I have no trasnplants but I just wanna make a comment:
The advent of grafting has made it feasible to raid hairs from outside the 100% safe areas. IMHO this provides a great opportunity to soften the transplanted hairlines with a sprinkling of thinner-shafted hairs (like grafts taken from the nape of the neck for example).
The criticism of this kind of thing is predictable - "the hairs may not be 100% MPB-resistant! You don't wanna waste your money on that!"
Okay, so they're not permanent. But . . . so what?
So you spend a few hundred extra grafts softening your hairline with hairs that (MIGHT) bald eventually many years from now. What's so horrible about that?
My other reasoning about this is the planning for future loss.
Everyone sees the logic of not raiding the non-permanent areas of the scalp for grafts. But if you plan your whole transplant around the assumption that the MPB meds will retard your natural loss progression in any major way . . . then what's the difference, really?
Instead of betting on a bunch of non-permanent hairs to last after they've been transplanted, you're just betting on another bunch of non-permanent hairs to last in their original locations. Either way, you're still betting on long term success at artificially reducing your hair loss using MPB meds.
See this for what it is - I'm not advocating everyone go out and get thousands of non-permanent hairs moved all over their heads. (You'd just end up pissed off & ripped off later on.)
I'm just saying that a lot of patients are mortified at the idea of doing any non-safe graft transplanting at all, and yet they're already taking a very similar risk in their HTs right now in terms of loss prevention. IMHO you might as well just go for a few extra neck-hair grafts into the hairline and maybe have it look a bit softer for the next 10 or 20 years.
cal is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO