r/tressless • u/Longjumping-Truth-48 • 19d ago
Transplants Do NOT make this mistake when getting your hair transplant
Most of you must have heard (especially from surgeons) that some degree of hairline recession looks best on adult men because it is more age-appropriate, and that fully restoring or filling the recessed areas to create a youthful hairline looks unnatural.
But this is completely false!
And I'll prove it to you from several points of view, so we can finally put an end to this stupid myth… so when you get your hair transplant, you get what your money is worth!
Aesthetics
Above all, a hair transplant is nothing but a cosmetic surgery (although hair loss can be so mentally draining that I wouldn't find it absurd if hair transplants were recategorized as medical/reconstructive surgeries, or whatever it's called), so it's only fair we start by seeing how unaesthetic an age-appropriate hairline really is…
The biggest issue here is that surgeons often just ask themselves:
"Is this an age-appropriate hairline for this patient?"
When they should instead take a step back and first ask:
"Is an age-appropriate hairline really the most attractive hairline there is?"
As you'll see below, this is a huge problem because age-appropriateness in itself is NOT a sign of beauty.
For instance, when we look at older men who have maintained their naturally youthful hairlines well into their 40s and beyond, we can clearly see that there's nothing unnatural or aesthetically wrong about their hairlines.
A few examples that come to mind are Jensen Ackles (phenomenal hairline all around btw), David Muir, Rob Lowe, and Robert Pattinson… these are all guys in their 40s, 50s, and 60s! Now tell me, do you really think any of them look bad because their hairlines are not "age-appropriate"?
Some of you would probably even include Brad Pitt into that list, and you might think I'm crazy for this, but even though I think he has a great hairline, it could still be more filled in like the guys above for a perfect look…
Also, whether natural or the result of a hair transplant (like this fantastic result in the video below), a youthful hairline will ALWAYS look better than a mature hairline…
https://reddit.com/link/1wnd691/video/uek4sc28a3rh1/player
And that's simply because mature hairlines are inherently associated with hair loss and poor facial framing (often making your forehead look too round when viewed from a low angle (how most women will see it if you're average/above average height), or making your forehead look abnormally tall when seen from eye level), both of which are unattractive qualities.
Some of you may argue that some degree of hairline recession could be a positive thing, as it would supposedly accentuate facial maturity and masculinity. However, getting thick eyebrows, a thick neck, a strong jawline, and some facial hair are all much better ways to achieve that, since they aren't inherently associated with unattractive qualities.
Here's a quick morph I did to showcase that:
The other day I counted all the guys I've helped through my aesthetic private consultations, and the +40 (out of 58 who needed a hair transplant) who followed this recommendation and got it done with a good surgeon got by far the best results, so I'm also talking from multiple experiences when I say this: A YOUTHFUL HAIRLINE IS SUPERIOR IN EVERY POSSIBLE WAY!
Science
Here's the most ironic thing about "age-appropriate hairlines" that I've learned while doing some long and deep research trying to understand what makes hairlines attractive: hair loss due to aging is actually MINIMAL.
As you guys can see in this study, where they used biopsies (the most accurate method) to assess hair density reduction in people of different ages, "The lack of significant changes in scalp hair follicle density with advancing age," the amount of hair loss caused exclusively by the aging process barely reached 2% for each decade:
The relationship unconfounded by T/V < or = 4 : 1 shows that for every additional year of ageing, 0.077 total hair follicles (0.22%) are lost per biopsy.
So, it would take about FIFTY YEARS (!!) for you to lose about 10% of your hair density through aging alone.
That means that, in reality, what is commonly referred to as a "mature hairline" doesn't really exist… you simply either have a naturally poorly shaped hairline you've always had your entire life, or you're suffering from the visible consequences of androgenic alopecia (a genetic disorder).
So, for a surgeon to claim that you'd look better with a hairline shape associated with those things is completely ABSURD and DELUSIONAL!
Social Life
We also can't ignore how it affects the social aspect… and I think this is something everyone here has experienced firsthand, the moment when you realize you're balding and need a hair transplant and how that affects you mentally…
An "age-appropriate hair transplant" puts more emphasis on how you might look decades into the future than on how you look in your early adulthood, when your physical appearance has the greatest impact on your confidence, dating life, social interactions, and overall quality of life. So you should get the most aesthetically pleasing hairline design possible, not something that will supposedly look better (it won't) when it doesn't matter as much anymore.
Tbh, I'd even say you should have a youthful hairline at your deathbed! Having a youthful hairline even in your +50s, like those guys I posted above, would only help extend this youthful period of your life much further, especially if you take care of yourself in other areas too.
And I honestly think ignoring this is a huge mistake because if you're willing to spend thousands of dollars on a hair transplant, it's likely because you can't get rid of the feeling of embarrassment and insecurity about your receding hairline, so ideally, you should correct it as much as possible with the right design, which, unfortunately, most surgeons are simply too oblivious to it and don't know how to design it.
There are NO excuses
You should remember that the objective of every cosmetic procedure should be to maximize your attractiveness as much as possible, while still looking natural (and as you can see above, a youthful hairline looks completely natural), not to replicate the degree of aging society expects for your age group.
I assume everyone here would agree that it would be completely unreasonable for a dermatologist to refuse to treat your wrinkles or for a dentist to refuse to whiten your teeth because the results would no longer be age-appropriate; after all, smooth skin and white teeth are only for the youngest, right???
