View Full Version : question for Dr.Rassman
Hi John,
I just wanted to drop in and mention that I have submitted this question to Dr. Rassman, but I'm still waiting to hear back. I'm completely unfamiliar with licensing requirements for nurses and all that other stuff. I'll get an answer for you though. Hang in there.
-Mark
Hi John,
Sorry I didn't get you that answer quickly enough, we got it on the blog first because we think it's a great question.
I assume that you already knew the answer to your question, which is why you had this large essay prepared before hand. I just wanted to let you know that you don't need to be coy with us. If you want to say something you're more than welcome to voice that opinion. I know that you've had some problems with other hair transplant forums (http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-158971) but I want to assure you that we're not going to ban you for simply having interesting or tough questions about the hair transplant process or anything. Heck, it seems like you've done your homework well and that's the biggest thing that Dr. Rassman stresses in his books/sites etc. We think that every potential patient should go into his hair transplant surgery knowing everything that he or she feels they should know.
But a point of clarity. You have mentioned a few times two posts up that hair transplant surgeons are breaking the law. What law is being broken? You linked to that King County list of people that who have been disciplined by a state medical board for practicing medicine without a license, which is indeed a serious offense. You also say....
for example you received lethal dosage of anesthetic by “surgical technician” during HT surgery and you die, as it happened already, two rights of yours were violated, rights to life and rights to the protection of the rule of law, because “surgical technician” administering anesthesia is forbidden
We do not allow any of our surgical technicians to administer anesthesia. You're right, that is against the law. Surgical technicians also do not remove grafts or strips, or create the incisions for sites. They primarily assist the doctor during incisions, and cut strips into individual grafts for placement later.
We maintain strict compliance with the law, as well as compliance with our patients wishes. We are one of the few (perhaps the only, but I'll have to check) hair transplant centers that are certified by the Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care (http://www.aaahc.org/eweb/StartPage.aspx). We were just evaluated for a renewal of that certification in November of 08 and we received a 3 year term of accreditation with them. We take absolute pride in knowing that our offices are not only in compliance with state and federal laws, but more importantly dedicated to improving patient care continually.
As far as the rest of your questions, I assure you I will get back to you on them, but it's 6AM in LA right now and we're out of the office on the weekend.
-Mark
I have nothing against you Dr.Rassman.Like I said I believe you are decent in what you do
It is not personal vendeta,it is not a rant.Or if some out there see it that way,give me at least ,that is not that ONLY.
Not only for me.For thousands like me.Did you know that 30% of customers of hair wigs (or systems as they call it) in hair saloons are former patients of butchered HT's?
I'm not sure where you're getting that statistic, but your point is generally sound. Yes, in the past hair transplant procedures were much less refined than they are now. We see patients in here a lot who have had bad procedures in the 80's and want to get them fixed. You can see the "repairs" section of our patient photos on newhair.com for examples.
However, and I can't stress this enough, the industry is MUCH better now than it was in the past. Those sorts of "horror stories" are virtually unheard of today, in the United States at least.
You all agree about what is done in the HT field.You also agree that is done on epidemic scale.Now,should we accept and even more important allow,"natural condition of HT field"to be a state of , insecurity and constant threat that some uneducated patient becomes victim.
I disagree entirely actually. I don't think that your perception of the hair transplant industry is in any way the norm. If you've had a bad experience with a particular doctor, that's one thing, but to extrapolate that experience out to the entire HT community is a huge stretch.
You keep saying it is duty for one who wishes to get HT to get informed about the jungle that is out there....?Where did you get that from.Where that duty derives from?
Caveat Emptor? Self reliance? Being involved in decisions about ones life?
I don't really understand where you're going with this. If the patient isn't willing to inform himself about an elective surgical procedure they're going in to, who should be the one to do so?
Like I said people when they go to a doctor believe they will behandled by medical personel.Title MD. D.O gives the majority of people confidence that they are dealing with reall doctor.They trust the doctors A PRIORI,not A posteriori.
Internal training?What is that? How long does it last? Is there an exam? Who conducts the examination?How long is that training?
So any doc can hire non medical personel,without certification get a HT "sufferer" put him on a chair,carve him,suture him,make holes in his head and leaves the room, and leaves that person with those non medical people to transplant human tissue on top of patients head?To be there for him for the rest of his life?
No duties
The rule,had become namely that which requires HT doctors "to do or abstain from certain actions, whether they wish to or not" !?
