How turkey hacked the hair-transplant industry
wired.com
wired.com
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/olalonde/olalonde.github.c...
I originally felt more confident going to a plastic surgeon, though even though the doctor oversaw the process, it was being done by highly trained technicians. That's probably more ideal anyway because it's very manual and meticulous work, so (IMO) you want someone who's done it a thousand times--not someone who did a nose job yesterday, a boob job the day before, and only does a hair transplant every couple of weeks.
I'd assume the techs in Turkey are about as experienced as you can get.
They take hair follicles from the back of your head, the "safe donor area" that is genetically immune to balding, and move them to the thinning areas. The total amount of hair on your head remains exactly the same, it's just repositioned to give the illusion of uniform coverage and eliminate bald spots.
That's also why it's not a miracle cure for baldness - you're limited by the amount of hair follicles available in the donor area.
See: https://ishrs.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/donor-area-asse...
The surgery just moves the follicles around your own scalp. Body hair transplant can be done but is relatively uncommon, donor hair from other people (or animals) requiring a lifetime on immune system suppressing drugs as with an organ transplant is virtually unknown.
No, it's not pubic hair and you don't need to have a hairy back or chest, and no, there are not millions of low-status Turkish men walking around with scarred heads because they sold their scalp to a foreigner.
I think the finasteride side effects sound too much for me to handle.
That's the bit that puts me off. I don't mind my baldness - it doesn't impact me in any way. I wouldn't mind being able to have hair again to style it, but not at the expense of the potential side effects of fin.
I'll just continue to enjoy not having to style my hair every morning, and saving on extortionate barber bills nowadays.
That being said, I also started balding in spots very young and I couldn't care less fixing it.
It's a case of having the right people at the right place, at the right time. Turkey have some of the leading doctors and clinics in this field, and have had for years. They were also located in a place which was close to both customers from Europe and the Middle-East, and could offer FUE (Follicular Unit Extraction) procedures at a very nice price.
Even the very top doctors there were charging a relatively modest price, compared to their (more) western colleagues. And I guess with the sheer volume they'd go through, they discovering new best practices, techniques, etc. along the way.
Back when I did research on this, now 15 years ago, the industry was starting to really take off. This was reflected in the prices that the best clinics charged. Some of them jumped up 50% in a short time, when photo-driven social media like Instagram started blowing up.
And then a whole industry sprung out of it. Many excellent clinics, tons more mediocre (to horrendous) ones that are only trying to compete on price.
Guess this also goes for the dental industry there.
It doesn't come from getting legitimate validation from others. It comes from one's own fear of aging and their own mortality. Sorry, but we all shrivel up like a raisin by the end. Trying to beat that back with these means just seems so futile. Spend that cash on therapy instead to tackle your body dysmorphia.
Survivorship bias, you only notice the plastic surgery that isn't good. Most of the time it's invisible, your brain doesn't process the individual change, you just get the sense that the person looks better/less tired/more put together.
>Lip injections are obvious
Same phenomenon, but even if they are obvious some people like that aesthetic, in the same way that dyed hair/painted nails are obvious, but that's the point
>Leg lengthening, I mean have you seen the proportions after
For some men it is far better to be 6' with wonky proportions than 5'7" with perfect proportions. There is far more hate directed towards short men than men with long legs.
>Hair transplants too. I mean are we acting like steve jobs wasn't still a handsome man with his grey thinning head?
Not everyone is as handsome as Steve Jobs. If you have a handsome face you can get away with balding, if not then its a further infliction on how people percieve you.
>Sorry, but we all shrivel up like a raisin by the end
If we all die after 80 or so years then what's the point of doing anything? Why get a job, why put any effort into personal grooming?
>If we all die after 80 or so years then what's the point of doing anything? Why get a job, why put any effort into personal grooming?
Because you want to be fit and healthy? All these surgeries are orthogonal to that. Every surgery is risky even medically necessary ones. You shower and groom yourself to prevent skin issues. You work out to simulate the hunter gatherer lifestyle your body is adapted to in the modern society which does not sufficiently pressure these adaptions. This stuff is your oil change and tire rotation. It is maintenance really. These surgeries are not maintenance however. It is like ricing the civic while it burns oil and the transmission makes scary sounds.
