Question about being young and getting a hair transplant

[soulsurvivor316]

One thing that always confuses me about the disapproval most have for younger people (those under 25) getting hair transplants is the fact that dutasteride is rarely mentioned. I understand that the key issue with a young person getting a hair transplant is that his hair loss isn't stabilized yet. But wouldn't it be accurate to say the dutasteride usually stabilizes hair loss enough that getting a transplant at a young age shouldn't be such a problem?

If the main problem is getting your hair loss under control, why can't someone just get on dutasteride and then get a hair transplant? I know the most knowledgeable posters on this site (bryan and Docj ) believe that dutasteride will more than likely control a person's hair loss to a respectable degree over the long term. Heck, Armani believes that finasteride post-transplant is good enough for control for a younger individual. So why can't a person hop on dutasteride and then get a transplant after, say, a year? Holla back.

 

[Guest]

Taking the hairloss meds in itself means nothing.

The real issue is whether or not the meds are actually working efficiency in one's hairloss. Finasteride and dutasteride are specific hormorne inhibitors. They are prostrate drugs. And as usual, patients respond differently to the meds including the potential side-effects.

The other big unknown is exactly how long the meds will continue to work. There's not enough long term data published to draw any concrete conclusions. I have been on finasteride for ten years and it's still working well.

The other thing about younger guys wanting to get hair transplants is that most of them want their juvenile hairlines back, and while that's understandable, it's also an unrealistic goal.

Hope this makes some sense to you.

 

[s.a.f]

The other thing about younger guys wanting to get hair transplants is that most of them want their juvenile hairlines back, and while that's understandable, it's also an unrealistic goal.

And longterm its unwise as it will probably look unnatural in later life. With hair transplant's its best to be conservative, if you want a natural result dont get greedy.
Just remember a good Norwood 2 is a world of diffrence from a nw4/5/6 any m.p.b sufferer should be satisfied with that.

 

[soulsurvivor316]

Hey gillenator and s.a.f.,

Thanks for responding to my post. What I am moreso concerned with is someone who is a good responder to dutasteride. I'm talking about someone who went from a NW3 to a very strong and thick Norwood 2.5 after a year. Now we can probably assume certain things about this person:

1. His hair is very responsive to the lowering of the levels of type II DHT by dutasteride
2. He more than like will never progress pass a Norwood 3.5, as the hairs in the back of the frontal portion of the head aren't as sensitive to DHT. Considering the fact that the always sensitive frontal hairs responded so well to DHT, the hairs in the crown and vertex are probably safe for the rest of his life (or at least for the next 30-40 years).

Now why can't the person who is a good responder to dutasteride get a hair transplant at say, 25? He probably wouldn't need another transplant until he is 50-55. The hairs in the vertex and crown will mostly be strong for the rest of his life. Those hairs in the front will probably eventually thin out, but that will be the extent of his loss. So why not?

 

[Guest]

i dont see any reason why you shouldn't soulsurvivor. find a good Doctor that you're comfortable with and get your juvenile hairline back if you want it. not really a big deal at all. if dutasteride is holding your loss, or even giving you regrowth, after 1-2 years, it's a very safe bet that you won't ever progress past NW3.5. If you have say 6000 grafts in your donor supply, you could use say 3500 of them and get from NW2.5 back to a solid hairline with good density.

Good luck to you.

 

[Guest]

T

The other thing about younger guys wanting to get hair transplants is that most of them want their juvenile hairlines back, and while that's understandable, it's also an unrealistic goal.

Hope this makes some sense to you.

Gillenator, I gotta disagree. You've seen my pics. If I had 3500 grafts of the 8000 or so probably available in my donor area, I could have a solid density NW1 with juvenile hairline again. I'm staying on dutasteride for the rest of my life and the other 4500 would be available if ever necessary, which they may not be. I'm diffusing to an NW4 pattern only but in the very early stages with decent coverage on top.

 

[s.a.f]

It would be crazy for you to have 3500 grafts with your hair. That would be beyond obsessive even for Taug. Most nw3.5's could get a good result with 3500 into the front third.
Again having lived with an excessive degree of hairloss I really see no reason for any Norwood 1.5's to resort to surgery.

 

[Guest]

It would be crazy for you to have 3500 grafts with your hair. That would be beyond obsessive even for Taug. Most nw3.5's could get a good result with 3500 into the front third.
Again having lived with an excessive degree of hairloss I really see no reason for any Norwood 1.5's to resort to surgery.

saf, that's how many it would take to give me back my juvenile density and juvenile hairline. 1500-2000 would probably fill in some of my diffused areas but it wouldn't close my hairline off and lower it a quarter inch.

and like i said, if i still have 4000 left over when all is said and done, and my dutasteride, which is working great at holding my loss, keeps me "in hair"(as michael barry likes to say) for life, then I don't see the problem.

i figure the average caucasian head has 100,000 hairs. i'm caucasian so mine is around there too. i figure i've lost maybe 12% of my hair, so let's say 13000-15000 hairs. So 14000 let's say. They've disappeared. 3500 graftsX2.4 hairs per graft on average is 8400. That will put me at 60 grafts per cm/2, which is prob necessary, since my hair is naturally thin, and dark, while I have light skin, which increases the contract. My hair is somewhat wavy so it helps but I think I would get a stellar result with that placement.