I still have to find out the answer to your question regarding the training of nurses and others who place grafts, but I think your analysis of patients as rubes who are being lied to is just inaccurate. We are absolutely 100% honest with our patients regarding how the hair transplant procedure goes. We have done "open houses" at our office for years where we do a procedure and anyone from the public can come watch it via a CCTV feed. They can see everything that goes on during the surgery.
Not only that, but we take GREAT lengths to ensure that our personnel do the best work possible. Their performance is continually evaluated, and extremely detailed records are kept. If a patient has any problems post-surgery we do detailed analysis of what may have happened and ensure that it doesn't happen again. As you would assume, because of this it's rare that we have any complications from the surgery.
Again, if you had a bad experience with a hair transplant surgeon I recommend that you take up your concerns with them first and foremost so you can potentially get problems resolved. If that's not possible or if your surgeon is not attentive to your needs, tell the world about it. You have the absolute right to that under our Constitution.
But to say that your experience mirrors that of all HT patients, or that there is some epidemic of secrecy from HT doctors, I don't think that reflects reality.
-Mark
Hi Mark
Thank you for
"
Hi John,
Sorry I didn't get you that answer quickly enough, we got it on the blog first because we think it's a great question.
I assume that you already knew the answer to your question, which is why you had this large essay prepared before hand. I just wanted to let you know that you don't need to be coy with us. If you want to say something you're more than welcome to voice that opinion. I know that you've had some problems with other hair transplant forums but I want to assure you that we're not going to ban you for simply having interesting or tough questions about the hair transplant process or anything. Heck, it seems like you've done your homework well and that's the biggest thing that Dr. Rassman stresses in his books/sites etc. We think that every potential patient should go into his hair transplant surgery knowing everything that he or she feels they should know. "
I like that.Lets put all on the table.
I will answer all your questions all where,how and why.I have answers,for all your questions.
Thank you.This debate can only make the HT "service" better.More elite doctors contribution is welcomed by me.The fact alone that you allow and encourage this debate speaks volumes already.
John36
Absoultely, we've never had any feelings otherwise. If you have a question we'll answer it 100% honestly.
I also just want to say that we totally understand where you're coming from. The reason we created sites like baldingblog.com, this forum, as well as the books that Dr. Rassman has written are primarily to help educate prospective patients and others who are interested about exactly what they can expect from a hair transplant surgery. We think that all patients should have everything they need to know.
I mean, if that means we get more business, that's great too. But we want to earn that business through honesty and transparency, not by PR or miracle claims.
We're an open book.
-Mark
1.Question
"But a point of clarity. You have mentioned a few times two posts up that hair transplant surgeons are breaking the law. What law is being broken? You linked to that King County list of people that who have been disciplined by a state medical board for practicing medicine without a license, which is indeed a serious offense. You also say....
Exactly what Law, that is the Question :confused::D
Right. Many had said, HT "Industry "is unregulated.
I say, there is NO SUCH thing as unregulated, as far as the Law system is concerned.
If something is not regulated by Lex specialis,then Lex generalis takes over. That is the backside of the legal rule that Lex specialis derogat lex generalis (When two or more laws contradict, the more specific law has precedence over the general law.)
So, whoever believes that the fact that there is no specific law that governs HT surgery, is
ground for lawlessness ,in my opinion, is wrong.
Since there is no Lex specialis in this instance, we have left the GENERAL Law.
Every state in USA has different statutes. However, their meaning is more or less the same, for the issue at hand.
For your state, for example, which is California, we will cut to the chase. I know exactly where the dispute, or the gray is.
It is here:
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION 2050-2079
2053.5. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person
who complies with the requirements of Section 2053.6 shall not be in
violation of Section 2051 or 2052 unless that person does any of the
following:
(1) Conducts surgery or any other procedure on another person
that punctures the skin or harmfully invades the body.
(2) Administers or prescribes X-ray radiation to another person.
(3) Prescribes or administers legend drugs or controlled
substances to another person.
(4) Recommends the discontinuance of legend drugs or controlled
substances prescribed by an appropriately licensed practitioner.
(5) Willfully diagnoses and treats a physical or mental condition
of any person under circumstances or conditions that cause or create
a risk of great bodily harm, serious physical or mental illness, or
death.
(6) Sets fractures.
(7) Treats lacerations or abrasions through electrotherapy.
(8) Holds out, states, indicates, advertises, or implies to a
client or prospective client that he or she is a physician, a
surgeon, or a physician and surgeon.