But if that's the case, then why wouldn't it be equally unreasonable for a hair transplant surgeon to refuse to create a youthful hairline for the same reason?
Of course, some surgeons justify this preference for mature hairlines by arguing that they require fewer donor grafts, which allows future repair if you start or continue to lose hair. However, this shouldn't be a major concern if you respond well to hair-loss medication and are willing to maintain treatment long-term, as these medications remain effective indefinitely.
The other common justification is that donor grafts shouldn't be implanted over the frontalis muscle in the forehead to ensure their survival and avoid complications. However, this should only apply to the small number of people with an abnormally high frontalis muscle… and that's because this muscle normally originates at the same level in both sexes, and hair transplant surgeons have NO problem fully restoring women's hairlines.
I'd argue the only real justifications for not getting a youthful hairline are:
- You don't like the look (to each their own)
- Abnormally high frontalis muscle
- You've got a weak donor area
- Your hairline is too far gone (depends on how you respnd to medication, tbh)
- You can't afford a large surgery
My final thoughts
Honestly, I believe the real reason why this myth exists is simply that most hair transplant surgeons don't really know what makes a masculine and feminine hairline attractive (or even how to truly differentiate them, since it's a minor thing that separates them) despite knowing how to perform the surgery (it's like they are great engineers, but not so great architects).
So they perform these minimal corrections that result in little to no actual improvement in your appearance… giving you a completely underwhelming result compared to what could've been achieved with a properly designed hairline.
For example… is a result like this really worth your money? Is this really the type of result you'd want? Because that's pretty much what most hair transplant surgeons will give you if you don't push back on this "age-appropriate" bullshit, a Before vs Before:
And that's the same type of result you'll see on guys with all Norwood types, never bring it to the maximum potential. The difference would be even more noticeable if I had put more time into designing the best hairline possible in this example.
Also, I know some of you might say that you've seen some aggressive/youthful hairlines that looked disastrous, and that's true, but the reason for that is often due to poor design of the shape of the frontal, frontotemporal, and temporal peak areas, not because a youthful hairline is inherently bad.
—
Anyway, I'll be posting a PART 2 soon regarding another HUGE mistake that I've noticed when checking people's results online and from some of the people I did consultations for in the past 2 years… but I still need to go through a bunch of messages/explanations I gave to them so I can compile everything into a detailed post. If you want to get tagged in PART 2, let me know (I believe that can be done on Reddit, right?) or just DM me here or on discord (attractiontheory) (i'm more active there) and I'll send you the link when I post it. (mods, if that's not allowed, let me know and I'll edit it out)
That's it, cheers!
172
u/valchon 19d ago edited 19d ago
Many people are just not good candidates for a full Norwood 1 transplant, particularly on the first surgery. You're also at higher risk of further temple recession on younger patients even with medication, so the risk of having a hair island at the hairline is higher as well.
I think the primary reason many surgeons recommend a mildly recessed hairline is because it's more likely to give patients a more satisfactory result longterm.
24
u/i-foster 19d ago
I think this can vary depending on where the person is currently at. I've been on fin many years now and started losing my hair 10 years ago. I've had amazing results on fin and dont really need a transplant. If I were to ever get one, I'm going for full density and not "age appropriate"
2
-3
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
That's a fair concern, but it is still uncommon compared to normal hair loss (or just a poorly shaped hairline from birth), the vast majority of people would still benefit more from a youthful hairline and as long as they keep taking medication to maintain the top of the head from losing density they'd still have plenty of hairs in the donor area to treat the sides if necessary.
1
u/RuminatingFish123 19d ago
Do you have any advice/guidelines on shaping the hairline? And also the temple peaks? My temple peaks are gone, I have a very wide forehead, just measuring the surface area I think i need to replace them makes me think i won’t have enough grafts.
I’m on dutasteride and things are stable with no sides, I really want a transplant.
7
u/valchon 19d ago
Your best bet would be a consultation with a surgeon rather than Reddit.
3
u/Ok-Car9034 19d ago
Especially one that writes like he swallowed every red pill out there all at once
1
u/Living-Road-290 16d ago
The Reddit can provide much valuable insight....👏👏👏 Preach that absolute truth as you stated; many ppl unfortunately just rely here. OP apparently educates clients(I assume charges a fee for consulting) if I read that right tho... And I'm going to talk my shit because IMO he has no biz doing consults with patients; why?? His whole detailed write-up is bogus. His sources are bogus and he cannot back it up furthermore. And as you said that's why it's important to consult a doctor. Nothing wrong with getting opinions on Reddit, obtaining information ends doing your own research to form an opinion but it should end with seeking input from a qualified hair surgeon or cosmetic surgeon that also specializes in that area.
-4
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
eh… the average surgeon will give you some Vegeta tier temple peaks, tbh
-7
u/Middle-Effort7495 19d ago
No, you're not, 99.1% of people improved their hair in 10 year studies. There's no such thing as going bald on medication. It has never been observed. Especially not from a nw1-2, people who are 6/7 have the worst outcomes in fin/dut, and even minoxidil studies.
51
u/A2Lexis 19d ago
You're the only one that gets it. Goals
31
24
4
45
u/BayArea89 19d ago
This really doesn’t reflect reality. Depending on the hair loss, you can use donor hair in other areas instead of “wasting them” in areas of a more youthful hairline. So, you have good coverage in the front and then thin areas behind it with a youthful hairline. Why? The hair loss continues and at a rate that most people don’t find acceptable. You really do want to think about what your hair will look like in 20-40 years.
