Deprecated: The each() function is deprecated. This message will be suppressed on further calls in /home/hairsite/public_html/hair-loss/functions.php on line 155
Hair Loss Forum - what you need to know

March 2017 - Trending Topics in our new forum

 Stem cell hair restoration results - Dr. Cole vs Histogen vs RepliCel.
 Dr. Paul Kemp, CEO of HairClone answers questions about follicle banking.
 RepliCel year 2017 forecast for RCH-01 cell based hair regeneration.
 Dr. Cole to start stem cell hair restoration trial in the US.
 Dr. Umar's 6500 grafts life saving repair procedure for transplant victim.
 FUE donor harvesting, what you must know when choosing a clinic.
 Dr. Koray Erdogan raises the standard in FUE artistry skills.
 Dr. Arvind on how to formulate your own toxic free shampoo.
 Conference & FREE hair restoration consultations; cities worldwide.

This is a READ ONLY forum.
Access our brand new platform at HairSite New Forum to continue the discussion on these topics that you are interested in. All contents and discussions have been transferred to our new forum at
  HairSite New Forum

Log in | User | Register

Thread view  Order  «  
 

Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
15.04.2016, 02:23
 

what you need to know (Hair Transplant)

its good to know how good a doctors results are

it is more important to know how bad his results are

Unfortunately, these facts are buiried, concealed, and protected from disclosure.

you only see the good... the tip of the iceberg, but what lurks beneth is what you need to know

read the disclaimer well in advance

never trust before after pics...in this age of technology, its absurd and potentially deceptive...its like taking before and after oil paintings...even the most basic smart phone takes HD video, so use it

i don't post much cause i am over the bs. I thought things would change.

instead, one form of donor destruction ( strip excision) was replaced by another ( rapid fire punch)

Finally, if in doubt..DON'T

hair loss is not a disease, it is natural, and good women could not care less

but if your wife or girlfriend is PUSHING you to do it,,brothers, I give you one last piece of advice..get a private dectective

Dr Ray Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
06.09.2016, 05:09

@ nthmainneighbor

wylie, ejj, ahb, whoever you are, good job

the industry must be held to account and bound by the chains of ethics,competency honesty and morals. But most importantly, FREE SPEECH...as long as what you say or show is honest, truthful and provable...and you can back it up with indesputable evidence in a court of law, no legal disclaimer should bind you to silence.


On the other hand, if someone posts incorrect, defamatory and unjustified information that cannot be substantiated,or uses the internet and emails for their own means, may the heavy hand of the law decend upon them........hilary excluded

Dr Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
nthmainneighbor

16.08.2016, 13:08

@ Wylie

Truth vs Fiction

Wylie posts comments about Dr. Cole as if he has a Ph.D in the study of Dr. Cole in some alternate reality. I took Dr. Cole's patient photos for several years and have known him since 2003. His camera and photography setup isn't optimal. His patients look better in person than they do in the photographs. Although DC is difficult to work with, he does great work. I was a repair patient before I went to work at his practice. Dr. Cole did a lot more work for me than I paid for. I got very good growth with beard and it looks natural.




nthmainneighbor is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
Wylie

26.06.2016, 18:10

@ Hicks

What you need to know

Originally Posted by Hicks


I've lurked for sometime on these forums and I'm surprised arfy was not hit with a liber suit. He's done nothing but troll the forums and I'm not exactly sure what his end state goal is.


A libel suit? For explaining, in great detail, what his surgical experience was with Dr. Cole? On some forums you are not permitted to reveal these issues in depth, which shows some forums are so wedded to the industry that they want to sweep results like these under the rug, lest they threaten the revenue stream.

He has not libeled anyone, he has presented an extremely well documented case of a HT failure on almost every level, from the planning, to the procedure, to the end result, and to the follow up care, his was an utter failure on each level. To pursue legal action for presenting this would likely backfire on the part of the plaintiff, as it would reveal before the judicial system just why his claims are true.




Wylie is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
Hicks

22.06.2016, 14:00

@ Wylie

What you need to know

Cole has done work on me a few times. I asked if we could lower my hairline a cm and he strongly advised against it but I'm sure if I said I wanted it done he'd do it. My visit to another Dr. In NC did not have any issue lowering the hairline. Soon I'll talk to a 3rd dr. At the end of the day it's YOUR decision. This is the same as it's your decision to have a robot do the work.

I've lurked for sometime on these forums and I'm surprised arfy was not hit with a liber suit. He's done nothing but troll the forums and I'm not exactly sure what his end state goal is. Even though Cole has done an amazing job on me I have no choice but to look at him differently. I hope arfy finds peace or $36k this hair loss can be devastating. My experience with Cole was completely different. Unfortunately life is full of risk.




Hicks is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
Wylie

18.06.2016, 06:00

@ Dr. Cole

What you need to know

You charged that man 36K for a hair transplant consisting of 100% leg hair. Not only was your choice of donor a poor one, but even with a 100% growth rate (impossible, of course) the leg hair is too fine to provide anything other than a dusting effect to his appearance. And you never refunded him a dime, even after you promised him a refund.

You are morally and ethically challenged.




Wylie is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
Dr. Cole

Atlanta, Ga,
15.06.2016, 07:16

@ Wylie

What you need to know

I think it is very important to recognize that without Dr. Woods, FUE would be well behind where it is today. Dr. Woods put it on the map. We have to give him credit for this. Dr. Rassman was very negative about FUE. Sam Lam is not an expert or a resource on FUE. That's why i refused to participate in his book that includes many individuals who know very little about FUE. I consider his book essentially worthless.

As far as Arfy goes, he was a repair case and highly successful on that level. The surgery was done for free. What he is complaining about is body hair, which can be unsatisfactory. I advised him against this procedure, yet he elected to proceed. We can't guarantee body hair and we always advise patients of this. Most patients accept this risk without complaint and sometimes body hair works out very well. We just can't predict it. Arfy knew this and accepted the risk. I wish it had worked well for him, but at least he did not get worse. He got a little better, which is the most you can hope for in many body hair cases. The only consistent source of body hair is the beard, but we were not doing that due to concerns over scarring over 10 years ago. Still, what we offered at the time was cutting edge surgery that no one else in the world offered.


Many sell FUE today yet lack the skill set to do this surgery. Joe Tillman is right on this. People tend to jump on the band wagon of good procedures even when they lack the skills. Still, the potential for a better aesthetic donor area with FUE is much better than with any strip procedure. What is the real danger for the donor area today is the ARTAS. This thing can destroy a donor area in one pass and produce almost zero in results. So, what you have to do is choose a good FUE surgeon.




Dr. Cole is located in ATLANTA, GA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
John P. Cole, MD
1070 Powers Place
Alpharetta, GA 3009
678 566 1011
==
Dr. Cole is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
Wylie

08.06.2016, 23:28

@ Dr. Woods

What you need to know

Marco is likely under a gag order as his case makes it through the rounds of justice, his case was a particularly egregious one that resulted in serious deformation. The necrosis looked severe. I hope he is doing well and ends up being well compensated for his pain and suffering, but no amount of money is worth what this man had to go through.

Hope to hear from him soon. Godspeed Marco. :waving:




Wylie is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
07.06.2016, 14:20

@ JoeTillman

What you need to know

my previous post clarified....but I'm not sure your clear on that...read before typing

How is Marco ?

See you in Saint Louis

Dr Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
07.06.2016, 05:46

@ Dr. Woods

What you need to know

Hi Dr. Woods,

"Every patient signs a consent form...ie they are having an FUE hair transplant as opposed to a leg amputation."