(b) A person who advertises any services that are not unlawful
under Section 2051 or 2052 pursuant to subdivision (a) shall disclose
in the advertisement that he or she is not licensed by the state as
a healing arts practitioner.
All right, I think, the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words in this statute is to be adhered to, unless that would lead to some absurdity or inconsistency with the rest of the instrument, in which case the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words may be modified, so as to avoid that absurdity or inconsistency, but not farther.
I think that it means that the words Conducts surgery and any other procedure on another person that punctures the skin or harmfully invades the body have TWO different meanings.
The words "conducts surgery" IMPLY that surgery IS procedure that punctures the skin or harmfully invades the body. It IMPLIES that because the words and any other .
So if one claims that surgical technicians (which are NOT surgical technicians or any kind of medical personnel) DON"T puncture the skin ,puts them OUT of this statute, and therefore they don't violate the statute, in my opinion is wrong interpretation of it.
In any surgery (words "conducts surgery" mean exactly that, any surgery) that is presumed. And THEN the legislator continues "any other procedure" (Other than surgery).
That is why, I think,the laws ARE violated. Surgeon MUST have participatory supervision of all the aspects of the surgery, BECAUSE surgery BY DEFINITION IN THE STATUTE IMPLIES it is procedure where skin is punctured and body harmfully invaded.
That is the Law. And, that is why I think when surgeon is out of surgical room when his patient is having surgery, alone with internally trained, non medical personnel is violation of THAT LAW.
I speak here in general,no body in particular.I THINK,and,I HAVE RIGHT TO THINK and say WHY I think that.I voice my opinion,and I do it with hope that such practice ,wide spread practice by HT surgeons,will stop.
Let me just repeat what I believe you're trying to say so that we're clear. It seems that you believe that HT surgeons read the law as saying that it's unlawful for anyone aside from a licensed medical practitioner to puncture the skin, but it's ok for surgical technicians to place grafts into sites that have already been punctured by the surgeon. However, your understanding of the law is that it's unlawful for them to do that.
I'm just confused by the conclusion that you come to with that analysis. You then say that it would be perfectly ok if the techs did the placing of the grafts, just as long as a surgeon was there observing.
By that same logic, it would be OK if the techs cut strips or made sites in the patients head as long as the doctor was observing. But that's clearly against the law.
So by your understanding of the law, why would it be acceptable for techs to place grafts in any circumstance?
Also, I just want to say that you really don't need to be so defensive. You absolutely do have the right to voice your opinion, and we're glad to engage you on it. We wish that most people were as concerned about their medical care as you seem to be. I understand that you've had a rough time on other forums, but I assure you that as long as you don't flip out and start calling people names or anything (and I have no reason to believe you will), everything is totally cool here.
-Mark
Question 6
"Caveat Emptor? Self reliance? Being involved in decisions about ones life?
Caveat Emptor is for one buys used car as is, or goes on an auction.
Medical Boards of USA replaced caveat emptor with assurance of the sick that they WILL get competent medical care when they go to a doctor that holds license issued by those medical boards.
I hate to nitpick here, but the medical board of CA (or any state) does assure that patients will get "competent" medical care, but what is your definition of "competent"? That a patient will grow 100% of the hairs transplanted? That they won't have a scar? That they will have a full head of hair after 1 surgery? None of these things are anything that we at NHI, or any HT surgeon can promise.
Every patient is different and will have a slightly different experience than the next. We've had some patients who have been a Norwood Class 7 and we've given then a nice looking head of hair. Not everyone is capable of receiving those results, and it's up to the doctor to give the best opinion possible based upon his experience.
Surgery, especially elective surgery like hair transplantation has risks. It's up to the patient to evaluate whether the risks are worth the potential gain. We here at NHI do our best to describe exactly what the patient will go through and give them as much info as possible to work with. The medical board, when evaluating doctors who have had problems during surgeries or other matters tend to ask whether the doctor was following the "Standard of care" in whatever field they are working in. Right now the standard of care in the HT surgery industry is what all surgeons follow. The only way to change that is to change the law or something like that.
How many hairless sufferers will reach good Web site to gather accurate info Dr.Rassman? 10 %,?20% of the total? How many will go to the elite clinics for HT? 10%? 20% what about rest 80 %? Where they will get informed? Type in your browser HT.
Every ONE of the HT surgeons advertises as a leader in HT.