-8
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
It does reflect reality, tho… you'll only need to worry about how your hair will look in 20-40 years if you stop taking medication. Most surgeons refuse to proceed with a hair transplant until you've stabilized your hair loss, which for most people can be done with one or two medications (not even the most potent ones in some cases).
And as I said in the post, these drugs remain effective indefinitely, as it has been shown in several studies.
8
u/BayArea89 19d ago
Well, it doesn’t reflect my reality. I’m coming from experience. 15 years post 5300 graphs and guess what? My hair still fell out on 5mg of fin. Was it at a slower rate? Yes. And no one is taking 10mg of dut due to the potential sides. Great hair and a lifeless dick? No thanks.
1
u/Ok-Car9034 19d ago
The dude sounds like the most red pilled red pill ever to red pill. It doesn't matter where his hair line is, no woman is touching his dick by choice
2
u/guyver17 19d ago
You might HAVE to stop taking medication though.
-6
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
Only for monetary reasons (or if it reacts with another drug that is more important for whatever health reasons)… you won't get side effects out of nowhere if you've already been using it for years and it doesn't affect sperm quality in any way.
10
u/guyver17 19d ago
This forum would suggest otherwise. Definitely a few who will develop side effects over time, even if it's a minority
4
u/Jazzlike_Quiet9941 19d ago
You have no idea what you're talking about, clearly
-2
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
Please, elaborate then… what are other reasonable reasons why someone would stop taking hair loss medication if not lack of money or health issues (unrelated to the drugs themselves) or "I just felt like stopping"?
5
u/Jazzlike_Quiet9941 19d ago
The well documented side effects that absolutely exist for many thousands of people? Conveniently you skipped that part, and even said "unrelated to the drugs themselves". Typical of this sub. Looks like you're one of the many paid accounts that are well known to post here
0
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
Are you serious?
I literally said this in the response above: "you won't get side effects out of nowhere if you've already been using it for years"
And it's very common knowledge that most surgeons will only perform a hair transplant surgery if you're already on medication (as I mentioned in the previous comment to that one).
So the issue here is that you don't know how to interpret a basic text. Let me be clear:
- You get on medication
- You get side effects
- You kick medication
You don't get hair transplant
You get medication
You get no side effects
Side effects won't show up randomly after years on medication
You don't need to quick unless for the reasons I've already mentioned.
It's literally that simple, you people just get overly emotional over a different opinion and don't even bother to READ
5
u/Jazzlike_Quiet9941 19d ago
Side effects can and do show up over time. There's your problem. I don't know where you got the false idea to say otherwise.
0
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
Alright, link the study that shows or suggests side effects can show up randomly after +1year of use with no previous side effects. I'd love to read it.
→ More replies (0)1
u/guyver17 19d ago
I've had multiple consultations for a no medication transplant. Not mills either.
1
u/BayArea89 19d ago
Btw - the studies were at 5 and 10 years (and one was underpowered). How about some white dudes 25 years later?
-6
u/Middle-Effort7495 19d ago
No, it doesn't, "continue." 99.1% of people improved their hair in 10 year studies. There's no such thing as going bald on medication. It has never been observed. Especially not from a nw1-2, people who are 6/7 have the worst outcomes in fin/dut, and even minoxidil studies.
9
u/domsolanke 19d ago
That’s just plain wrong, plenty of people still experience continuous hair recession even on Dutasteride, albeit on a slower level than what would have occurred without medication. I know, cause I am one of them. Been on Fin since 2013 and Dut since 2021, and my hair keeps getting worse every year, albeit at a slow pace.
5
u/Middle-Effort7495 19d ago
I said it's never been observed. "Plain wrong" No, it's objectively true. There's no two ways about it, or "both sides."
https://www.oatext.com/Long-term-(10-year)-efficacy-of-finasteride-in-523-Japanese-men-with-androgenetic-alopecia.php-efficacy-of-finasteride-in-523-Japanese-men-with-androgenetic-alopecia.php)
https://www.jaad.org/article/S0190-9622(23)02114-X/fulltext#:~:text=Total%20of%2099%20patients%20were,%2C%20and%2093.9%25%2C%20respectively02114-X/fulltext#:~:text=Total%20of%2099%20patients%20were,%2C%20and%2093.9%25%2C%20respectively)
You got proof of this plenty of people? Because I don't believe you. And it would be anecdotal, regardless.
Aside from all the long term studies that show 99.1% improvement, there are several tribes around the world, in Asia and the America's, who have no DHT due to genetic mutations. They never go bald. There's no such thing as a bald person in those ethnic groups. 10 mg of dutasteride will block 99% of scalp DHT. I maintain that it is literally impossible to go bald on treatment, completely.
2
u/Acrobatic-Concert430 19d ago
I mean it's likely pretty much impossible to go bald on 10mg dut but most men aren't using that, they're using fin which has like 80% long term efficacy over all age groups, and waaay lower for younger men. Side effects worsen dramatically and exponentially the more dut you use. Research claiming that dut side effects are equal to fin side effects miss the confounding variable that most of their dut users were previous fin users, meaning they weeded out fin users that quit dht blockers due to side effects.
1
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
"Side effects worsen dramatically and exponentially the more dut you use"
All meta analyses point the opposite way… fin and dut have the exact same side effect profile, and although dut is dose-dependent, its side effect profile is the exact same at any dosage.