Not true for everyone. Simply living healthily and grooming, you are still limited by the ceiling imposed by your body. Sometimes it just doesn't live up to the aesthetic demands of the human psyche, used to a superstimulus of attractiveness as the norm.
>Every surgery is risky even medically necessary ones
Most cosmetic surgeries carry very little risk, your overall risk from even being a moderate drinker, commuting to work in a car, being mildly overweight are far higher in aggregate.
My main point is, the human modern social world isn't a perfect arbiter of reward based on whether you are doing all the "right things", by being generally healthy.
Sometimes people get a disease, like cancer, and nothing our body evolved to do can help, but human-invented therapies can actually help. Likewise, you can be perfectly healthy and nevertheless start balding, and no amount of generally being healthy is going to fix it, and no amount of generally being healthy will mitigate the minor albeit real social cost of it.
So you're telling me all these Hollywood stars having infinite money, access to the best surgeons and are literally paid to look good get butchered on purpose?
Saying
>I'm getting a hair transplant because I want to feel better about myself
Is received much more favorably that
>I'm getting a hair transplant because people are mean to bald people and I would downgraded a few points in implicit social status and general treatment if I were to exhibit male-pattern baldness.
> as AI erodes humans' ability
Lol here we go again.
The etymology here is interesting and has a looooong history. The country has officially been named Türkiye for over a century.
The problem with the turkey rebranding is that it was a mere orthographic update, but it is using orthography that is very non standard(whatever that means for English), including using a diacritic rarely seen in English.
I could get behind it more if they completely changed the name, like a when Swaziland switched to eswatini. But for now, you can pry turkey from my cold dead hands
Big fan of Thanksgiving foods I see.
(Do you see the real problem? Lowercasing a proper noun that has another meaning when lowercased. Turkey/Türkiye is just the cherry on top)
So here's your why: because they asked you to and you are better at it than they are. If you need smug superiority, you could use that too, I guess.
People change their names and nick names all the time. I don't go and check every value of theirs before I use their new name. It's really not that complicated.
Frankly I dispute that Türkiye can be the English name given it contains a non-English letter.
We can choose not to do it, I guess, but place names change all the time. Istanbul vs Constantinople. New York vs New Amsterdam. Myanmar vs Burma. Czechia vs Czech Republic. Swaziland vs Eswatini.
It's "Eswatini" with a capital letter and no, it's not a complete change. In both cases the word means the place of the Swazi/Swati people. If you're not aware that Southern African languages use prefixes such as "e-" as well as suffixes (like e.g. the suffix "-land" in English) then I guess it's harder to recognise the word stem. But they are related terms, not a "complete change".
[0] https://unterm.un.org/unterm2/en/view/745bbc2a-fc50-4b94-bb9...
I don't think we are required to start calling it Turkey in the vernacular. Regular Turkish people don't have to change their names for countries in their language either. I only pointed out Turkey/Türkiye in my original post to head off smart-asses. Using proper casing for the name is much more important.
It's the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your uncle jack off a horse.
This headline makes it sound like the IT systems of a cosmetic surgeon have been attacked by poultry.
They can call themselves what they want, but it unreasonable of the Turks to expect English speakers to write their country's name with characters which are not part of our alphabet.
https://www.npr.org/2023/01/08/1147704945/the-state-departme...
(But yeah, personally I would capitalised both counties regardless of spelling/which name used.)
Another country's official name in English is "Republic of Türkiye". Since 2022.
In both cases, that is what officials from the country expect the country to be called, when using the English language.
For instance here
They don't have any authority to manage other people's languages.
The lack of capitalization is an obvious error, though. Before clicking, I wondered if some accidental discovery in turkeys (as birds) resulted in better human hair growth.
And that's fine. I mentioned Türkiye because at least one smart-ass would correct me otherwise. But "turkey" is a bird. For it to be a country it's at least gotta be "Turkey".
Whyever not? It's their stated preference. And it's hardly the same kind of change as "China" vs. "Zhōngguó" or "Germany" vs. "Deutschland". It's just a slightly different spelling and pronunciation of the same word. You can change your ways.
Any country should have the respect to have their names spelled out as they prefer, the PITA is the keyboards. I speak for myself, but when I type Turkey I mean the country with no subliminal diss.