It may be true that not every HT patient will be informed when they go into surgery, but what can we do? We're doing our best to help patients. If other doctors aren't as proactive as we are on these matters, there's nothing we can do to change that. We try to keep up on the latest procedures and techniques, (heck, we've invented a lot of them) but we can't force any other doctors to do the same.
I've been thinking a lot about the points that you're bringing up and I'm just curious as to what you see as the solution to the problem you're describing.
Hair transplant surgeries as well as most elective procedures like it are unregulated. I mean, to perform the surgery you need to be a doctor in good standing with the medical board of CA. But there is no board certification for hair transplant surgery or anything like that.
Dr Rassman specialized in general surgery before he worked in the HT field, but he didn't get trained in HT surgery from a college or anything. As a matter of fact, he invented quite a few of the techniques used in HT surgery to this day. Quite a few doctors that do HT surgery were trained by him.
Is this against the law? No. That's just the way the industry works.
The same thing goes for surgical techs. They are not required by law to be certified by a medical board. Does that mean that we hire just anyone off the street to become a tech for NHI? Absolutely not.
Our techs go through a proprietary training process that we have developed over the years and we follow stringently. I would assume that most other HT offices have the same sort of program. To get our AAAHC accreditation we needed to show our training processes and ensure that they are stringent and followed. Also as I said before, we keep extremely detailed records during surgeries so that if any problems arise, we can look back at the data and find out where problems might happen. We've found that this is the best way to manage our practice.
If there were some nationwide agency or board that could certify our techs in HT surgery, believe me we'd do it. But that doesn't exist. So we do the next best thing and are certified by the AAAHC, which is something we've done to show how much we stand out from the rest of the unregulated HT industry in our care for patients.
So knowing all this, what is your solution to the problem you perceive? Reading through your posts, it seems that you've only got a handful of options.
1. Do extremely detailed homework on your doctor, the HT procedure in general, and leave no stone unturned. This is what we've been advocating for at NHI for almost 20 years.
2. Contact your congressional representative or senator and push for regulation of the industry.
3. File a lawsuit against HT doctors if you believe that they truly are breaking the law.
Right now, I think option one is the best/only one you can go with. Option two is a long shot, and option three is really a stretch.
Anyway, just trying to continue the dialogue.
-Mark
No, what you believe I said is not what I said.
I said it is unlawful for them to do that without the surgeon's participatory supervision (which is possible only if the HT surgeon is physically present in the room with the patient)
Why I said that I think is unlawful for them to be doing that, and the surgeon allowing them to do that when he is absent is because placing the grafts in the receptor sites (already made by the surgeon) is still part of the surgery, it is part of the "conducting surgery" and ONLY a doctor can conduct surgery according to the statute.
One may say in reply, but the technician does not perform the surgery, he is assisting the surgeon in the surgery.
To that I would reply. They can not assist someone who is not physically there. When the surgeon is not in the room with the patient, that surgeon left the surgery and left someone else to conduct the surgery because placing the grafts in the receptor sites is part (huge part ) of the surgery.
When he is there, he can be assisted in the course of the surgery. When he is not, he can not be assisted, because he is not there to CONDUCT the surgery. The named authority in the statute quoted ,itself, had to exercise the function described (CONDUCT),which is no delegable duty. The statute is very clear about that when it says "unless that person does any of the following :...conducts surgery...)
The surgeon can delegate part of his duties to assistants. That part consists of all those powers except (and the law is very explicit) "conduct surgery" OR (now this is separate from the term conducts surgery) procedure on another person that punctures the skin or harmfully invades the body.
Power to conduct surgery is exclusively vested in the HT surgeon, without contingency or exceptions, I think, according to the statute.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on the semantic issue of whether it's legal for the surgeon to leave the operating room while the techs are placing grafts. Our reading of the law (as well as that of every HT surgeon I know of) is that it's only illegal for techs to make incisions, administer anesthesia, or make sites for grafts. And you know what? That's perfectly ok! We can certainly disagree on these things and I think our disagreement will lead us to better and more productive laws on these matters. I certainly wish that everyone was as interested in these things as you are.
But I think whether it's legal or not is kind of beside the point here. Your concern is that the surgical techs are either not skilled or caring enough to place the grafts without the detailed supervision of the HT surgeon. I can't disagree more. The girls we have at the office who do this work have done it literally thousands of times. They are extremely skilled at what they do.
On top of that, we keep extremely detailed records of our surgeries. We have spent decades going back over our prior surgeries and double and triple checking our work to find out what practices give the best results for our patients.
And look, I know that it's not exactly surprising to hear me, someone who is employed by NHI, praising them this way. But I have to say that I'm continually impressed with the work that they do.