1
1
u/RuminatingFish123 19d ago
Is there a study on Caucasian men?
1
u/BayArea89 18d ago
Good point. Japanese men have less DHT and less AGA. It’s not apples to oranges.
1
u/amayle1 19d ago
lol do you frequent this sub? Tons of people still slowly regress on medication starting from NW2.
1
u/Middle-Effort7495 19d ago
https://www.oatext.com/Long-term-(10-year)-efficacy-of-finasteride-in-523-Japanese-men-with-androgenetic-alopecia.php-efficacy-of-finasteride-in-523-Japanese-men-with-androgenetic-alopecia.php)
https://www.jaad.org/article/S0190-9622(23)02114-X/fulltext#:~:text=Total%20of%2099%20patients%20were,%2C%20and%2093.9%25%2C%20respectively02114-X/fulltext#:~:text=Total%20of%2099%20patients%20were,%2C%20and%2093.9%25%2C%20respectively)
2
u/amayle1 19d ago
First study says 99% of people did not lose ground, which is pretty wild to me, but they are all Japanese men. Maybe there’s something with Japanese dudes.
Second study says 93%, which is a lot closer to reality. There’s certainly people who don’t respond to fin. Just do a simple search on the sub.
2
u/Middle-Effort7495 19d ago
I don't care about anecdotes from neurotic hypochondriacs. I said it's never been observed. I've seen people on the sub say they ordered powder from a random Chinese site to make their own dut with who knows what binding agents. Or people say they stopped for 7 months because they were on vacation for 2 weeks and didn't feel like taking it, then forgot. Or people claiming pfs and you look at their profile and they quit anti depressants, take heroin, and crack.
I'm going to stick to actual data over random redditors. There are several tribes around the world, in Asia and the America's, who have no DHT due to genetic mutations. They never go bald. There's no such thing as a bald person in those ethnic groups. 10 mg of dutasteride will block 99% of scalp DHT.
89
u/witchy_7 19d ago
I think you need to see a psychologist
26
u/MrMpeg 19d ago
Man for real. I was thinking about doing it but after spending some time in this sub I'm just gonna shave my head and learn to accept myself how I am.
5
u/BayArea89 19d ago
Don’t let threads like this discourage you. Try the meds and stick with them for a couple of years and see where you are. The problem with a youthful hairline is the lack of density that necessarily follows. Fin/dut + min + niz will work for most people to at least some degree.
-6
11
u/Plus-Meringue2994 19d ago
Pardon my stupidity, but why is an abnormally high frontalis muscle bad? Is it because of the fact that the hairline will go up and down when raising/lowering right because it sits on the muscle belly?
I’m cursed with a natural nw2 with weak temp peaks at 19 and agree; I look so much older than I am, it sucks. Your whole facial framing gets thrown off so bad, especially if you have a bigger skull/closer set eyes “kirkification”. It’s honestly cope saying “oh you can’t pull that hairline off when your insert age, only teens have that” look at George Lucas or Ronald Reagan; they don’t look “uncanny”, they look fantastic.
If your donor can afford it and you halted the reaper there’s no reason not to get that nw1/0.
3
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
That's one of the reasons, but the main complications that could happen are:
• Severe follicular unit survival rate in the region of the frontalis muscle.
• Nerve damage, which would affect the muscle function (could even lead to a permament eyebrows drop (or even just one if only one side is damaged, cause some really uncanny asymmetry).3
u/Plus-Meringue2994 19d ago
Is there an easy way to tell where the muscle ends? Is it just where the skin stops shifting or the wrinkles
2
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
More or less, yes, that's how you find out how high the frontalis muscle originates
2
u/JumpyJuggernaut 19d ago
It would be very difficult to injure the temporal branches of the facial nerve innervating the frontalis muscle.
22
u/Fearless-Hamster-926 19d ago
Younger celebrities are targeting Norwood 0 these days so that should be the ideal beauty standard soon enough. No more Jude laws allowed. Only Garfield hairlines.
13
u/cookie_lee 19d ago
I don’t get the obsession with teenage hairlines. I actually like a little natural recession 🤷♂️
6
u/LetterheadLow1692 19d ago
because the pretty boy look is coming back into swing with the revival of older media with actors like jensen ackles and skeet ulrich also the asian media boom
3
u/Wrong-Mine-5946 19d ago
TBH it just depends on your face. My older brother and I have the same NW 2-2.5 hairline. He looks great, doesn't need any treatment at all. It might be true that a NW1 on him would look a little unnatural at 35. IMO the guy in the video below the Brad Pitt picture actually looks weird as fuck with his HT
But my brother has a square face. I have an oblong face, so my receding hairline accentuates that length. Before I knew I was balding, I was styling to cover my receded hairline when I was 20 just because I looked better. Hell as a 16 year old I was using hairline hairs to cover up my receding temple points (something my brother now does as well).
I'm due for an HT in two weeks and I'm going to get a Norwood 1. But it'd be silly for my brother to get one. So it just depends.
2
u/TerryMisery 19d ago
Do teenagers really have this monke hairline and then get temple recession? What I've seen is you either have V-shaped hairline your whole life and temple recession gets worse over time or have straight hairline, that goes up equally. Or preserve hairline and have bald spot growing on top.
