Below is a sample of the interview:

Q: Who would be a good candidate for hair transplant surgery?

In general, men and women age 30 and older can be candidates, but there are a host of factors that determine if a person is a good candidate…

Q: How does hair transplantation work?

Hair removed from the permanent zone in the back and sides of the scalp continues to grow when transplanted to the balding area in the front or top of one’s head…

Q: What can be done for people dissatisfied with previous mini/micrograft procedures?

If the grafts are too large they can be removed, divided into smaller units under a microscope, and re-implanted back into the scalp (the same day)…

Q: What are the possible harmful effects of Propecia and Rogaine?

The main side effect of Propecia (finasteride 1%) is sexual dysfunction, which occurs in about 2-4% of men taking the drug. Fortunately, these side effects are completely reversible when the medication is stopped. [...] The main side effect of Rogaine (minoxidil) is scalp irritation. [...] Both Propecia and Minoxidil can produce some hair shedding at the beginning of treatment, but this means that the medications are working…

Q: How many grafts/hairs are needed for hair transplant surgery?

An eyebrow restoration can require as few as 200 grafts, a hairline 800 and a scalp, with significant hair loss, 2,500 or more grafts. An equally important consideration is the donor supply…

Q: What are the advanced hair transplant techniques?

Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT), where hair is transplanted exclusively in naturally occurring follicular units, is the state-of-the art. [...] A more recent means of obtaining the donor hair, the follicular units are extracted individually from the back of the scalp. This procedure, called Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) eliminates the need for a line-scar, but is a less efficient procedure for obtaining grafts…

Q: What are the new hair restoration treatments available for men and women?

Low-Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) utilizes cool lasers to stimulate hair growth and reduce shedding of hair. [...] Latisse (Bimatoprost) is an FDA approved topical medication for eyelash growth.

Go to Bizymoms.com to read the full interview.

Celebrities – especially the men – are getting comfortable with the idea of surgical hair restoration and we are seeing more famous men embracing the concept every day. The truth is that the majority of men will eventually lose hair, so this is nothing to be embarrassed about. But most men don’t have to depend on their appearance to pay their mortgage bill, or to ensure that their career continues. Celebrities find themselves in a unique position in this respect, especially when the world is watching them grow up or grow old.

Celebrity hair loss is becoming an increasingly hot topic in the media. The continuing demands on celebrities to keep their good looks, seems to be of great interest to the tabloids. This is evidenced by the recent interest in the hairlines of stars like John Cleese, Mel Gibson, John Travolta, Kevin Costner, Dennis Miller, Tom Arnold, Johnny Depp, Jude Law, David Beckham and many others.

For example, a Google search for “Mel Gibson hair loss” has almost 50,000 entries. This attests to the amount of attention the media – and the public – are paying to celebrity hair restoration.

Many celebrities don’t mind their hair loss when it comes to their own personal life, but they realize that appearance is paramount in the entertainment industry. Celebs worry that their looks are important to the fans, and they seem to be right.

Chat rooms and fan sites are abuzz with the hair lines of the stars, not to mention the TV, magazines and newspapers which seem to always know when to get a picture at the right (or the wrong) time.

Often celebrities have hair transplant surgery only to satisfy the demands of their careers. Soap Opera stars for instance, need those wonderfully youthful hairlines, something that would not be in such demand with the general aging public. The hair transplant design required by someone in this profession, however, might not be appropriate for the average person.

As a result, actors sometimes need to make some compromises on long-term results in order to achieve short-term career goals.

In order to create the illusion that time has simply stood still for people in the public eye, secrecy is paramount. Cosmetic Surgeons for the stars are very meticulous about maintaining privacy, and understanding the special needs of their celebrity patients.

“Though the public tends to perceive celebrities as temperamental and demanding, I have not found that to be the case. Celebrities recognize the importance of cosmetic surgery to their careers and are very pragmatic about having it done – for most it simply goes with their job.” says Robert M. Bernstein M.D., Clinical Professor of Dermatology at Columbia University in New York and founder of Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration in Manhattan.

