I saw on a website that they transpant 80 grafts per cm. How does this compare to how much hair grows per cm naturally. The results didn't look near as dense as natural grown hair.

I've never head of HT's matching natural density, and I think there are some arguments some docs have against dense packing due to blood availability to allow follicles to survive. Some of the pics look like they've been packed pretty tightly though. My doc said you typically get a fraction of the density and the results are best when grown out.

One way or the other, the obvious facts are you have a finite number of follicles (for now) and it depend on how far you have to spread them. For me it's a b!tch because I have to cover my whole head, stupid patterns.
Rogaine 5% and Propecia can make all the difference as they can stop (and in some cases reverse a bit) the loss, and that's less coverage required from the donor areas.

YOu can tell from the before and after pics of some people here. Some (me) end up "less bald" after a procedure, while others (Futsyhead) look like they've never had a hairloss problem.

Thanks! Do you have a link where I can see Futsyhead's photos?

I am worried because I like to shave my head real short, and I don't have much area to fill in so maybe I am able to get a more dense natural look? Is it even possible to go as dense as natural grown hair?

NA,
Just go to yahoo and type in Futzyhead. His website is usually the first listed.

NA,

FUTzyheads pic is right on the RegrowHair.com site. His is the picture(s) over the line that reads "Yes, this is the same man!"

-Robert

quote:

---

Originally posted by NA:
Thanks! Do you have a link where I can see Futsyhead's photos?

I am worried because I like to shave my head real short, and I don't have much area to fill in so maybe I am able to get a more dense natural look? Is it even possible to go as dense as natural grown hair?

---

You can get a natural look yes.
But thats not the same as what nature gave.
And anyway no one will give you as many hair as nature had placed originally.
Not unless body hair or hm becomes commonplace.

Hi NA,

The average patient bears 80 natural "hairs" per cm2. If 80 grafts are utilized, that appears to attempt to double what mother nature established us with since the "average" graft bears two hairs. And generally speaking, if you can achieve 50% of original density, you should get some decent coverage.

As was mentioned earlier, be sure to consider the other areas of future loss so you do not over dedicate your finite donor to any specific area. Plan for the future. Best wishes!

Thanks guys! Ok so if someone got 80 grafts it should appear as double density than your natural grown areas, or the same? So this means 20 grafts would appear as 50% of original density correct?

Therefore I should probably get 40 grafts per cm for my needs to create a most natural look...

NA,

Yes about 40 grafts per cm2 should do it unless your original density is higher. 80 hairs per cm2 is the "avearge" density.

Did you ever have your donor density evaluated by a reputable HT surgeon? That is what you want to do ultimately and it cannot be done through pics. You will need to have an in-person evaluation. Unfortunately not all HT surgeons pre-calculate density so be sure you ask the HT surgeons you talk to about this area. DO NOT allow anyone to "wing" it and simply respond by stating you have enough donor. Stay away from doctors who give you this type of response because obviously those types of responses imply that they are not wisely evaluating the donor nor the recipient areas especially considering future loss and the need for subsequent procedures.

A good competent HT surgeon will also examine for miniturization which can indicate those areas where you may sustain future loss and will want you to plan accordingly with the reserves you have, not what you do not have.

thanks! i am thinking about going with dr. scott alexander from arizona, i am very interested in FUE...

thnx again!

I'm one who thinks the claim that 50% of
original density gives the "appearance of
fullness" is mostly rubbish.Just compare
someone with ht to someone with a full head
of hair to see what i mean.
Terms like "appearance of fullness" "extensive
coverage" are marketing/sales terms that the
ht industry uses to advertise and lull in those
with visions of restoring a full head of hair.
they can't honestly/legally claim to give you
back a full head of hair,but they like to use
such phrases to lead you into thinking they
can.
Obviously if you densely pack a small area,
this will leave you with less in storage to
cover the remaining balding areas.one of the
biggest oversights i think prospective patients
make is to not fully understand how much hair
one can lose in the crown area.rather depressing
to consider but one should have a plan for it.