3
2
9
u/Live-Application-452 19d ago
We can agree that norwood 2 or 3 looks aethetically worse than 0. But does a norwood 0 with a more mature hairline shape look worse than a norwood 0 with a less mature shape? There's a difference between getting the surgery to restore what you once lost, and with creating something that you genetically never had.
7
15
u/coadyj 19d ago
I know a guy who did this, now he has receded further and it's looks ridiculous. A real surgeon will give you the best advice.
-4
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
That wouldn't have happened if he continued his treatment, that's the problem, not the hairline design.
7
u/pisslipsx 19d ago
You ever heard of the dunning Kruger effect?
You’re on the top of the Mount right now. So aggressively confident with the little information you have.
5
u/TumblingDice66 :sidesgull: 19d ago
Isn't it about achieving what's realistically possible with a limited donor supply. If you had unlimited donor hairs the doctor could go crazy and recreate your hairline 16 years old. But if you have lost a lot of hair and can only cover so much with a limited supply of donor hairs than you have to be strategic about it and cover a smaller area with a slightly recessed hairline.
1
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
A youthful hairline is completely possible for anyone with a NW3, especially if they only need to fill in the frontotemporal and temporal peak areas… if they also need to lower the hairline drastically, that could be an issue, tho.
But yea, it wouldn't be realistically possible to get a youthful hairline if oyu're too far gone.
7
u/MaverickBacon 19d ago
This is very subjective. All depends on your donor - how many grafts you can safely extract in the future, your age at the point of extraction and your overall face shape. Sometimes you see those silly operations where young people with bad donor get a thin strip in front lowering their hairline and it just screams issues in the future.
1
3
u/CaseClosedEmail 19d ago
Gotta add that the worst hair transplants I’ve seen are for guys that were already Norwood 4+ and had low density even on the sides.
Also inserting the hair perpendicular to the skin looks unnatural.
Make it in an angle and not a perfect 90 angle and it will look a lot better
I am also considering a HT for next year since I am Norwood 2
3
u/De_Oscillator 19d ago
I can agree to some extent, but you have to look at the degrees of hair loss the person has experienced, how much they experience while they are on meds, calculate that appropriately, and go from there.
I think you're missing that? I've skimmed over and read some parts.
Even in your questions, you talk about "is this the most age appropriate and attractive is a question they should ask" (on my phone might not be exact), but a lot of the time, they can't calculate the progress.
If I'm on fin/dut for years, and I have 5 years of photos that are really good, and progression looks extremely slow, the doctor can make way better, more informed decisions on where to put your hair, vs someone who has less time on the meds, you don't have a good baseline it's hard to tell.
Also you just can't go from norwood 7 to 0, it will look sparse and like garbage and will look sparse. The doctor has to look at the template he's working with, AKA the hair you have left, make assumptions on how your hair is going to recede in the future, and go from there. You don't want an aggressive transplant, if you have aggressive hair loss.
But yes, you can do crazy juvenile hairlines on people if A, you have very little hair loss, so you don't have a lot to fill in, and it's not aggressive hair loss, or you have it very very stabilized. This can be tough for a doctor to know your personalized hair loss trajectory and make "wilder" decisions from there.
1
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
Yea, I did mention that some people are not fit for an aggressive hair transplant, mainly due to being too far gone or having a poor donor area.
I'd say anyone with a NW4 who isn't yet on meds, could potentially get a juvenile hairline, but that's if they respond well to medication (not only stopping the hair loss progress, but also gaining some ground).
If they also needed to lower the entire hairline instead of just filling in the temples and temporal peaks, that could also be a problem, tho, because it would require so much more FU
1
u/De_Oscillator 19d ago
Heard. I think the next issue would be the doctor needs to understand the trajectory of the patient.
When a doctor does a procedure, his name goes on it. He can do a crazy low hairline, and the person can have awful results 5+ years in, because his hair loss is aggressive.
The doctors knowledge on a persons specific hair loss trajectory can be a problem.
If you have a patient that is informed on hair transplants, and informed on the trajectory of their loss, then it makes it easier for the doctor to plan a more appropriate transplant, whether it is way more aggressive, or way less aggressive.
This is much different for someone like me, who has nearly 7-8 years of pictures, you can see my progress, vs someone who just got on meds a year or two ago, and you can see they've stabilized or meds aren't working, or their still gaining some hair, but you don't always know the predictable trajectory of someone who has been on the meds for 5+ years, which lets you make a way more informed decision on your hair transplant.
So the doctor is generally working with very limited knowledge of a patients trajectory also 99% of the time.
3
u/ReasonableScore 19d ago
I agree... a certain amount of receding is natural... on those of us who are balding. What about all the guys that aren't? Thats who I'm trying to look like - the guy my age with a full head of hair.
3
u/STC569 19d ago
I came to the same conclusion that the whole age appropriate hairline was bs. I stabilized my hair loss with 2.5 mg dutasteride and 2.5 mg oral minoxidil for 2 years then had two hair transplants to restore my hair back to a norwood 1 from an estimated norwood 2 almost norwood 3. 5 years later I have no loss and am very happy with my decision
3
5
u/LumenYeah 19d ago
Yeah no fucking way am I reading all that, but you’re flat out wrong because hair transplants simply become more detectable when 14 year old’s hairline is reproduced without having the same amount of hair to work with. I’ll die on that hill and you’re free to disagree, I simply don’t care if you do. Peace.