 

[techprof]

Jayman,
You are forgetting that by doing hair transplant, you could have a scar for life and there is a possibility of shock loss.
For your current hair situation, hair transplant would be a waste IMO.

 

[Guest]

Jayman,
You are forgetting that by doing hair transplant, you could have a scar for life and there is a possibility of shock loss.
For your current hair situation, hair transplant would be a waste IMO.

Hey tech,

I'm not forgetting that, but the fact remains that I'm missing ~10-15% of my hair. I know I'd have a scar but I never wear my hair shorter than half an inch(4 guard) in back anyway, and normally a bit longer, like 3/4ths of an inch(6 guard). Avodart should help decrease the shock loss and gillenator has looked at my pics and concluded that the hair that I still have on top is very thick and not miniaturized, so it would not be permanently lost to shock. it would grow back when the new hair is growing in.

 

[LookingGood!]

One thing that always confuses me about the disapproval most have for younger people (those under 25) getting hair transplants is the fact that dutasteride is rarely mentioned. I understand that the key issue with a young person getting a hair transplant is that his hair loss isn't stabilized yet. But wouldn't it be accurate to say the dutasteride usually stabilizes hair loss enough that getting a transplant at a young age shouldn't be such a problem?

If the main problem is getting your hair loss under control, why can't someone just get on dutasteride and then get a hair transplant? I know the most knowledgeable posters on this site (bryan and Docj ) believe that dutasteride will more than likely control a person's hair loss to a respectable degree over the long term. Heck, Armani believes that finasteride post-transplant is good enough for control for a younger individual. So why can't a person hop on dutasteride and then get a transplant after, say, a year? Holla back.

no disrespect to Bryan and Doctor but they dont have a crystal ball. Yeah it makes sense on paper but these drugs have not been tested long enough to see the long term outcome so it's a crap shoot to say well the smart guys said it should halt my loss......sorry but that's the wrong approach to take. I acknowledge what they say but I would think long and hard before I commit to dutasteride for the rest of my life. finasteride isnt in the same class as dutasteride. What about long term effects? We dont know. What if the guy's body changes and he no longer can take dutasteride b/c it reacts with other meds. Even Armani doesnt know but it appeals to your hair greed and makes you feel somewhat secure. Think long and hard before u take the plunge. YOu cant reverse it if it goes bad and your native hair falls out around the hair transplant.

 

[LookingGood!]

Taking the hairloss meds in itself means nothing.

The real issue is whether or not the meds are actually working efficiency in one's hairloss. Finasteride and dutasteride are specific hormorne inhibitors. They are prostrate drugs. And as usual, patients respond differently to the meds including the potential side-effects.

The other big unknown is exactly how long the meds will continue to work. There's not enough long term data published to draw any concrete conclusions. I have been on finasteride for ten years and it's still working well.

The other thing about younger guys wanting to get hair transplants is that most of them want their juvenile hairlines back, and while that's understandable, it's also an unrealistic goal.

Hope this makes some sense to you.

I dont understand why guys want juvenile hair loss back. Even if I could have my juv back it woouldnt look right on my face. No one takes this into consideration. Hair greed is almost as bad as hairloss!

 

[soulsurvivor316]

One thing that always confuses me about the disapproval most have for younger people (those under 25) getting hair transplants is the fact that dutasteride is rarely mentioned. I understand that the key issue with a young person getting a hair transplant is that his hair loss isn't stabilized yet. But wouldn't it be accurate to say the dutasteride usually stabilizes hair loss enough that getting a transplant at a young age shouldn't be such a problem?

If the main problem is getting your hair loss under control, why can't someone just get on dutasteride and then get a hair transplant? I know the most knowledgeable posters on this site (bryan and Docj ) believe that dutasteride will more than likely control a person's hair loss to a respectable degree over the long term. Heck, Armani believes that finasteride post-transplant is good enough for control for a younger individual. So why can't a person hop on dutasteride and then get a transplant after, say, a year? Holla back.

no disrespect to Bryan and Doctor but they dont have a crystal ball. Yeah it makes sense on paper but these drugs have not been tested long enough to see the long term outcome so it's a crap shoot to say well the smart guys said it should halt my loss......sorry but that's the wrong approach to take. I acknowledge what they say but I would think long and hard before I commit to dutasteride for the rest of my life. finasteride isnt in the same class as dutasteride. What about long term effects? We dont know. What if the guy's body changes and he no longer can take dutasteride b/c it reacts with other meds. Even Armani doesnt know but it appeals to your hair greed and makes you feel somewhat secure. Think long and hard before u take the plunge. YOu cant reverse it if it goes bad and your native hair falls out around the hair transplant.