So you do in fact have your patients give signed informed consent. I'm sure you're being sarcastic when you say "as opposed to a leg amputation" and I'm sure you're more thorough than this. This is no different than any other clinic that requires signed informed consent, contrary to what you've been saying all along and most definitely contrary to what some others in this thread have said. Regardless, I consider this settled so thank you for your clarification.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
06.06.2016, 16:12

@ JoeTillman

What you need to know

Every patient signs a consent form...ie they are having an FUE hair transplant as opposed to a leg amputation.

Every patient is screened for health issues .

Every patient is told a full head of hair is not possible,, but good to great density is, depending upon number of procedures

Every patient is told there will be small white dots from follicle removal, and how short they can buzz their hair depends upon how much hair is removed from donor.

Every patient is told ingrown hair and pimples may occur, but will settle and heal.

Every patient is told that 100% of follicles inserted are intact and viable, and CLEARLY MONITORED UNDER HIGH POWER by the patient, friends family etc...I provide a comfy lounge

Every patient is told that the horrible pits, dents, weird angles and cobblestoning will not occur because the techniques , time and effort I use will protect them from this. Infection is incredibly rare, and easily treated by simple antibiotics if it does occur

And all this is on intimate personal well understood VIDEO CONSULTATION TAPE

All is documented, but I do not defend myself from indefensible " industry standard " practices that put patients at obvious risk in order to make a quick easy production line buck.

It's hard work, and it takes it's toll, but it is my life and passion to do this right. I will be here for maybe 5 more years and then I'm out.

I will come to LA and NYC in July for the last time to give lectures. I will organise with HAIRSITE etc and hope to see as many of you as I can

I didn't mean to offend joe...when he put up all that stuff about rassman and others writing me out of history I hope he had a sense of humour when I jokingly discussed my reality tv show , where I will replace jotronic with jilltronic...now how can that be misconstrued as bad taste ?.

Last thought...what happened to Marco ??? The last relevant thing I read was that he invited debate about his situation, but he personally could not comment...interesting. Maybe things have changed, but from being a prolific poster, there is now radio silence.

God forbid, I suggest nothing. What you infer from this is up to you

Dr Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
Wylie

04.06.2016, 15:57

@ JoeTillman

To Joe Tillman

Reading this thread gives me a headache. Joe's defense of the industry shows what a minefield you are entering when you agree to get this risky and unpredictable medical procedure done.

One thing that Dr. Woods has always had working in his favor are his ethics, something that, in a spectacular understatement, are lacking in the HT industry. No matter how severely you are butchered, trying to gain some measure of recompense for your pain and suffering would mean employing a legal team that would have a less than average chance of success.

It surprises me not one bit that Dr. Woods has been attacked by this sleazy industry of barely competent doctors that make outrageous sums of money for moving hair from the back of ones head to the front, and who often do a poor job of making this look natural. Advances in technology are great, if the practitioner is competent. Too often this work is being done by technicians, assistants, and other unqualified employees working at the doctors behest.




Wylie is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
30.05.2016, 22:32

@ ejj

To Joe Tillman

Hi Ejj,

I'm not concerned about your claims that I lied because I stated an opinion about your opinion. You can write more pages if you wish but it is what it is. The ”Stalemate" is your opinion based on Arfy's quote from over a year ago. I believe your opinion of what the situation turned into is inaccurate and self serving whereas I'm simply referencing Arfy's words used seven days ago. It comes down to you accusing me of lying over what appears to be semantics. You being so steadfast about what Arfy said over a year ago compared to what he said seven days ago is like me holding you to your opinion of me nearly one year ago vs. today. Which would be more current and accurate? It's a rhetorical question.

"I have spoken to many hair transplant clients who have been legally silenced by their doctors..."

I think the contradiction here is clear.

"...they are out there and for you to suggest otherwise is disingenuous of you."

You know I suggested no such thing. My consistent message has been that any silencing is not due to any legal allowances granted or acted upon by doctors through informed consent forms because informed consent forms do not make for such allowances. You're trying to change the subject again.

If you think I'm on the "warpath" to attack Dr. Woods then lets break this down to the relevant basic facts.

1. I challenged his position on informed consent. He could have explained his position but he instead called me names.

2. I asked Dr. Woods if he informs his patients about possible side effects and complications that every patient has a right to know. He could have simply said yes or no. He instead talked about starting a reality TV show and said he tells patients about what can happen at other clinics.

3. I asked him what size punches he uses (if he uses punches) in his surgeries. He said he uses a variety of sizes, but gave no further relevant information.

4. I have have not criticized his results. I have not criticized his techniques. I have not criticized his passion. I have asked very simple questions that should be easy to answer.

I'm not here to conduct character assassination but you seem Hellbent on doing just that. You are very emotional, and for that I do apologize, but I don’t see what point there is in trying to bully me with unrelated issues. My points stand and no amount of deflection, evasion or bullying about irrelevant subjects will change this.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
ejj

29.05.2016, 14:55

@ JoeTillman

To Joe Tillman

Joe you assume to much. Here is you`re lie Joe ...... AGAIN FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME !!


Ejj,

I'm not clear how my opinion about a statement you made is a lie. What exactly is the lie? How can an opinion be a lie?

I assume you are referring to your summary of our discussion about Arfy...



When one has to make things up to support their argument they have no more argument to support. Nowhere in Arfy’s 97 post thread did he say there was a stalemate. This is your word, not his, and by providing the definition of the word stalemate does not make it a stalemate. Arfy did say, in this thread that Dr. Cole “reneged”. I’m done discussing this with you because I won’t debate against fantasy.



Joe you lied to mislead. You created a false statement to exit the argument, The false statement was that "I am making things up" I made nothing up I gave an opinion, therefore false ............

You even admit this by saying " this is your word not his" so you knew stalemate was my word, my opinion, and still went on to make a false statement saying I was "making things up to support my argument"

I did no such thing therefore a false statement. A false statement used to mislead is in fact a lie, the false statement and lie was used a a pre cursor by yourself to exit the debate, quote "done discussing this with you as wont debate against fantasy" ...... Thus misleading people as to why you were in fact really leaving the debate .......

So a false statement and a lie by you. YOU LIED TO MISLEAD

please see the above, then the below, as I really can`t be bothered explaining this to you anymore, you were lying and you got caught out .................. simples!

Joe let this go now please as I am almost beginning to feel sorry for you .... its embarrassing .. for yourself

No more rhetoric, word twisting, deflection, put your thesaurus down, and please just stop, then again you could always just man up, and apologise for lying ?

Dictionary.com thesaurus.com




False statement
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2008) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)


A lie is a statement that is known to be untrue and is used to mislead.



lying1
[lahy-ing]
Examples
Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
the telling of lies, or false statements; untruthfulness:
From boyhood, he has never been good at lying.
Synonyms: falsehood, falsity, mendacity, prevarication.
Antonyms: truth, veracity.
adjective
2.
telling or containing lies; deliberately untruthful; deceitful; false:
a lying report.
Synonyms: deceptive, misleading, mendacious, fallacious; sham, counterfeit.
Antonyms: true, candid, actual, correct, accurate, trustworthy.





Moving on (finally)


Wow Joe really is on the warpath with Doctor Woods. More deflection in the guise of humour ;

(the above was a parody of the accusation and is meant in jest. See how silly this is?)

totally predictable really, followed by more attacks on this doctor from Joe `the keyboard Warrior` and `defender of the hair transplant faith`




Again? No, I think once was enough. You can just read the first version. It's still there


So when we take this back to Dr. Woods’s point about not requiring informed consent for his patients, I think that he is being disingenuous with the subject. If he really wanted to have something to brag about he would not only make informed consent with a signature standard practice in his clinic, he would also enter into a formal agreement, in writing, stating that if the patient is unhappy with their results for any reason, they are free to say as such online with no fear of legal retribution from him, whatsoever, and that this agreement supersedes any other forms the patient may have signed in the clinic that acknowledge informed consent. The patient signs, Dr. Woods signs, everyone wins.