Interest in celebrity hair transplants is not just reserved for film and TV stars, but for all kinds of professions in the public eye. Sports celebrities like Tom Brady, politicians, fashion designers, musicians, and now even top business executives recognize the importance of hair to their image.

Busy celebrities often have their PR people or handlers try to discover what their treatment options may be, but often the proper research is not done. After all PR people are influenced by the media just like the rest of us. The far better route is the more time consuming one, where academic credentials and hospital affiliations are checked and medical publications are reviewed. Without this level of research, the search for a hair transplant surgeon can lead to some pretty bad results.

According to Dr. Robert Bernstein of the Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration in Manhattan, “Most Celebrities aren’t as concerned with how the process is done; they simply want it to be taken care of. One high profile patient of ours, however, was so curious about the process, that he actually left the surgical chair during his procedure so that he could watch how the graft dissection was done.”

In this very competitive society, youth and beauty are highly coveted bargaining chips.

One without the other can seem to be a considerable handicap. However, in the world of the rich and famous, where ones livelihood depends on physical image the stakes are even higher.

Fortunately, with modern medical breakthroughs, the image that is conveyed by a full, healthy head of hair is something that can be achieved, even by people who are not so genetically fortunate.

In the past days, there might have been many physicians who did not care much about the importance of the follicular unit and they have only cut the grafts to size. Now, every hair transplant physician believes the importance of follicular unit, and there is no one who cut the grafts to size ignoring each follicular unit.

However, there are some physicians who shout that a hair transplant procedure can be called FUT only when people use all single FU exclusively, and the procedure cannot be called FUT, if mixture of single FU and double FU are used in a session.

I would like to ask you, if you could accept the usage of combination of single FU and double FU under the name of FUT, as long as the grafts were cut according to each FU and intact FU are used throughout the procedure. Could you accept easing of the very strict definition of FUT, which you published about 15 years ago? Could you agree to use mixture of single FU and double FU under the name of FUT?

A: Thank you for the kind words. In thinking about hair transplantation in general, it is important to consider that a hair restoration procedure spreads hair around and, as a result, the transplanted hair will be less dense than the person’s original hair. Therefore, one would never want grafts larger than the largest original follicular units or the results will not look natural. The artificially large grafts will stand out in relatively thin surroundings. If one were to try to fix this by transplanting the doubled FUs very close together (over one or more sessions) one risks running out of grafts for other areas of the scalp. In other words, you can’t fool mother nature.

For example, if a person has thin hair and has only 1-, 2- and 3-hair units occurring naturally in his scalp, then creating 4-hair grafts (by combining two 2’s or 1’s and 3’s) can result in an unnatural, tufted look. Doubling larger follicular units also necessitates larger wounds to receive the grafts which defeats one of the main advantages of FUT, namely to minimize recipient wounding.

That said, it is not unreasonable to place two 1-hair FUs in a single site (if there are extra 1s from the FU dissection) in order to increase density in an area and to eliminate an extra wound.) We do this for crown hair transplants when we are not doing a hairline and there is no need for 1-hair grafts. However, this is the exception.

Technically speaking, anything other than transplanting individual, naturally occurring follicular units is not FUT. However, a physician should make modifications to the procedure for the specific needs at hand. This is the art of medicine. By understanding and applying the underlying principles of Follicular Unit Transplantation, rather than being limited by its nomenclature, the physician will serve his patient best.

In addition to exploring the Hair Transplant Blog, to learn more about this topic, visit the Follicular Unit Hair Transplant section of our website and read detailed information about the hair transplant evaluation, the hair restoration procedure, follicular unit grafts, the donor area, and more.