I'm not saying that it would halt my loss. In fact, in my second post, I acknowledge that whether a person suffering from male pattern baldness uses dutasteride or not, his temples will eventually probably thin. So I don't believe that even a good responder to dutasteride has his hairloss halted. I'm moreso concerned with the crown and the vertex. I just believe that it is very,very,very likely that a good responder to dutasteride will probably never lose hair in that area if he gets on the meds before dht has a chance to act in that area. I explained my rationale for this in my second post.

Now I know that you said we can't predict with 100% certainty that the vertex and crown will hold, but I think that based on the characteristics of these regions (for most male pattern baldness sufferers, this area is not as sensitive) I believe that we can say that there is a good chance that it will hold. Again, I am talking about good responders.

I also agree with you that there are other future variables that may affect future use of dutasteride. I am willing to take that risk.

 

[Guest]

Guys,

As LG stated, you're forgetting a couple of things like predicting the long term effficiency of the meds. Even though they have worked for me for 11 years or so, there' is no guarantee that they will for another 10 years. But I guess that's part of the risk. Still I would wait a little longer, probably until late 20's early thirties.

Jayman,

I never said you had "no miniturization" going on. The only way to know for sure is by microscopic evaluation like I spoke of on that other thread. My opinion however is that yes, from your pic your natural hair in that area still looks strong enough that it would not be permanently lost to shock. Remember, that's an opinion, not necessarily a scientific fact.

And there's no way that I would put 3500 grafts in that area. IMO, that would be overkill and not necessary to attain the look you are going for. Think of youselves when you are 35 plus. A juvenile hairline does not look natural in most men.

 

[Guest]

thanks gillenator.

how many grafts would you put in? 2000?

 

[Guest]

Yes, that's a better number to start with. I think you will be very happy with that. :wink:

 

[Guest]

Yes, that's a better number to start with. I think you will be very happy with that. :wink:

gotcha.

i still think the center of my hairline has either moved a very tiny amount or not at all ver, the left temple has moved a tiny bit, and the right temple has moved some. but not a huge amount of recession because i'm a diffuser. so it wouldn't take that many grafts to give me my juvenile hairline back, i'm saying. could probably do it with 1000 grafts. that's worth it, right, with a pretty intact hairline already? i mean the surgeon can't give me a mature hairline if I would still have hair below it.

here's my hairline:

putting 1000 grafts into it and making it nice and straight and fully juvenile again wouldn't be too much, would it?

i mean can you tell me if it looks like i have a mature hairline now, a juvenile hairline, or somewhere in between? as you can see in pic #1, my right temple is a bit higher than my left.

final question for you: when you say i'll be happy with 2000, does that mean you think it will appear to others and myself that I'm an NW1 again with 2000? like no visible hair loss?

thanks

 

[s.a.f]

I think your hairline is great as it is. If you have diffuse thinning go for added density (which wont need hardly any grafts) any lower/straighter hairline is unmasculine and looks like it belongs on a pre pubescent child.

 

[Guest]

First of all, the average person would not see you as someone with hairloss. And I think where your hairline is situated right now looks mature, not juvenile so I would not lower it at all. Still, if it were me, I would still wait longer until your hairline gets weaker.

You still could if you want to potentially strengthen your exisiting hairline with lots of singles, and some doubles just behind it and also why 1,000 grafts would not be quite enough to get you where you want to be. Anything between 1500 and say 1700 will suit you fine Jayman, you'll see.

Then, stay on the meds and wait and see where things go from there. You do not have extensive classes of hairloss in your family history, so I don't see you as someone with donor issues. But that's my opinion, not a guarantee as you know.

You have a much better situation tham most guys I know. :wink:

 

[Guest]

thanks guys.

i don't know why i'm so obsessed with having a low hairline. i mean i never had one as a kid. i didn't have temple recession then either but my hairline was a bit higher than average and always had a v shape so i'm not sure that i've receded more than a tiny bit.

gillenator,

do you mind elaborating a bit on waiting till my hairline gets weaker? do you mean until it fully matures, or are you talking like nw2.5, nw3, etc? because i don't think i'll ever hit worse than nw3 on avodart. my dad is nw5 at 50 and has never taken drugs. i was thinning in an nw5 pattern before avodart and now i think it only looks like nw4 at worst, but i don't think that i'll ever even get there. i'd be surprised if i hit nw2.5 before cloning came out.

is nw5 considered an extensive class or in between moderate and extensive? my dad has like the big bald spot in the back but he def has more hair on top than your average nw6, so i'm pretty sure he's a solid nw5.