Thank you, it is indeed still there .......... in all its glory!



Joe attacks Doctor Woods re PRE CONSENT SURGICAL forms because he does not use them, this is his whole and complete reason for being on this thread.

Everything else he says is pure deflection techniques of which he is highly skilled at, he will not stop keep watching, watch him twist and turn ....

He has gone to great lengths even making numerous telephone calls to Australia, such is his disdain and anger towards this particular doctor.

Doctor Woods does not require his clients to sign this legal document, and never has done so



Joe wishes to `clean up` the industry by introducing a document to `supersede a document that DOES NOT EVEN EXIST in Doctor Woods practice!` At no point has he suggested he would impose this on his own affiliated list of doctors, were there is in fact a document to be superseded .... how hypocritical and telling !



The intention is for the clients being able to discuss anything they wish online ...... something that they are currently entitled to do anyway, and have been able to do so for a long time with Doctor Woods


He then says this is a `win win ` situation? the mind boggles with Joe`s logic from `aliens` `kidnappings` and `murder` to `conspiracies` against him, is the man deranged ?

He does not need anyone to embarrass him as he has accused me of trying to do, he really does a great job of this himself !


Joes whole attack on Doctor Woods in my opinion is shameful really. He will go to any extremes to enforce his point of view on others, even lying as proven above


I would expect the answer from the Australian authority, that Joe is so desperately waiting on, to try to help him get out of the `DO DO` he has created to be very pc and non committal, a little like Joes own answers as to why his affiliation with his own doctors ends.

Plenty have asked, only to have the same old vague reply rolled out by Joe, as he himself in turn wishes not to be sued ...... how ironic !

If I am wrong then I have no problem either admitting so or apologizing, as this is not about me, it is about honesty and transparency, and the wellbeing of others

Joe is to arrogant to even offer an opinion on Marco ( doctor is his former employer) and hides behind nonsense, deflecting any questions, a technique he has often accused others of

and one he himself specialises in.


He has appointed himself as some expert within the industry and assumes his opinions and views are more informed than others

His qualifications are that he is the `most documented hair transplant case out there? How exactly does this qualify him to attack

medical doctors, who have been to medical school and served their time in their profession, or patients with a similar amount or more experience than himself?

He thinks that he himself is some quality control enforcer across this industry, `the hair transplant policeman`, full of self importance ..........

He is just a client, a patient, nothing more nothing less ..... please do not forget this, a bully and liar who believes his own hype


The reality is he thrives on bullying posters with opposing views to his own, he lies when he is caught out much like an `ever so slightly more informed` school yard bully

He refuses to answer questions that he does not like with remarks like ;

The rest of your post is far too long to quote/argue so I'll summarize here


He then scrapes the bottom of the barrel, a last resort by suggesting an agenda or conspiracy against him.

He is annoyed when others join in the thread on a public forum, as if his presence and input has suddenly elevated the entire thread to that of two learned and equal opponents

of equal stature and value, two, and it can only be two, according to Joe. The educated opinions, that of a doctor and his equal joetronic, in his deluded world of equal standing, they are not equal, nowhere near

and then he wonders why Doctor Woods humors himself with his putdowns of Joe .....

He is a `busted flush` in my opinion, best avoided

His strategy now will be try to micro-analyze and challenge both the dictionary and myself, he may even `count` my words to try and worm his way out of being caught out lying, he will twist and turn like a scalded cat and go into mega deflection mode to try to divert from the fact he knowingly made false statements, untruths, which falls within the definition of lying ..........



I hope my input on this thread helps someone make a better decision. I hope they themselves find this thread and become more informed before deciding upon anything

I hope it stops people making the same mistakes I made


I had no internet many years ago. The information is out there however you have to find it and avoid the pitfalls, people who do not tell the truth are the problem


Joe`s second biggest mistake the first being that he is a liar , is that people like me genuinely only post to help others

Joe is totally incapable of understanding this, it surprises him as he naturally assumes an agenda/ conspiracy ?

No conspiracy or agenda Joe, just good old fashioned compassion, and concern for others, MOST IMPORTANTLY GOOD CONSCIENCE

you struggle to understand this, hence why you throw the term agenda or conspiracy around and auto deflect constantly to try and protect your self appointed position and income stream

it speaks volumes about yourself ... `projection` is the term to describe your behavior I believe .... look it up its quite interesting


Joe I would not be able to sleep at night if the garbage that you have spouted on this thread was the reason why someone chose a different doctor over Doctor Woods

much worse, someone in dire need of repair, think about that .... As Australia is severely lacking in skilled doctors.

It is called conscience Joe and this is WHY I HAVE POSTED, THE ONE ONLY REASON !

My conscience would trouble me if I allowed you to get away with the utter rubbish and lies you have posted here

I have spoken to many hair transplant clients who have been legally silenced by their doctors, they are out there and for you to suggest otherwise is disingenuous of you

I am happy to sign off now, as I said earlier I don't want to debate with a liar, and I have exposed Joe as such, and much, ... much more .................

A `busted flush` or in Arfy`s words `debunked` quite fitting really.


EJJ `OUT`




ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
29.05.2016, 01:16

@ ejj

To Joe Tillman

Ejj,

I'm not clear how my opinion about a statement you made is a lie. What exactly is the lie? How can an opinion be a lie?

I assume you are referring to your summary of our discussion about Arfy...

"You said Dr Cole ended it, I said it was a stalemate, Arfy said he would not agree to signing a gag order without a full refund, its simple really Joe in my opinion a stalemate as stated earlier

You said my opinion was fantasy?

You are a liar you have been caught lying and you do not like it."


YOU SIR are the liar and you have BEEN CAUGHT RED HANDED!!!! I did not say Dr. Cole ended the discussions, it was Arfy so YOU ARE A LIAR!!!

(the above was a parody of the accusation and is meant in jest. See how silly this is?)

No, I did not say Dr. Cole ended it. Arfy said Dr. Cole ended it with his comment about how Dr. Cole "reneged" whereas I simply repeated it. You said it was a stalemate and you used Arfy's comments from over a year ago to invalidate Arfy's comments from six days ago. "Stalemate" and "reneged" are not synonymous so that is why I called your description of Arfy's statements a fantasy. Any rational person that subjects themselves to the torture of reading this thread will pick that much out of this.

We still don't know what Dr. Woods tells his patients to inform them of possible complications or side effects and we don't know what size punches he uses.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
ejj

28.05.2016, 07:27

@ JoeTillman

To Joe Tillman

More deflection from Joe as he has been caught lying.

Joe has managed to twist and turn and post a `block` of text whilst avoiding all questions put to him.


He has avoided all logic and reason and tries to discredit me with a lie


For someone who counts words written by a poster, and is as `pedantic` as yourself, and attacks doctors on trivialities, to try to boost ones own sense of self importance, there can be no excuse.

YOU LIED JOE , saying I was making things up `fantasy` as you put it, so you could then in turn, make excuses to leave that argument, one that you were losing.

Whilst hoping to keep your self anointed credibility intact based upon a lie, your lie, if you are lying about this what else are you lying about ?

Here is you`re lie Joe ;

When one has to make things up to support their argument they have no more argument to support. Nowhere in Arfy’s 97 post thread did he say there was a stalemate. This is your word, not his, and by providing the definition of the word stalemate does not make it a stalemate. Arfy did say, in this thread that Dr. Cole “reneged”. I’m done discussing this with you because I won’t debate against fantasy.