If I were bald, I would totally go there and do the same.
I visited one of those Bosley places in the US. The pitch came across as very...predatory? It did not inspire confidence. They would only consider scheduling you for the surgery if you could demonstrate that you'd use other measures for a year, meaning finasteride, one of those laser hat things, etc. They did talk about how few surgeons there were that do this stuff well though. Also talked about scalp injections I think?
It's been several years. I just decided to let it go naturally and deal with it.
I don't want to defend the esthetic surgery industry in general, which I do think tends to be quite predatory, but doesn't this sound like the opposite of that? If they really wanted to fleece you, wouldn't they offer surgery instead of the safer and cheaper treatments?
Tip: Bald people the worst to fleece.
Unless you're already at full Norwood VII pre-transplant, you have hair that you'll continue to lose post-transplant. Being on the medications that help stop that in its tracks will mean a better looking long term result and keep you from having to undergo future transplants.
I was at "80% hair loss" and they pretty much just carpet bombed my scalp. Looks great now, no meds.
1. the turkish government had reasons for trying to get people to use "Türkiye" instead.
2. It's still not working.
I 100% thought this was about birds until clicking
Same, I was really curious reading about the hair transplant industry organized by turkeys and got really disappointed :(
> Turkey’s billion-dollar hair-transplant industry is the result of a constant process of innovation. [...] it’s also a tale of “hacked” medical equipment and algorithmic craftsmanship
Seems there was some actual "hacking" involved, if they had to patch medical equipment, but who knows how much of the article is actually about that, I can't actually see any text.
Turn off JS
This was in 2023, and I'm largely happy with the results since then. If I had my 20s to do over again, I would have tried to go just the medication route and avoid the procedure. I do think that would have resulted in a more natural appearance vs. what I have now.
This is so extremely harmful. I wish you the best of luck.
Edit: To whoever I upset, yes it is harmful to suppress your sexual hormones daily. Originally it was never intended for hair loss but for prostate cancer until Merck & Co. figured out they could market it as a 'hair loss pill'. You will find the popularity of fin/dut inflated on Reddit these days as (paid) moderators will remove anyone who speaks against it even those with first hand horror stories.
Edit: systemic effect is not 0% even with topical, enters your bloodstream nonetheless. To respond to the guy marketing below (HN limiting replies).
What really matters is the prevalence...
I'm not unhappy with how I look. I'm happier after a haircut and a hot shave. Sometimes we make choices because they take us from "whatever" to "this rules".
This forum believe the silicon valley delusional tech executives saying we'll soon extend lifespan to 150+ years thanks to "ai", it's a transhumanist echo chamber, a hair transplant is nothing, they'd sell their parents for a neuralink chip
If it makes someone feel happier to not be bald, great. It should come from making them happy, not them having to avoid social stigma though.
However the way the brain responds to it is incontestable, and no amount of body positivity will change the impact it has, thus for an individual it makes much more sense to pay a few thousand to conform to beauty standards than hope that everyone you meet will turn off their primate brain when interacting with you.
More directly, at the risk of a handwavey evo-psych just-so story: Hundreds of millions of years of evolution, perhaps? A ton of characteristics driving attraction are signals of health / youthfulness. Weight, musculature, nice skin, good teeth, etc. And yeah, good hair! Male pattern baldness is definitely associated with aging even though many people will probably spend more of their lives follicularly challenged than they did with good hair.
More sun exposure, less cold protection.
It has benefits too, but it's overall harmful.
If you need your job and income, taking steps to prevent facing this bias can be beneficial.
Edit: I love that someone downvoted me for offering my hair follicles to a random stranger, downvotes truly happen randomly here :)
No idea if ZME science is reputable at all.
I was business admin student in college and my concentration was in entrepreneurship. Part of the program was a class were I had write a business plan and I chose medical tourism. This was back in 2006-ish. Even back then, there was trend where Americans would travel abroad for surgery, but cosmetic surgery was not that popular. Mostly people would go to India, bc the quality of care was high and orders of magnitude cheaper.
Good to know my entrepreneurial instinct was somewhat accurate.