Most importantly however, is that this is a fairly unregulated surgical field. Because of that, our work is what has to speak for us. Our patients are the ones who, after the surgery, can go on the internet and speak about their experiences with us, and we had better make sure that we've provided them with the best experience possible. When we have patients who are unhappy in any way (which is rare, but it happens), we will bend over backward to make things right for them.
And it makes sense. There isn't some federal agency that can rate our practice or something like that, so we have to make sure that our work speaks for itself.
If you're ever in the LA area, I really wish you could come by our offices for a tour to meet everyone here. We don't get to talk about our work in detail like this with a lot of people, and we'd be more than happy to get into the nitty gritty of our work.
-Mark
Competent is one who finished school to be medical assistant. Competent is one who FIRST medical board certified that he or she is competent. Second, that he is good performer. He can not be anything before he or she does the FIRST. Because:
Unlicensed Surgical technician:
a) can not be addressed as surgical technician
b)Is not surgical technician
But that's the thing, there is no medical certification that one can get to place grafts. Since this is an unregulated medical field, we have to train and certify our own techs. We can't send them to UCLA for a "HT Graft placing degree" or anything of that sort.
So what would you suggest we do?
Thanks.
It makes me feel bad that I engage you on this, and I say that with at most sincerity. Because I believe that you earned your excellent reputation because you are good doc.
I wouldn't have to engage anyone if the majority were like you Dr.Rassman.
I would be one of the poster boys.
But sir, now we are on it and practices of HT will be scrutinized ,by me.
And, even me would not like to be my opponent :D
For the flipping out I give you my word I will not. I do that only when someone else flips out on me first.
To a gentleman like you, I will never do that. Like I said I even feel bad that I have to spill out all this on your site.
Please, there's no need to apologize. You and I (as well as everyone at our practice) is on the same page here. We all want there to be transparency at every level. This conversation that you and I are having is part of it, and I'm glad that we're able to have this discussion.
We both have the same goals here. I feel bad that you've had such a hard time with other forums and other doctors, but I sincerely wish you the best and I hope that you'll continue to be a part of this forum in the future. We always appreciate people like yourself who are educated in the process and wish to help others. Heck, it's the reason we have the forum, the blog, as well as the books that Dr. Rassman writes.
I know that, through our discussions, we can work together to make the industry one of the finest medical fields in the world.
-Mark
Dr. William Rassman
05-29-2009, 10:11 AM
In addition to what I wrote on the blog, I also wanted to stop in here and say a few things as well.
A doctor can not delegate his responsibility to another person (Beautician) unless that person holds a valid medical license in that state. With regard to technicians performing cutting and placing grafts, this is done under supervision of a doctor who may or may not always be next to the technicians. The surgeon must check up on the technicians much of the time and in our case, the technicians have been with me many years so I know their skills very well as I trained them. Many doctors do not have that situation going on and use technicians on an itinerant basis having no quality control in the operating room. Technicians can make or brake a hair transplant and cause success or failure depending on their skills and the process being instituted in the surgery. I know what you may be talking about as I am aware of many people who do the surgery without proper training or credentials. Going through the medical board of the state is the way to come down on these people. I would be happy to have a conversation with you to shed more light on the subject.
William Rassman
Hi John,
Sorry I couldn't get back to you sooner. I've been moving all week and haven't had time, although I've wanted to address the points you brought up. If you want to continue the discussion, I'd be more than happy to.
-Mark
This is my basic misunderstanding about the whole thing. You claim that it's extremely bad form for the surgeon to leave the operating room during surgery, even for a bit. But why is that necessarily bad? If the doctor has trained his staff well, they should be able to place grafts just fine without someone looking over their shoulder at all times. no?
Also, even if the doctor was in the room, do you believe it would even be possible for him to directly superivise every single graft getting placed? You have to remember there are usually two to three girls all placing grafts at the same time. That's a hard process to try and keep track of.
I think our clinic has come to the understanding that we do need to delegate some level of responsibility to the surgical techs. And if they make mistakes, we know about them due to our extremely detailed records that are kept.
So I'm just confused as to what you see the problem to be, aside from a semantic issue in the law?
-Mark
Also, John, I'd like to un-delete your posts as it's difficult for people to understand what's being said here. Unless I'm missing something, I don't think it's necessary for you to delete your posts simply because there wasn't a quick enough response to your questions.