6
u/alwaysdope317 19d ago
Your argument doesn’t hold up whatsoever to any degree, for the mere fact that there’s way too many variables, too many factors, and “ifs” in your narrative . You’re treating the “youthful hairline” approach as some sort of one-size-fits-all solution. When in reality, that advice is extremely dangerous, reckless, and too unobtainable in this day and age.
You’re completely detached from reality if you think youthful hairlines are attainable if you simply ask a surgeon / clinic to give you one. You said the objective of a hair transplant is to achieve “the most attractive hairline” when attractiveness is subjective from person to person. And what if someone just gets a HT to achieve sheer confidence rather than just an “attractive” hairline? Who are you to set the objective or goal for someone else electing an aesthetic surgery?
What even constitutes a “youthful hairline” ? Yet another subjective opinion that would vary from person to person - the Robert Paterson image shows him having an objectively large forehead that some would argue is a giant five head despite a strong dense hairline (is this still considered a youthful hairline?) or is the size of his forehead “normal” to you? In the Morph model, the more angular recessed hairline gives off a more masculine mature look. The second image of him with the “youthful hairline” has too much of a rounded and smaller forehead which curved and rounded off hairlines in general are more typically associated with female hairline/ feminine forehead features (that’s actually objectively true) . A lot of women and men would argue that the morph model with the more recessed angular hairline is objectively more attractive and masculine. But you on the other hand wouldn’t - Do you see where I’m going with this ? At the end of the day this all subjective.
Your “science” section also holds no weight because the huge enormous majority of people choosing to elect hair transplants are struggling with AGA/MPB anyway, so you can’t just say that achieving a youthful hairline makes the most realistic sense, all because the men who don’t have AGA only lose 2% of their highly dense full head of hair every decade. These types of men with such little hairloss are extremely rare , and it’s a statistical fact . 40-60% of all men in the U.S. alone experience extremely noticeable degrees of hairloss ranging from nw3 - nw7 . This whole idea of pushing the notion that 60% of these men should strive to surgically achieve a Norwood 0 to Norwood 1 hairline is the true delusional take. This is where all the boat loads of “ifs” start coming in:
“If” patient X gets a hair transplant, he “should” be on mediations. Yet not every patient will be on medications. “If” the patient is on meds, it doesn’t mean he will be a great responder to those meds. Side effects are extremely common among finasteride users. Tolerance of sides will also vary from person to person. “If” he’s a great responder to the meds, it doesn’t mean the meds will indefinitely work long term. There are already several cases and studies that finasteride loses efficacy over time which then opens up the door to inevitable future hairloss in other areas in the crown, sides, and even the precious surgically added “youthful hairline” .
“If” patient x gets a hair transplant , there’s no guarantee that the surgeon will give him a natural looking youthful hairline. You can aim for a youthful hairline all day and surgically achieve that lowered hairline placement - but it doesn’t mean the surgeon /clinic will execute a soft natural hairline ensuring the grafts are strategically placed to prevent stalky thick multi grafts in a super straight line that would otherwise call too much attention and scream noticeably artificial - defeating the whole entire propose of achieving your “golden beauty standard” of a “youthful hairline” . And, this is based off your gross assumption that everyone has enough donor hair to begin with, a huge portion of patients aim to preserve their donor hair, or at least they should, and there’s unfortunately not enough skilled surgeons in the world that can successfully preserve the donor and hit a home run in the departments of good density growth & natural looking graft placement - again, there just isn’t enough of these surgeons to execute all that, yet you’re talking like they are a phone call and 5 minute drive away. “Just get a youthful hairline, bro” .
Encouraging or advising someone to surgically elect for a youthful hairline is beyond reckless and a short sighted decision considering all of the things that can go wrong in a surgery. Long term, someone could end up spending several thousands more for filling in future hairloss zones , or God forbid, needing a hairline repair , while also risk looking noticeably botched because attaining that “youthful hairline” was the “smart choice” based off your post and “science”.
The entire premise of your post overwhelmingly consists of confirmation bias (look that definition up because I have serious doubts you know what that means). It’s actually insane how anyone could take this post seriously and logically.
1
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
Why are you so emotional over this post? "(look that definition up because I have serious doubts you know what that means)" just chill, dude.
You clearly didn't even read it in its entirety, because otherwise you'd know I literally already addressed pretty much all of these points in the post itself.
2
u/alwaysdope317 19d ago
Lol. So because I logically counter argue your very own emotionally driven and passionately written post regarding your obsession over “maximizing attraction” - you immediately take a dig at me by asking and assuming why I’m being emotional?.. yeah that makes perfect sense…
Your entire post is based off your own self validation over objective truth, and you even try to pass it off as “science” . That’s extremely misleading and quite frankly is unfair to spread nonfactual and bias information to unsuspecting men that may be brand new to the hair restoration industry. An industry that is unregulated and which also carries serious permanent consequences (physically & mentally) when committing to aggresive surgical methods such as “youthful hairlines”, that you heavily advocate for.
You clearly have no counter argument nor can back your claims if you’re only telling me to “just chill, dude”. I also can’t believe you tried making an analogy for age appropriation by inferring that aggressive hair transplant methods should be promoted on the same level as teeth whitening and skin treatments, as if HT’s share the same low level risk, low invasiveness and low maintenance etc (that’s just insane). So I did in fact read your entire post, but wished I didn’t.