Here is the definition of a liar from `merriam-webster online` whom I think you are familiar with ;

Full Definition of liar
: a person who tells lies


Joe has the arrogance to accuse Doctor Woods of not answering questions, you see Joe`s hypocrisy here!

For Joe to come on a public forum and attack a doctor that has shown an incredible amount of integrity, in the way he approaches hair transplantation, and his patients will attest to this going as far back as twenty years

ago shows that Joe himself has very little integrity.

This also speaks volumes about the doctors that choose him to be their voice and for that they should be ashamed


[b]1. I think he voiced his displeasure and was murdered.
2. I think he voiced his displeasure and was kidnapped.
3. I think he voiced his displeasure and he was abducted by aliens.




Joes logic above that shows he is not capable of providing an opinion on the subject but would rather retreat,
deflect, and hope that the Australian authorities can help him out of the hole he as dug himself!


I do not debate with a LIAR!




ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
28.05.2016, 03:09

@ ejj

To Joe Tillman

"You said my opinion was fantasy?

You are a liar you have been caught lying and you do not like it. "


I'm a liar? Are you assuming this or do yo have proof? Wait, assumptions and proof are the same thing, right? Or was it guessing and assumptions were the same? I'm confused. Anyway, why are you asking questions when the answer is in black in white in a previous post?

"Please can you run it by me again how your `document` you would like to impose on Doctor Woods works again?"

Again? No, I think once was enough. You can just read the first version. It's still there.

"Whilst your waiting for the Australians to come back to you, perhaps you

could take the time to answer this guys questions about Doctor Vories?"


"Joe posts his advert, but fails to answer the questions below !"

Why? I don't understand. If you're concerned about me answering someone else's question, on a different forum no less, why don't you just send me a nice email? Wait! I bet it's because you want to embarrass me, right? Brah-vo! I like your use of the exclamation point, too. It gives your question a really nice conspiracy tone to it.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
ejj

28.05.2016, 01:10

@ ejj

To Joe Tillman

Joe,

Whilst your waiting for the Australians to come back to you, perhaps you

could take the time to answer this guys questions about Doctor Vories?

I note you managed to post an advertisement two days ago for an afiliated doctor but failed to answer the following questions.

You better be quick it`s already dropped onto the second page of obscurity,its been left unanswered for a while,2 weeks in fact, mentor him Joe, reply to the guy`s question

`to neograft or not to neograft` that is the question?

Why exactly did your affiliation end? I am expecting a vague, politically correct non- answer, from the hair transplant mentor/liar


05-25-2016 08:25 PM #1
JoeTillman

Doctor Representative
Join Date
Jul 2014
Location
Canada
Posts
392
Dr. Lupanzula, One on One Meetings, London, July 30th


Dr. Lupanzula of Medikemos Hair Restoration in Brussels will be in London on Saturday, July 30th for one on one meetings. You'll get to meet Dr. Lupanzula in person and learn more about his approach to follicular unit extraction.
To reserve your spot contact info@medikemosclinic.com.
Joe Tillman
The original Hair Transplant Mentor

Currently Affiliated With-
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula
- Dr. Jerry Cooley
- Dr. Bernard Arocha
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical Tricopigmentation
Reply With Quote
+ Reply to Thread
Quick Navigation Hair Transplant: Start Your Own Topic Top



Joe posts his advert, but fails to answer the questions below !


Originally Posted by boldat25
Joe did anything ever become of this?
No.
Joe Tillman

The original Hair Transplant Mentor

Currently Affiliated With-
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula
- Dr. Jerry Cooley
- Dr. Bernard Arocha
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical Tricopigmentation
Reply With Quote
05-15-2016 07:46 PM #10
smrcalidiv

Junior Member
Join Date
Sep 2015
Posts
5

Quote Was something wrong, or it just didn't work out?
Reply With





ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
ejj

28.05.2016, 00:55
(edited by ejj, 28.05.2016, 01:20)

@ JoeTillman

To Joe Tillman

But that's the crux. It is not my opinion, it was Arfy's, as stated in this thread and you are putting up your opinion against Arfy's opinion regarding Arfy's own experience. That doesn't make sense.


My opinion is my opinion, I am not putting it up against anyone other than yours

It was not up to Arfy. Done.

You said Dr Cole ended it, I said it was a stalemate, Arfy said he would not agree to signing a gag order without a full refund, its simple really Joe in my opinion a stalemate as stated earlier

You said my opinion was fantasy?

You are a liar you have been caught lying and you do not like it.


Please can you run it by me again how your `document` you would like to impose on Doctor Woods works again?

He has no disclaimers clients can say what they want?

Joe wants to introduce a legal document on Doctor Woods (but none of his afiliated doctors) that enable them to go online and say whatever they want, pretty much like they can do already and have been able to for the last twenty years

Here is the definition of a liar from `merriam-webster online` whom I think you are familiar with ;

Full Definition of liar
: a person who tells lies





ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
28.05.2016, 00:36

@ ejj

To Joe Tillman

"I never said that Arfy used this term. I said this, as it is my opinion.

I will not allow you, to try to ram yours down my throat!"


But that's the crux. It is not my opinion, it was Arfy's, as stated in this thread and you are putting up your opinion against Arfy's opinion regarding Arfy's own experience. That doesn't make sense.

"Please explain your comments ` I am behind a keyboard` what does this mean?"


It means I don't know you personally so you shouldn't be taking anything I say as being personal but you appear to be taking it personally because of your smart and sarcastic remarks toward me.

"You are done `discussing this with me`

Well you would be because you are wrong, and that is what internet bullies do when they are proven wrong, they spit the dummy out of the pram AND LEAVE"


Ok. Thank you for your opinion.

On the BALANCE OF PROBABILITIES I am assuming Marcos PRE CONSENT SURGICAL FORM gagged him from speaking anymore, if you think any different then
YOU also are assuming, as YOU YOURSELF do not know either, YOU yourself have NO PROOF to the contrary! Therefore please explain why my assumptions are irresponsible but yours are not?


I agree, you are assuming but I am not as I've presented evidence to support my position and the law regarding informed consent is the same in Canada as it is in the US. What is also not an assumption, and is a fact, is that informed consent forms do not act as gag orders which is what the point of this discussion has been from the start. The email I presented directly, specifically and completely invalidates the claim that informed consent forms are, by default, "gag orders". This is not deflection, it is the very core of the discussion.

The rest of your post is far too long to quote/argue so I'll summarize here. Informed consent is the law. Period. That is the case in the US, Canada, the EU, the UK as well as Australia. It is designed for one purpose; to allow patients to make decisions about their own bodies based on the idea that it is a basic human right to know what may be the rewards of the decision to have surgery as well as what may be the consequences of the decision to have surgery. The idea, that by signing a form acknowledging informed consent, somehow gives a doctor automatic rights to sue a patient for expressing their opinion about their own experience and results is ludicrous, whether it be for hair transplant surgery or having a tooth removed by a dentist. An informed consent form cannot supersede the 1st Amendment rights to free speech by a patient (in the US). What happens AFTER a procedure comes up short is another story altogether and is completely unrelated to the subject. You brought it up early in this thread and you are trying to bring it up now but as I said from the beginning, they are two separate issues and are unrelated.

Dr. Woods has made a claim. I challenged the claim and I've done so with facts that are verified by examples I've provided. Dr. Woods instead talked about reality television, mocked me, and called me names. In other words, he avoided the questions. You decided to get involved and you want to present your opinions as facts and your assumptions as proof and talk about subject matter that is unrelated to the topic at hand. You too wish to be personal and snarky about the issue but I'm not going to do the same in kind. It serves no constructive purpose and distracts from the points. And to be clear on this, I'm not expecting you to agree with me on any of these points and I'm not expecting you to concede anything. You absolutely are entitled to your opinion, as am I. I've presented multiple examples and references to support my position which is all I can really do.