" Most experts agree that Turkey’s strategy for success in hair transplantation no longer relies on low prices or volume; instead, it hinges on creating an unshakable brand value through innovation, purpose-built technological equipment, and medical expertise that has proven itself on a global scale. "
Life expectancy in these regions is mostly from diet, lifestyle, avoiding wars, and at times from avoiding the healthcare actually.
Pretty much what a western dentist charges for a handshake. So you get endless rows of teeth flying there.
Some less-than-ideal outcomes are from mismatching the procedure(s) to the patient or doing too much too early in the loss period. If the progression occurs differently than expected after the procedure the outcome can become unbalanced. A few patients can be one-and-done but for many patients multiple steps over time can increase the odds of optimal outcomes. Generally, you should NOT push for one-and-done unless you're that rare candidate. Figuring out the pattern, progression and matching the correct plan of attack is where the experience and diligence of the practitioner matter most.
While a lot of hair loss clinics market the 'artistry' of their doctors, the reality is that performing the procedures tends to be fairly rote. My eventual outcome was great, but I totally lucked into it. It was still the late 90s when my hair loss progressed from "just some thinning" to the early stages of "have you considered a comb-over?" I went to a clinic and was told I was most likely early in a 'full loss' progression and that I'd probably need more than one scalp reduction before even starting transplants. They also advised waiting more than a year between scalp reductions for optimal results.
I was disappointed because I'd been hoping to walk in and walk out a few hours later with "Brad Pitt hair." But just having turned 30, I was feeling insecure about my hair, still dating and looking for "The One." So I signed up and insisted the surgeon "go big" on the first scalp reduction. The procedure itself was fine but the week-long recovery kicked my ass and for several months afterward my scalp felt stretched to the limit. To be fair, they did fully warn me on all this, I just hadn't taken it seriously enough. As I recovered, I decided it just wasn't worth it and gave up on the hair thing.
After it had settled for a year, the one big scalp reduction did improve things back to "just thinning" but eventually the loss progressed (as I was warned it would). But I'd already decided "it is what it is". Fortunately, it turns out when I met "The One" a couple years later she didn't care about my hair (despite being, according to my friends, waaaay out of my league) :-). Jump forward another ~20 years and my now-wife is seeing a plastic surgeon for C-section scar removal and mentions "If you still care, they do hair transplants."
Thanks to the now-ancient mega-scalp reduction, my hair never reached "full loss" but it'd stopped somewhere deep in comb-over territory. I didn't care that much but decided to do a consult anyway. Based on my unique history, the doc asked for year-by-year photos to gauge how things had progressed since the scalp reduction (photos from kid birthday parties worked well). Turns out that doing the mother-of-all scalp reductions and waiting ~20 years to reach full progression was, accidentally, the perfect plan. Now the target was clear, unmoving and reduced enough they could nail it in a one-and-done transplant by taking ALL the donor hair - which is rare. Most procedures are done on patients still in progression, but each patient only has a limited amount of donor hair, so they don't 'harvest' all of it because some will be needed later in the progression. They just don't know exactly where yet.
So I did it and ~5 years later, it still looks perfect. The procedure took most of a day but was pretty easy. The interesting part was the top-notch, deeply experienced plastic surgeon didn't do the procedure herself. It was done by two sub-contractor technicians who travel from clinic to clinic over a multi-state area doing nothing but transplants all day, every day. The doc explained its really best because they can do it very well and fast (apparently speed in parts of the procedure can improve the follicle survival rate). Of course, she checked in during the day and was on-hand in case anything went wrong. You don't need Sully Sullenberger in the cockpit on every milk run, as long as he's there on the rare flight that ends in the Hudson River.
tl;dr In my experience, once you have a skilled assessment, correctly matched procedure(s) and plan of attack, then using lower cost technicians to do the actual procedure should be fine - as long as there's an experienced back-stop available in the event of an "unscheduled water landing" (do 737s have scheduled water landings)? My only other concern would be ensuring they don't harvest too much, too early from some patients. Doing so would probably lift their 90-day customer satisfaction but at the expense of nefing 10-year C-Sat. To be fair, that could happen at pricier U.S. clinics too (my technicians had both started in those places and we got to gossiping over that long day).
Couldn't that be the pills Wayne took?