I don’t want to spend any more time on mute audience. A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi…there is no interest for this topic from the patients. And I was writing all this for them.
John, this is a very new forum. We're slowly building up new members every day. Hopefully more of them will start participating in these discussions rather than just watching from the sideline.
However I don't think it's a good idea to simply delete all your posts because you're not getting the kind of immediate reponse that you expect. I've restored all your previous posts as I think they're very important for all potential HT patients to be aware of, and if you're still interested I'd like to keep up this discussion with you.
I do apologize for not getting back with you as soon as possible. I just bought a house and I've been having sporadic access to the internet. I'm getting on it ASAP and this discussion with you is one of the most interesting and relevant one we've had here. I'd like to continue it if you're still interested.
-Mark
Hi Mark :)
Sure, that is cool if you restored the posts.
I did not mean you when I said the topic lacks interest...I was referring to the patients + other surgeons.
Dr.Rassman and Dr.Ron Shapiro ,are first surgeons interested to participate in the discussion and you the first moderator that found this topic interesting :).
Kudos to you...what can I say more.
I deleted the posts because I thought you think that I target you or Dr.Rassman, and I really don't.
Ok, we can continue then :)
You really really really don't have anything to worry about here. If we thought you were being unfair or rude, I'd certainly say so. You've been an absolute gentleman and I think you've got a lot of good points to make. I really can't stress this enough.
-Mark
hairloss1234
06-12-2009, 12:31 AM
aight i got these biotin pills it's for hair,skin & nails that's what it is called. it's biotin/collagen/gelatin. what are those? for what is collagen? it's for collagen support. it says on the pill bottle 3 tablets per seving,i take one in morning one at noon and one at night. these pills have 3mg biotin ,that is 3,000 mcg. now if i take these everyday 3 a day how long will it take to see results because i suffered from bulimia for about 6 months and i am recovering from it. So now i am taking these biotin pills and i was wondering how long will it take before i notice my hair getting thicker? please help i am only 16 i am sure it is not baldness because my hair didn't start to thin until i was intil bulimia for awhile. my hair is thin on top where when it's cut short like 3 inches i guess u can see my scalp. and now my hair gets greasy so i have to wash it everyday. i am sure this is due to bulimia how long will it take for me to notice my hair getting thicker?? thanks
aight i got these biotin pills it's for hair,skin & nails that's what it is called. it's biotin/collagen/gelatin. what are those? for what is collagen? it's for collagen support. it says on the pill bottle 3 tablets per seving,i take one in morning one at noon and one at night. these pills have 3mg biotin ,that is 3,000 mcg. now if i take these everyday 3 a day how long will it take to see results because i suffered from bulimia for about 6 months and i am recovering from it. So now i am taking these biotin pills and i was wondering how long will it take before i notice my hair getting thicker? please help i am only 16 i am sure it is not baldness because my hair didn't start to thin until i was intil bulimia for awhile. my hair is thin on top where when it's cut short like 3 inches i guess u can see my scalp. and now my hair gets greasy so i have to wash it everyday. i am sure this is due to bulimia how long will it take for me to notice my hair getting thicker?? thanks
If you're suffering hair loss due to malnutrition (bulimia) then the only thing you really need to do is eat well. Don't eat junk food, try to cook all your food yourself rather than eating pre-made stuff full of preservatives and other garbage.
Eat a well balanced diet and you should be just fine. Generally it'll take a hair cycle to see it getting thicker. Depending on how far gone your hair is, it can be up to 9 months.
-Mark
hairloss1234
06-12-2009, 10:08 AM
thanks cause when i lost hair it was really thin on top then half way down the sides of both of my sides of my head and my hair gets greasy alot now
hairloss1234
06-12-2009, 10:41 AM
this is some pitures of me after bulimia how long will i notice my hair getting thicker eating right?http://http://i679.photobucket.com/albums/vhttp://http://i679.photobucket.com/albums/vv155/hairloss1234/zak006.jpgv155/hairloss1234/zak005.jpg (http://http://i679.photobucket.com/albums/vv155/hairloss1234/zak005.jpg)http://http://i679.photobucket.com/albums/vv155/hairloss1234/zak001.jpg
hairloss1234
06-12-2009, 10:43 AM
the links didn't wortk try these
http://i679.photobucket.com/albums/vv155/hairloss1234/zak001.jpg
http://i679.photobucket.com/albums/vv155/hairloss1234/zak006.jpg
http://i679.photobucket.com/albums/vv155/hairloss1234/zak005.jpg
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.