What the readers should take away from this is that if they do have surgery the informed consent form will not take away any of their rights and it will not remove any barriers to putting them in legal trouble. In the unlikely event that there is some sort of pre-surgical non-disclosure form that specifically states you cannot talk about your upcoming surgery or results then put the form down and walk out. The first is for your safety and is required by law before surgery can commence. The second is not required and is not for your safety.

More to come as I follow the trail started by the email I received today from the Australian Medical Council.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
ejj

27.05.2016, 10:12

@ JoeTillman

To Joe Tillman

Joe please show me were I SAID Arfy stated it was a stalemate?

I never said that Arfy used this term. I said this, as it is my opinion.

I will not allow you, to try to ram yours down my throat!

It is obvious to most (excluding you) that this was the FINAL outcome.

Please explain your comments ' I am behind a keyboard' what does this mean?

You are done 'discussing this with me'

Well you would be because you are wrong, and that is what internet bullies do when they are proven wrong, they spit the dummy out of the pram AND LEAVE

Based on your logic? Any one of the three options below.

1. I think he voiced his displeasure and was murdered.
2. I think he voiced his displeasure and was kidnapped.
3. I think he voiced his displeasure and he was abducted by aliens.




Your logic covers all three scenarios but it doesn't make any one of them more likely. You don't know, you are assuming, so don't confuse that with proof. It's irresponsible.


Earlier today I called an attorney I know that works at a fairly large multi-national firm. I asked him the following question.

"Does signing an informed consent form before hair transplant surgery give automatic rights for the hair transplant doctor to sue the patient if they speak negatively of their experience or of their results in any online format?"

His answer? "Not even close." I then asked him to send me an email with his explanation so I could share it here. The personal information is removed for obvious reasons. If any of you doubt this then call up a lawyer and ask for yourself.



Very very silly here Joe.

I am using the balance of probabilities of which none of your examples are either realistic or likely.

You are employing deflection, something you often accuse others of doing.

Please stop as you are embarrassing yourself.


On the BALANCE OF PROBABILITIES I am assuming Marcos PRE CONSENT SURGICAL FORM gagged him from speaking anymore, if you think any different then

YOU also are assuming, as YOU YOURSELF do not know either, YOU yourself have NO PROOF to the contrary! Therefore please explain why my assumptions are irresponsible but yours are not?

However you are entitled to an opinion and it would be nice to hear it, NOT YOUR ATTORNEYS, YOURS! .............

Let me remind you of events in chronological order;

Marco books a date for surgery (at your ex employer) He has consulted earlier and all is ok, all explained, all is tickerty boo .....

The morning of the procedure he signs the PRE SURGICAL CONSENT FORM all explained in great detail all is tickerty boo ....

He has a procedure goes home updates on several forums stating all is tickerty boo .......

This continues for a few months then his scalp 'dies it is necrosis' all suddenly is 'not' tickerty boo ....

He consults with his doctor and disappears after providing weekly updates ..... DISAPPEARED!!! aliens no? murdered no? kidnapped no? ...... Gagged ... could be ???

So contrary to what you say Joe it is in fact reasonable to assume ON THE BALANCE OF PROBABILITIES

that the PRE SURGICAL CONSENT gagged him. LOGIC DICTATES THIS ......

What in your opinion, and feel free to ask your attorney friend for help if you are struggling with this one do YOU think happened?

As it looks to me that the PRE SURGICAL CONSENT FORM gagged him which would support Doctor Woods claims and not yours!

Any argument that a patient is publically precluded from discussing his or her experience in a truthful way as a result of receiving informed consent is simply wrong

If the above is true then why do different doctors have different levels of informed consent, ranging from two pages to thirty?

I believe the above to be vague, Doctors can add whatever they wish to a consent form, I have read and signed ten, six completely different to the others.

We must remember though Joe is attacking Doctor Woods on a technicality.

If the above is true then it suggests other methods are employed to silence the client, what are they?

Are these even discussed at the consultation stage?

Is it the industry standard to sue patients who talk either with the pre surgical consent form or with something else?

I care not for your assault on Doctor Woods over a technicality, as we all know what he meant really, Doctors silence patients Joe fact !

With what, and when, does not matter. They bargain with the client to buy their silence, a disgusting and unethical way of conducting their business, and protecting their online reputation.


So when we take this back to Dr. Woods's point about not requiring informed consent for his patients, I think that he is being disingenuous with the subject. If he really wanted to have something to brag about he would not only make informed consent with a signature standard practice in his clinic, he would also enter into a formal agreement, in writing, stating that if the patient is unhappy with their results for any reason, they are free to say as such online with no fear of legal retribution from him, whatsoever, and that this agreement supersedes any other forms the patient may have signed in the clinic that acknowledge informed consent. The patient signs, Dr. Woods signs, everyone wins.



Wow just wow! Not only does Doctor Woods provide monitors to enable the client to watch the extractions and count them, not only do they not need to sign any legal's and Joe wants more! ..............

He really does not like this guy .............

Joe no one would win.......

It is clear to me Doctor Woods does not need to hide behind legal's and attorneys, unlike many other doctors.

Doctors Woods clients are ALREADY FREE to say as much online without any legal fear of retribution from their doctor.

Please explain how this would benefit Doctor Woods and his clients?

Perhaps it may be a good idea to ask your OWN recommended doctors to adopt this practice ...... Just a thought as it may be beneficial to prospective clients

Were your plan is flawed big time Joe, is that the unhappy client may be offered a 'free procedure' or a 'refund' or 'part refund', and for them to

receive this, the doctor 'may' introduce more legal's during the negotiations, effectively silencing the client to protect his online

reputation, thus making your 'superseded disclaimer' 'null and void' ..............

highly unethical




ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
27.05.2016, 02:31

@ ejj

To Joe Tillman

EJJ,

Arfy and his Doctor reached a stalemate.

1 Below is the definition of a stalemate.

2 You said it was Doctor Coles decision to end negotiations, it was not, it was a stalemate.

Arfy refused to sign `gagging orders` unless he
gota full refund, his Doctor did not offer a full refund, only part = Stalemate.



No offence Joe however you are wrong, and you do not like being wrong.

You have `no problem with me but I am only behind a keyboard` what does this mean ? Do you expect me to post from

somewhere else ??





(1) stalematenoun [C or U]
uk /ˈsteɪl.meɪt/ us /ˈsteɪl.meɪt/
› a situation in which neither group involved in an argument can win or get an advantage and no action can be taken:
Tomorrow's meeting between the two leaders is expected to break a diplomatic stalemate that has lasted for ten years.




( 2 ) phone calls with an offer of a $3,000 settlement (less than 10% refund) and I would be required to sign non-disclosure documents. I decline the offer. I’m not willing to sign a non-disclosure contract
(requiring me to be silent about my terrible experience with Dr. Cole) for anything less than a full refund.


When one has to make things up to support their argument they have no more argument to support. Nowhere in Arfy’s 97 post thread did he say there was a stalemate. This is your word, not his, and by providing the definition of the word stalemate does not make it a stalemate. Arfy did say, in this thread that Dr. Cole “reneged”. I’m done discussing this with you because I won’t debate against fantasy.

"Moving on;

You have provided no proof. The link you shared points to speculation and assumption; nothing more.

I think at this time I should remind you, again, that the discussion is about whether or not PRE-SURGICAL consent forms act as legal constraints that prevent patients from discussing their procedures if they have a bad outcome. It is about whether or not consent forms give doctors free reign to sue patients for defamation for the simple act of expressing their dissatisfaction with their procedure in an online format.