Areas of Unethical Behavior Practiced Today
William Rassman, MD, Los Angeles, California

I am disturbed that there is a rise in unethical practices in the hair transplant community. Although many of these practices have been around amongst a small handful of physicians, the recent recession has clearly increased their numbers. Each of us can see evidence of these practices as patients come into our offices and tell us about their experiences. When a patient comes to me and is clearly the victim of unethical behavior I can only react by telling the patient the truth about what my fellow physician has done to them. We have no obligation to protect those doctors in our ranks who practice unethically, so maybe the way we respond is to become a patient advocate, one on one, for each patient so victimized. The following reflects a list of the practices I find so abhorrent:

1. Selling hair transplants to patients who do not need it, just to make money. I have met with an increasing number of very young patients getting hair transplants for changes in the frontal hairline that reflect a maturing hairline, not balding. Also, performing surgery on very young men (18-22) with early miniaturization is in my opinion outside the “Standard of Care”. Treating these young men with a course of approved medications for a full year should be the Standard of Care for all of us.

2. Selling and delivering more grafts than the patient needs. Doctors are tapping the well of the patient’s graft account by adding hundreds or thousands of grafts into areas of the scalp where the miniaturization is minimal and balding is not grossly evident. I have even seen patients that had grafts placed into areas of the scalp where there was no clinically significant miniaturization present. Can you imagine 3,000-4,000 grafts in an early Class 3 balding pattern? Unwise depletion of a patient’s finite donor hair goes on far more frequently than I can say.

3. Putting grafts into areas of normal hair under the guise of preventing hair loss. There are many patients who have balding in the family and watch their own “hair fall” thinking that most of their hair will eventually fall out. A few doctors prey on these patients and actually offer hair transplantation on a preventive basis. This is far more common in women who may not be as familiar with what causes baldness and do not have targeted support systems like this forum. They become more and more desperate over time and are willing to do “anything” to get hair. They are a set-up for physicians with predatory practice styles.

4. Pushing the number of grafts that are not within the skill set of surgeon and/or staff. The push to large megasessions and gigasessions are driven by a limited number of doctors who can safely perform these large sessions. Competitive forces in the marketplace make doctors feel that they must offer the large sessions, even if they can not do them effectively. A small set of doctors promote large sessions of hair transplants, but really do not deliver them, fraudulently collecting fees for services not received by the patient. Fraud is a criminal offense and when we see these patients in consultation, I ask you to consider your obligation under our oaths and our respective state medical board license agencies to report these doctors.

5. Some doctors are coloring the truth with regard to their results, using inflated graft counts, misleading photos, or inaccurate balding classifications. False representation occurs not only to patients while the doctor is selling his skills, but also to professionals in the field when the doctor presents his results. Rigging patient results and testimonials are not uncommon. Lifestyle Lift, a cosmetic surgery company settled a claim by the State of New York over its attempts to produce positive consumer reviews publishing statements on Web sites faking the voices of satisfied customers. Employee of this company reportedly produced substantial content for the web.

The hair transplant physician community has developed wonderful technology that could never have been imagined 20 years ago. The results of modern hair transplantation have produced many satisfied patients and the connection between what we represent to our patient and what we can realistically do is impressive today. Unfortunately, a small handful of physicians have developed predatory behavior that is negatively impacting all of us and each of us sees this almost daily in our practices. Writing an opinion piece like this is not a pleasant process, but what I have said here needs to be said. According to the American Medical Association Opinion 9.031- “Physicians have an ethical obligation to report impaired, incompetent, and/or unethical colleagues in accordance with the legal requirements in each state……”

Rassman, WR: Areas of unethical behavior practiced today. Hair Transplant Forum Intl. Sep/Oct 2009; 19(5) 1,153.

A: Graft excision generally works better than FUE in removing old plugs and mini-grafts. In these grafts, the hair is not aligned due to the scar tissue that forms from the large recipient sites. Because the hair direction is altered from the scar tissue, there is much more damage when the grafts are removed with FUE.

Another benefit of graft excision is that we can remove the underlying scar tissue and improve the appearance of the skin.

Finally, graft excision sites are sutured closed so they heal with an imperceptible scar. FUE sites are left open and the white scars at the hairline can be visible.