. When you place your order at
» McDonalds, do they have the obligation to tell you that Burger King offers
» onion rings?

The analogy with Mc Donalds is incorrect.You all agreing with that analogy forget that,surgery involves INFORMED consent,by LAW.

Placing order with Mc Donalds does not include INFORMED consent by Law.

This is what informed consent BY LAW includes:
Informed consent is a legal document in all 50 states.

It is an agreement for a proposed medical treatment ornon-treatment, or for a proposed invasive procedure.It requires physicians to disclose the benefits,risks, and alternatives to the proposed treatment,non-treatment, or procedure. It is the method by whichfully informed, rational persons may be involved inchoices about their health care.

Description

Informed consent stems from the legal and ethical right an individual has to decide what is done to his or her body, and from the PHYSICIAN’S ethical duty to make sure that individuals are involved in decisions about their own health care.

The process of securing informed consent has three phases, all of which involve information exchange between DOCTOR and patient and are part of patient education.

First, in words an individual can understand, the PHYSICIAN must convey the details of a planned procedure ortreatment, its potential benefits and serious risks,and any feasible alternatives. The patient should be presented with information on the most likely outcomes of the treatment.

Second, the PHYSICIAN must evaluate whether or not the person has understood what has been said, must ascertain that the risks have been accepted, and that the patient is giving consent to proceed with the procedure or treatment with full knowledge and forethought.

Finally, the individual must sign the consent form, which documents in generic format the major points of consideration.

The only exception to this is securing informed consent during extreme emergencies.

Hair Transplant procedure is NEVER extreme emergency.

Today, all of the 50 United States have legislation that delineates the required standards for informed consent.

If “CONSULTANT”(who almost in ALL instances is NOT physician),not the doctor, explains the pros/cons of HT to patient and patient decides to undergo HT surgery because of it,that “informed consent” is NOT informed and legaly worthless.

Patient can not ask the "COnsultant"needed questions about the HT,which is MEDICAL PROCEDURE because “Consultant” can not explain inteligently HT,does not have the education,skill and most important ,legal right to do so.

Lack of informed consent before HT constitutes Battery

Question for the doctors.How many of you have “consultants” doing that for you?

For you HT patients,who did informed consent on you?


#17

» The analogy with Mc Donalds is incorrect.You all agreing with that
» analogy forget that,surgery involves INFORMED consent,by LAW.

The analogy with McDonalds is the way the real world operates. I know we would like to think that the ehtics of medical doctors are higher then the local mechanic or plumber, but they are not. In fact the local repairman probably has higher ethical values then the average doctor.

It’s not your fault, the conditioning starts the moment you are born. Western medicine is more about profit then it is about helping people.


#18

» » Do you think that during the consultation the doctor has the obligation
» to
» » tell the patient that FUE is available even though his clinic does not
» » offer FUE? Do you think strip doctors violate the law if they do not
» tell
» » their patients that FUE is available elsewhere?
»
» What do I think :slight_smile:
» I think that they do.
» Does it coun’t?
» No.
» you all read about all violations done in my HT case.
»
» Could I find 1 doctor to say that was breach of care?
» No.
» That is care they say.

There are some things that are grey area and subject to interpretaion. But whether the doctor had told me about fue or not is very clear cut, either he did or he did not. Fue and strip are so radically different, don’t you think I have a case against the doctor who failed to inform me about FUE before selling me a strip transplant?


#19

» » » Do you think that during the consultation the doctor has the
» obligation
» » to
» » » tell the patient that FUE is available even though his clinic does
» not
» » » offer FUE? Do you think strip doctors violate the law if they do
» not
» » tell
» » » their patients that FUE is available elsewhere?
» »
» » What do I think :slight_smile:
» » I think that they do.
» » Does it coun’t?
» » No.
» » you all read about all violations done in my HT case.
» »
» » Could I find 1 doctor to say that was breach of care?
» » No.
» » That is care they say.
»
» There are some things that are grey area and subject to interpretaion. But
» whether the doctor had told me about fue or not is very clear cut, either
» he did or he did not. Fue and strip are so radically different, don’t you
» think I have a case against the doctor who failed to inform me about FUE
» before selling me a strip transplant?

I am sorry i did not reply before to this. I seldom visit this site and stay on , where mostly I am ignored because I bash as they say HT “Industry”.
Look brother, only way to prevail against this Clan, this CLUB of HT surgeon that have alliance and code that they never go against another is, critical mass of people like u and I, top cat …thousands more to put pressure on the Supreme Court by challenging the affidavit of merit as unconstitutional and strike down unconstitutional law, or pressure the legislator )Senate/Congress) to change the law, Or Medical negligence attorneys to file res ipsa in every case where violation of the law occurred …

The Law now is designed to shield the corrupt doctors from law suits. How many victims of HT you know of? I bet there is thousands. How many successful litigation of HT victims we know of? NONE my friend.
HT victims that won law suits are usually for fraudulent misrepresentation/advertising, lack of informed consent,…stuff like that which is vegetable soup…without any meat in it. The meat is Medical Malpractice. To START ,to FILE med malpractice claim you need to find ANOTHER HT doctor to write you so called affidavit of merit. GOOD LUCK!! IF you find one you might be one of very few who did.
Please contact me at bocvarus@yahoo.com


#20

» » The analogy with Mc Donalds is incorrect.You all agreing with that
» » analogy forget that,surgery involves INFORMED consent,by LAW.
»
» The analogy with McDonalds is the way the real world operates. I know we
» would like to think that the ehtics of medical doctors are higher then the
» local mechanic or plumber, but they are not. In fact the local repairman
» probably has higher ethical values then the average doctor.
»
» It’s not your fault, the conditioning starts the moment you are born.
» Western medicine is more about profit then it is about helping people.

Topcat611

Everything in the world is created and endowed with a certain nature that defines what each sort of being is in its essence.

A thing’s nature is detectable not only in its external appearance, but also and more importantly through the natural inclinations which guide it to behave in conformity with the particular nature it has.

We all COULD take active role in prescribing ,sustaining and CHANGING the various natures included in that creation .

After defining law as “an ordinance of reason for the common good, made by someone who has care of the community, and promulgated.”

Anyone with common sense knows that is not a case,or as you say “is the way the real world operates”

Topcat611 there is such thing called natural law which guides human beings through their fundamental inclinations toward the natural perfection .

As we have seen, however, the human subjugation to the eternal law (called the natural law) is always concomitant with a certain awareness the human subject has of the law binding him (the existing law,the codified law,the common law etc)

Since one of the essential components of law is to be promulgated, the natural law would lose its legal character if human beings did not have the principles of that law instilled in their minds

For this reason man considers the natural law to be a habit, not in itself, but because the principles (or precepts) of the natural law are naturally held in our minds by means of an intellectual habit, a natural knowledge held by all people instructing them as to the fundamental moral requirements of their human nature.

Topcat611 man with your intelect should not surender to the reality.Man with your intelect has duty not to define the reality,but to improve the reality.:slight_smile:

I say get together.