I disagree. I think this is proof that this client has in fact been gagged by a simple PRE SURGICAL consent form.

I think the PRE SURGICAL consent form states all surgery carries a risk and that is what was signed, to that effect.

I think he voiced his displeasure and was warned to `cease and desist` otherwise he `may` be sued for defamation as Doctor Woods states


It is not an assumption I think it is quite clear, he has ONLY signed a `PRE SURGICAL consent form, before the procedure as legally required and this signed form has IN FACT acted as a gagging order as Doctor Woods stated in his first post

What else could it be ?"


Based on your logic? Any one of the three options below.

1. I think he voiced his displeasure and was murdered.
2. I think he voiced his displeasure and was kidnapped.
3. I think he voiced his displeasure and he was abducted by aliens.

Your logic covers all three scenarios but it doesn’t make any one of them more likely. You don’t know, you are assuming, so don’t confuse that with proof. It’s irresponsible.

Earlier today I called an attorney I know that works at a fairly large multi-national firm. I asked him the following question.

“Does signing an informed consent form before hair transplant surgery give automatic rights for the hair transplant doctor to sue the patient if they speak negatively of their experience or of their results in any online format?”

His answer? “Not even close.” I then asked him to send me an email with his explanation so I could share it here. The personal information is removed for obvious reasons. If any of you doubt this then call up a lawyer and ask for yourself.

[image]

"Any argument that a patient is publically precluded from discussing his or her experience in a truthful way as a result of receiving informed consent is simply wrong"

What everyone reading this needs to understand is that informed consent was born out of the Nuremberg trials after WWII. During the trials the issue of human experimentation was reviewed which gave rise to the Nuremberg Code which in turn gave us informed consent. The American Medical Association acknowledges this…

“Informed Consent
The legal doctrine of informed consent can be traced back to the post-World War II Nuremburg Code, a set of guidelines drafted to ensure that unethical “medical” experiments were no longer carried out in the name of science. The doctrine is founded on the general principle that a person of the age of majority and sound mind has a legal right to determine what may be done to his or her body [1]. Thus, when a patient is subjected to a procedure he or she has not agreed to, the physician performing that procedure is violating the patient’s legal rights and may be subject to medical malpractice litigation, removal from preferred-provider lists, or the loss of hospital privileges.”

Informed consent is designed to protect you, the patient, not the doctor. In fact, if I were not given a form to state that the procedure was explained to me then I'd walk out the door as it puts the patient at risk if the doctor does something that was not agreed upon. It would be his word against mine. That is why it exists in the first place.

So when we take this back to Dr. Woods’s point about not requiring informed consent for his patients, I think that he is being disingenuous with the subject. If he really wanted to have something to brag about he would not only make informed consent with a signature standard practice in his clinic, he would also enter into a formal agreement, in writing, stating that if the patient is unhappy with their results for any reason, they are free to say as such online with no fear of legal retribution from him, whatsoever, and that this agreement supersedes any other forms the patient may have signed in the clinic that acknowledge informed consent. The patient signs, Dr. Woods signs, everyone wins.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
ejj

26.05.2016, 08:41

@ JoeTillman

To Joe Tillman

Joe,

Arfy and his Doctor reached a stalemate.

1 Below is the definition of a stalemate.

2 You said it was Doctor Coles decision to end negotiations, it was not, it was a stalemate.

Arfy refused to sign `gagging orders` unless he
gota full refund, his Doctor did not offer a full refund, only part = Stalemate.



No offence Joe however you are wrong, and you do not like being wrong.

You have `no problem with me but I am only behind a keyboard` what does this mean ? Do you expect me to post from

somewhere else ??





(1) stalematenoun [C or U]
uk /ˈsteɪl.meɪt/ us /ˈsteɪl.meɪt/
› a situation in which neither group involved in an argument can win or get an advantage and no action can be taken:
Tomorrow's meeting between the two leaders is expected to break a diplomatic stalemate that has lasted for ten years.




( 2 ) phone calls with an offer of a $3,000 settlement (less than 10% refund) and I would be required to sign non-disclosure documents. I decline the offer. I’m not willing to sign a non-disclosure contract
(requiring me to be silent about my terrible experience with Dr. Cole) for anything less than a full refund.


Moving on;

You have provided no proof. The link you shared points to speculation and assumption; nothing more.

I think at this time I should remind you, again, that the discussion is about whether or not PRE-SURGICAL consent forms act as legal constraints that prevent patients from discussing their procedures if they have a bad outcome. It is about whether or not consent forms give doctors free reign to sue patients for defamation for the simple act of expressing their dissatisfaction with their procedure in an online format.

I disagree. I think this is proof that this client has in fact been gagged by a simple PRE SURGICAL consent form.

I think the PRE SURGICAL consent form states all surgery carries a risk and that is what was signed, to that effect.

I think he voiced his displeasure and was warned to `cease and desist` otherwise he `may` be sued for defamation as Doctor Woods states


It is not an assumption I think it is quite clear, he has ONLY signed a `PRE SURGICAL consent form, before the procedure as legally required and this signed form has IN FACT acted as a gagging order as Doctor Woods stated in his first post

What else could it be ?




ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
26.05.2016, 00:46

@ ejj

To Joe Tillman

Ejj,

I'm not trying to be condescending much less insulting but you keep reaching further and further away from the facts to defend your position. I'm quoting Arfy from THIS thread while you're pulling up slices of his posts from over a year ago which only tell part of the story to begin with. Again, for the umpteenth time, what Arfy felt he could or could not do is not relevant to the issue. What is relevant are the claims by DR. WOODS HIMSELF that consent forms give doctors the legal right to sue their patients for the simple act of saying they are unhappy.

"You asked for proof of a simple consent form gagging a client and here it is

http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry.html?id=97886&da=ASC&page=0&category=all&order=last_answer&descasc=DESC&be_page=1

This guy would appear to have been gagged by a informed consent form
He took the trouble to post and update then disappeared?"


You have provided no proof. The link you shared points to speculation and assumption; nothing more.

I think at this time I should remind you, again, that the discussion is about whether or not PRE-SURGICAL consent forms act as legal constraints that prevent patients from discussing their procedures if they have a bad outcome. It is about whether or not consent forms give doctors free reign to sue patients for defamation for the simple act of expressing their dissatisfaction with their procedure in an online format. For the third (or fourth?) time you are trying to talk about agreements that may or may not take place AFTER a bad result is realized with the intent of establishing a refund or other rectifying course of action.

THESE ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ISSUES and are UNRELATED.

Please don't be offended by my posts, Ejj. You are behind a keyboard. I have no problem with you because I do not know you but when we are discussing the points I bring up and my challenge to Dr. Wood's statements I wish to remain on topic and not veer into debates based on carefully selected snippets of posts that are grossly out of context and made over one year ago. I'm simply waiting to hear back from the Australian Medical Council about what is required for FUE surgery and informed consent. Once I have that answer then I'm done with this thread. Also, we still don't know what Dr. Woods tells his patients with regard to potential complications from his surgery (which is in fact required) and we still don't know what size punches he uses. In fact, if a patient asks Dr. Woods about his punch sizes, he has to tell them as it is considered to be part of informed consent. Ask any other doctor these questions, and they'll tell you immediately.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
ejj

25.05.2016, 20:40

@ JoeTillman

To Joe Tillman

Joe,

I honestly do not know which part of the below you do not understand
a direct quote from Arfy ;

April 2008: Johnnie McCarthan returned my phone calls with an offer of a $3,000 settlement (less than 10% refund) and I would be required to sign non-disclosure documents. I decline the offer. I’m not willing to sign a non-disclosure contract (requiring me to be silent about my terrible experience with Dr. Cole) for anything less than a full refund.