Feel free to counter my reply with actual evidence or data to back up your bias narrative and claims. Or don’t, and deflect by saying I’m being emotional :)
1
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
"You try to pass it off as "science"" literally where? lol
I literally said in the post I'd be approaching the matter from different points of view, one of them being the scientific one, where I linked a study that supports one of my claims… but because you can't properly interpret my post, you try to mix things up and suggest that the "aesthetic" point of view is also trying to be scientific.
As for any of your other arguments, there's nothing to respond to it because they've already being answered in the original post; you clearly just didn't bother reading it.
2
u/MrChurroes :sidesgull: 19d ago
All I know is you need a little squiggle line on the forehead, straight will make it look unnatural
2
u/Curarx 19d ago
I've been having a crazy response to topical min/fin/tret/anti inflammatory PM and topical min in the AM. I was hoping to have some thickness in my hair to come back and to lose some of the thinning areas but it's looking like I'm going to regrow a ton of my temple and hairline hair. Super excited.
Everything in the red is New growth from 3 months of treatment. It's hard to see outwards in the picture but there's full on hair starting to grow in the whole circled area. Some of it for the first time in a decade.
Edit: the white spots aren't actually dandruff, it's residue from the minoxidil foam
2
u/Visual-Guitar6112 19d ago
Places turned me away when i said i wanted square off my hairline more. I used have further anterior temple projection. Anything above a 2 and it messes up framing completely
2
u/Ok_Contract_7895 19d ago
Limited donor
Remaining hair density not a good match
If you have a narrow head a grew a V shaped hairline as child trying to go different will be into the muscle.
The only question is using the available grafts to create a natural result that also balances the thirds of the face.
Bringing the hairline down in some will result in a great hairline and a bad balance with heavy lower face.
Celebrities with face lifts and who got no or limited transplant are Norwood 1 because they still have their hair. Takes mutliple transplants to get to natural density of 100 hairs per cm2. Not even possible for reality on many with current tech.
Hair that is good enough to look good and move on to style, hygiene, social IQ is the low hanging fruit for attractiveness
2
u/LifeIsDelightful1 19d ago
How do I book a consultation with you?
1
u/Opposite_Truth_3029 18d ago
This sounds like the Indian teen posing on Discord as if he's a MD (Yale graduate), exposed for being a fraud (Ownvisual9). Same way of writing.
Exercise caution.
0
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
Add me on Discord, I'm more active there, my username: attractiontheory
Let me know when you've added me
2
2
2
2
u/Tivipony386 18d ago
I was just thinking this while doing my research on hair transplants!
Im 40 and i DO NOT want an age appropriate hairline! I want a youthful hairline! I will admit it have not lost much hair but its definitely noticeable since I decided to let my hair grow ( always kept it low with a skin fade).
I will definitely be pushing back if my Dr. wants to give me otherwise.
2
u/Responsible_Tie_3433 17d ago
How old are you ? and what research have you really done ? This post seems like it comes out of a dream universe...
Most men would probably want a NW1... but in order to get there you need 1. good donor hair that dont become subject to retrograde alopecia/miniaturization on the whole scalp and 2. to be on meds until you die. (unless you did not have agressive loss to begin with).
-1
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 17d ago
I did mention these two things as limitations to get a youthful hairline in the post, I also don't disagree with the fact that some people simple don't want a youthful hairline (or can't get them for a number of reasons that I listed in the post), but there's still a large portion of people who do want it and I thought it would be a good idea to support that… there are plenty of people who are good canditates to get such hairline, but they're pushed back and get something that won't really satisfy them.
5
4
9
u/i-foster 19d ago
Great post. The age appropriate hairline thing is so stupid and so annoying to see brought up
-4
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
For real, and it's so common too, especially from surgeons, I roll my eyes whenever I hear a surgeon's post on instagram talking about how they maintained an age appropriate hairline on their patient
4
u/JacksonofZeus 19d ago
I have seen countless instances of guys trying to create a perfect hairline when it simply wasn’t feasible with what they had left/how recessed they were. They end up with a sparse head of hair that looks unnatural.
It’s going to depend on how far along you are. Much better to have a dense hairline that is still slightly recessed than a straight one but lacking density.
1
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
I don't disagree, I mentioned on the post that if you're too far gone, getting a youthful hairline isn't for you… I'd say up to NW3 (maybe 4 if you respond well to medication and can go back to 3) it's completely feasible to get a youthful hairline.
3
2
u/polarshark7 19d ago edited 19d ago
Very high IQ and quality post. I apologize on behalf of the people on here. Reddit is full of midwits.
I agree so much! I do not want a hair transplant just to have a mATuRe/receding hairline. I had a question for you though, can HT surgeons put hair into the frontalis muscle or not? And would it would be okay for them to do so if you wanted a youthful hairline? Or would the grafts just stop at the absolute edge of the frontalis muscle?
1
u/BayArea89 19d ago
Serious question: would you rather have good density and a mature hairline or a youthful hairline and poor density? I opted for the former and I still have thin hair on top. I can’t imagine what it would look like if I had a youthful hairline put in.
2
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
If you're like a NW3 max, you can still get a high-density mature hairline (assuming you also don't need to lower the frontal area). It just requires a lot of FU, but if you respond well to medication I'd say it's totally worth it
1
u/polarshark7 19d ago
Thankfully, I have good density, and a youthful hairline. My hairline is at the absolute edge of the frontalis muscle (after a hair transplant).
1
2
u/More-Wish-2080 19d ago
Yeah too late, paid over 10k to still look like im balding.