Thank you for your explanation of the term `renege` however I am familiar with the term, so your condescending and sarcastic reply is uncalled for

However not unexpected as this is how you try to elevate yourself and your position above others .... epic fail !



You asked for proof of a simple consent form gagging a client and here it is

http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/board_entry.html?id=97886&da=ASC&page=0&category=all&order=last_answer&descasc=DESC&be_page=1

This guy would appear to have been gagged by a informed consent form
He took the trouble to post and update then dissapeared?

Regards




ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
25.05.2016, 20:31

@ ejj

To Joe Tillman

Ejj,

I'm not sure what part of "Dr. Cole promised a refund and then reneged." you don't understand. The below definition is from Merriam-Webster online.

Renege - to go back on a promise or commitment

What Arfy refused or did not refuse is irrelevant. This was part of his negotiation. Such is the nature of every negotiation in any aspect of life. Offers are made, offers are refused, you move on to the next round in an attempt to find common ground and agreement. Dr. Cole ended the negotiation entirely ( per Arfy's quote above ) and closed the door to further discussion. It is already in the record so why are you debating this? Good for Arfy for fighting for what he feels he deserves but it has nothing to do with what Dr. Woods was talking about. What does have to do with this is that the consent forms that Arfy signed did not prevent him from speaking up.

"But it did prevent him from speaking for 8 years. You are arguing over a technicality. I do not believe you have read every informed consent form, from every Doctor, neither have I. Therefore Its reasonable to assume the thirty page ones from LA doctors are more legally binding than the 2 page ones from Europe each carry different levels of protection."

I'm not debating over a technicality. It is the basis for this entire discussion. Dr. Woods specifically stated, and has so for years, that by signing an informed consent form that doctors are automatically given the right, and they exercise this right, to sue an unhappy patient for going online and saying they are unhappy.

These are his quotes in this very thread...

"So the patient will be located and told...". Hey buddy..you were well aware things could go horribly wrong...you signed those 15 pages of apple like clauses and went into this with full disclosure and knowledge...and unfortunately for you, things went seriously wrong......very very sad...but don't blame me or damage my reputation or practice by your unfortunate story or I am legally entitled to sue for defamation and financial loss to my business...."

"So sure, feel free to divulge, but expect a legal response with defamation and financial compensation demands ......so"

"In other words, the patient went in with full knowledge and disclosure that a disaster may occur..so dont blame the doctor.
And if you do, he is in his legal right to sue you for defamation and damages to reputation/income etc."

"There may not be a specific gag order, but if you talk, they sue...so, you don't talk, hence..gag"


This is, and has been from the start, the focus of my challenge to Dr. Woods and is what I have disputed with direct evidence to the contrary so please stop trying to derail the point of this thread with more irrelevant information.

"The state of New South Wales does not currently require informed consent from hair transplant physicians however most of Doctor Woods associates use them whilst he does not, why do they use them if they do not have to?"


Incorrect. Informed consent is a requirement in every state of Australia.

"Review of State and Territory Legislation
Informed consent to medical treatment

10.48 ‘Informed consent’ refers to consent to medical treatment and the requirement to warn of material risk prior to treatment. As part of their duty of care, health professionals must provide such information as is necessary for the patient to give consent to treatment, including information on all material risks of the proposed treatment."


The six other hair transplant clinics in NSW (as listed at ISHRS.org) provide informed consent because it is part of the basics of medical ethics, as is the case in most parts of the world, and they are required to on the state and federal level. In many medical jurisdictions, if a doctor performs surgery on a (mentally) competent adult without informing them of potential complications or side effects then the doctor is not only contradicting basic medical ethics and breaking the law, he is open to criminal charges of battery.

I think what you are specifically referring to is SIGNED informed consent. THIS Is what is in question. Australian federal law does require a signature for invasive surgeries and it is left up to each state to determine this requirement and what constitutes "invasive". In Western Australia, signed forms acknowledging informed consent are required for any procedure requiring local, regional or general anaesthesia.


"It is Department of Health policy that consent for treatment is obtained in writing, using an approved consent form for all surgical operations, and for all medical anesthetic, radiology or oncology procedures.

Written consent must also be obtained for:

surgical, medical, radiology, oncology and endoscopy treatments/procedures requiring:
general
regional
local anaesthesia"


FUE would qualify as requiring signed informed consent forms because it is both surgical and medical and it also requires local anaesthesia.

With regards to the state that Dr. Woods operates in, the specifics are more vague and is what I'm waiting to hear back on from the Australian Medical Council. I think the question may be one of invasiveness because FUE may not be considered invasive enough and it may also be one of pain management requirements.

But let's not kid ourselves here. When Dr. Woods is talking about how he doesn't require legal forms compared to his colleagues, he's not talking about the six other clinics in NSW. He's talking about North America, Europe and everywhere else.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
ejj

24.05.2016, 21:48

@ JoeTillman

To Joe Tillman

Joe you said " it was not up to arfy" it very clearly was up to arfy, he refused to accept the reduced, sum his choice.

Interesting point about its not how a patient feels ...

Yes it is Joe, exactly that, people are scared to talk, that`s what the informed consent form does, thats why people take time to tell their story

They feel frightened to do so ` gagged, silenced by default` no matter of the
legal rhetoric, its how many feel a point lost on many industry employees

What Arfy "felt comfortable" with is irrelevant. It's what he is bound to, or not bound to, by the disclaimer he said he signed that IS relevant and what he signed did not prevent him from speaking


But it did prevent him from speaking for 8 years. You are arguing over a technicality. I do not believe you have read every informed consent form, from every Doctor, neither have I. Therefore Its reasonable to assume the thirty page ones from LA doctors are more legally binding than the 2 page ones from Europe each carry different levels of protection.



The state of New South Wales does not currently require informed consent from hair transplant physicians however most of Doctor Woods associates use them whilst he does not, why do they use them if they do not have to ?




ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
24.05.2016, 21:07

@ ejj

To Joe Tillman

"Quote by Arfy…

"Dr Cole promised a refund and reneged."

It was not up to Arfy. Done.

Yes it was up to Arfy, if he had agreed to accept the lower offer, he chose not to .... Done.

Again, my point was that your case, your documentation, proves that consent forms in fact do NOT act as gag orders. If they did then you would not be speaking as freely as you are due to these alleged legal constraints disguised as consent forms. I hope you understand now.


How long was it again before Arfy felt comfortable sharing his story with the public, 12 - 18 months ? The consent form did a pretty good job of gagging him for this time period ...... You cant have it both ways he was gagged by a consent form for a period of time "

EJJ,

Those were Arfy's words. Not mine. HE said that the offer was "reneged". If you wish to debate Arfy on this then by all means, go ahead but it has no bearing on the facts. Arfy was not silenced by the consent form he signed. And yes, done.

What Arfy "felt comfortable" with is irrelevant. It's what he is bound to, or not bound to, by the disclaimer he said he signed that IS relevant and what he signed did not prevent him from speaking. It was his comfort level, as you just stated and not the form itself. Remember, Dr. Woods is talking about legal forms, not comfort forms.

Do you understand what a consent form is? Consent forms are put in place as requirements by the various medical organizations (AMA, NHS, etc.) to make sure patients can make a decision based on all of the relevant information that they are legally entitled to have. In the UK, the NHS says the following about consent.

"Consent to treatment is the principle that a person must give their permission before they receive any type of medical treatment or examination. This must be done on the basis of a preliminary explanation by a clinician.

Consent is required from a patient regardless of the intervention – from a physical examination to organ donation.