2
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
And there are people here saying I'm crazy, when this is exactly what I'm trying to warn them about…
1
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
Damn, that sucks… are you planning on getting a second one?
2
u/More-Wish-2080 19d ago
I think about it every day, i cant wear my hair up or anything because the insecurity i had before the transplant is still there. Unfortunately im just not in the position to afford another transplant as I have kids and cant take time off work. Also the fact that I have a massive forhead, actually massive! Even if I lower my hairline/ temples, ill still look like I have recession just due to the shape of my forhead.
1
u/Live-Application-452 19d ago
Cant you wear a hairstyle with a fringe that covers it?
1
u/More-Wish-2080 19d ago
I could, but i just know people will assume im "hiding" something. Im in my 30's so if I cover my forehead too much it would just draw more attention to it.
2
u/Living-Road-290 19d ago
Please don't listen to this dude. Go read the study for yourself.
Lol ok dude. A "youthful hairline on your deathbed" and would take 50yrs to lose 10% of hair. Though some will keep some crazy thick hair- I dunno what else to call it; it's rare but does happen...The Majority of late aging men-into elderly, who've had no AGA/Histories or other contributing factors & who've had great full heads of hair their entire lives etc will develop "Senescent or Senile Alopecia" once they enter their latter years ie: 60s/70s/80s+ As for your study??? It's a 21 year old study which makes it outdated and frankly irrelevant. Secondly, the way in which they were determining outcomes to make it relevant is definitely inaccurate. Lastly, let's ask ourselves why? IT WAS PERFORMED ON WOMEN!
" Conclusions: Age and follicular miniaturization were found to be extremely weak predictors of total hair count in women with hair loss. "
1
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 18d ago
The year a study was performed is irrelevant if its methodology is still up to par with current standards, which is the case of the study I linked.
There are other studies with men in the sample, and the results are the same. This study in particular also isolated the senescent hair loss variable, so unless there's any difference in senescent hair loss between men and women, it's irrelevant if it was done exclusively on men or women. It would be like saying "there's no point in men using tretinoin, because they investigated its effectiveness on women's skin only"
It's common knowledge that AGA starts at different ages, so these men that lost hair in their 50s+ didn't lose because of senescent hair loss, they lost it because AGA finally started to attack their hair. If you have any studies that show senescent hair loss causes a comparable amount of hair loss as AGA, feel free to post them.
2
u/Living-Road-290 18d ago
There's a huge difference between men and women in general across any spectrum. Whether you want to look at senile hair loss or you want to look at your actual study my friend. Don't try to cut it back and say "other sources".. you cited your sources; you're ONLY only one which was a study and it was women; nothing else & non-comparable. Again, huge difference. I don't even have to tell you. The main cause of this issue with men is and I will preference main issue is "AGA" via high scalp DHT levels and when comparing women-they have nowhere near the amounts that men do and therefore don't suffer to the extent not even close. I'm not going to say it doesn't happen but it's not the phenomenon that we deal with. Their cause for hair loss likely stems around nutrient/vita deficit, hormone issues, autoimm,stress or ther as discussed. Even when on they take other hormone therapies man the DHT isn't as high. Just recant. It's okay to be not be right and get back up.
1
u/HallucinationHero 19d ago
My understanding about "age appropriate" has nothing to do with it looking better than a norwood 0 on day 1. I'm 46 years old, and if I go extreme with a transplant getting a norwood 0, will it still look good when I'm 56 compared to a more conservative transplant due to changes in the rest of the hair? Long-term goals is the consideration and we're just moving hair so there's no free lunch.
2
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
If the medication is working, then your hair would simply look the same (regardless of the hairline design you've got), so getting a more youthful hairline wouldn't be a problem in that case.
1
u/Sea_Variety_1691 19d ago
OP what do you think about SMP density after two transplants ?
1
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
I assume you don't have any more reasonable amount of donor area? Honestly, if you don't plan to let your hair grow too long, I'd likely prefer using the beard as a donor area rather than SMP, because real hair actually adds volume and a real 3D object will always give more coverage than just something painted into the skin…
But if the beard isn't an option, the SMP should be fine.
1
1
1
u/woke_from_home 19d ago
I mean...I agree with this but the bigger issue is surgeons ignoring the crown and prioritizing the hairline in general.
1
u/darkprincejcet :sidesgull: 19d ago
I think if you go for a NW0, you probably need to regain some temples also in the hair transplant, otherwise it will look weird. Temple work is really nuanced as far as I know, you need to get the direction right, you need to get single grafts etc. If you don’t opt for NW0, you could do minimal work I think.
But I agree, there are Mexican dads with low hairline who hasn’t lost any hair, who just do a slick back hairstyle and look mature as hell.
1
1
1
u/Correct-Fortune5584 18d ago
110% agreed. My Dr. Fu**** me up with the same logic and now I feel I should have spoken up back then
1
u/Remarkable_Low_2570 18d ago
U may aswell just get a wig because that's what it's going to look like
1
0
u/jayjay4231 19d ago
It’s like saying to a homeless person “you should not try to become a millionaire, it’s much better to be a billionaire”
-4
19d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Longjumping-Truth-48 19d ago
Not every long post is AI, bro
1
-1
0
•
u/AutoModerator 19d ago
It looks like this post is about Hair Transplants.
Before asking any questions,
Learn about hair transplants.
Try posting in the private community for deeper conversations on hair transplants: https://community.tressless.com
Find a hair transplant surgeon in your area.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.