The principle of consent is an important part of medical ethics and the international human rights law."


It's a big deal when something is referred to as a human right but this is what informed consent is about. By saying you have been informed about a procedure does not give a doctor automatic rights to take a patient to court for saying they are unhappy. It's beyond ludicrous to say so and informing patients about what can happen at other clinics is not considered to be informed consent. At best it is uninformed consent.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
ejj

24.05.2016, 19:37
(edited by ejj, 24.05.2016, 20:17)

@ JoeTillman

To Joe Tillman

one.Quote by Arfy…

"Dr Cole promised a refund and reneged."

It was not up to Arfy. Done


Yes it was up to Arfy, if he had agreed to accept the lower offer, he chose not to .... Done.



Again, my point was that your case, your documentation, proves that consent forms in fact do NOT act as gag orders. If they did then you would not be speaking as freely as you are due to these alleged legal constraints disguised as consent forms. I hope you understand now


How long was it again before Arfy felt comfortable sharing his story with the public?

Procedure 2005, complained 2007 went public 2015 ! The consent form did a pretty good job of gagging him for this time period 8 years !!! ...... You cant have it both ways he was gagged by a consent form for a period of time




ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
24.05.2016, 01:54

@ arfy

To Joe Tillman

Arfy,

You said…

"You make it sound like I've been unfair to Dr Cole."

With all due respect, I did no such thing. You believe this only because you would expect me to. This is called confirmation bias where you expect something to be, therefore it appears to be, even when it is not. I gave no judgement about your actions. I merely made an observation about the documentation. The only opinion I made was that it is unprecedented in scale. Your initial post on HLT was 11,886 words along with multiple images. That was just one post. On this website your thread has 97 posts and you made 40 of them. Name one patient on any of the forums for the past 20 years that has come close to the scope of documentation you’ve made regarding your negative experience. For the record, I told Dr. Cole twice that he should refund your money and I said it to his face.

Again, my point was that your case, your documentation, proves that consent forms in fact do NOT act as gag orders. If they did then you would not be speaking as freely as you are due to these alleged legal constraints disguised as consent forms. I hope you understand now.

Ejj,

You said...

"I assume arfy took no such deal…"

You assume too much.

Quote by Arfy…

"Dr Cole promised a refund and reneged."

It was not up to Arfy. Done.

Regardless it is the fact that he signed a disclaimer before surgery that is the point and said disclaimer did not act as a gag order, as Dr. Wood’s says it does.

You however are speaking about something entirely different.

"1 sign pre consent all ok no problem

2 sign pre consent, problem = offers of part refund, free work but the legals
get deeper and more specific, releasing the physician from all responsibility"


There is no such thing as a “pre-consent” form.

To clarify, what Dr. Woods and I are discussing is his decade long claim that by gaining a signature from the patient that acknowledges that they understand the potential problems that can arise from surgery, the doctor is not only protected from a malpractice suit but it also allows the doctor to sue the patient for defamation if they speak ill of their experience. THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE. ANYWHERE.

What you are talking about is what can happen AFTER surgery when the result is not up to expectations or if problems occur. In fact, you know that your topic has to do with after surgery, and is unrelated, because you said as much in your first post in this thread.

"I would like to talk about the disclaimers, general releases that are used afterwards when a procedure has gone wrong and a client is left with nowere to go other than request a refund, this is much more interesting to me."

You even made the word "afterwards" in bold to emphasize your understanding of the situation. Here is your original post showing as much...

http://www.hairsite.com/hair-loss/forum_entry-id-132607-page-0-category-2-order-last_answer.html

If you do however have proof of how a simple informed consent form, which is required in most medical jurisdictions, acts as and HAS BEEN USED AS a gag order successfully against a patient in the form of a defamation suit then please do present it. If not then nothing you have said thus far is relevant to the point.

The ridiculousness of this thread acts as a testimony to how easy it can be to use the power of distraction to avoid answering questions.

1. I provided evidence that signed informed consent forms are required by most medical jurisdictions.

2. I’ve demonstrated how signed informed consent forms do not act as gag orders and they do not automatically allow a doctor to sue his patient for defamation.

3. I asked if Dr. Woods provides all the known side effects that can manifest due to FUE surgery.

4. I’ve asked him the size(s) of his punches.

Yet thirty-eight posts later we still do not know the punch sizes and we know that instead of telling his patients about potential side effects of his surgery he instead tells them of the side effects of bad surgery performed somewhere else. We also know that he’s up to date on current reality television programming.

My questions would be answered, and quickly, had they been asked of any other clinic. Why is it so unconscionable that I ask the same of Dr. Woods?




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
arfy

Homepage

22.05.2016, 08:12

@ JoeTillman

To Joe Tillman

It has not been a "blitzkrieg of negative press" about Dr Cole. I have posted in 3 forums so far about my experience. Everything I said was true, and I took care to document the proof, whenever documentation was possible. There is a good deal of negative information available about Dr Cole available online for those who know how look. My case is just one example of Dr Cole's issues.

Quote:
"With the blitzkrieg of negative press you have given Dr. Cole over the past year, the shock and awe campaign the likes of which have literally never been seen on any forum to the degree that you have carried it"

Absurd hyperbole. Ridiculous. You make it sound like I've been unfair to Dr Cole. My family is out $36,000, with virtually zero results. Dr Cole promised a refund and reneged. All I did was recount the facts and back story. I was also quite careful to explain that I didn't claim that nobody gets good results from Dr Cole, and that he does have satisfied patients too.

You are a paid representative of several doctors. You're not just some ordinary guy posting online. You don't see anything unethical about a paid doctor's representative criticizing competing doctors? I certainly do. And in this thread, over what? Nothing! Your objections were superficial. And now you've been debunked.




arfy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

---
Dr. Cole Botched My Corrective Surgery

http://www.angelfire.com/indie/hairtransplant/


Post reply
ejj

21.05.2016, 10:41

@ JoeTillman

TL;DR

Arfy's case directly contradicts your claims, Dr. Woods. Arfy signed disclaimers before his surgery, as he states in his own words, yet he is still able to talk and I imagine he has talked more than any patient in history. If ever there was a case where a doctor wanted to file a lawsuit against a patient I would imagine it would be this one. According to everything you've said in this thread and others for the past decade there should be nothing to stop this from happening yet here is Arfy, one year later, sans legal muzzle talking about his case. How do you explain this? The evidence is conclusive. You're wrong.


Joe

Information I have to hand supports Doctor Woods claims. And I signed the pre consent form also. You`re wrong the releases quite clearly say `agree to not disparage online, or our legal rep will seek to recover reasonable costs`

It is a two step process, most including yourself are not familiar with

1 sign pre consent all ok no problem

2 sign pre consent, problem = offers of part refund, free work but the legals
get deeper and more specific, releasing the physician from all responsibility

I assume arfy took no such deal, and I have nothing but total respect for him and his courage to do what he has done.
He is also telling the truth, but telling the truth has him $36,000 out of pocket, thats a bitter truth pill to swallow for a no show! His doctor tried to deal, he made offers, part offers, but arfy stood firm, if arfy had accepted payment then he would not be on this thread or forum now ...

Most take the money Joe it is used as a `bargaining tool to buy silence` .....totally unethical, the doctors pay to keep their reputation intact the pre consent is a pre cursor, the first layer of protection if you like to unethical doctors

2 pages you should be ok as required by state and insurance comps

10 - 20 pages head for the door !




ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
21.05.2016, 03:34

@ Dr. Woods

TL;DR

Originally Posted by Dr. Woods

Interesting

Joe doesn't refer to or seem to care about Arfy's ordeal

He is more concerned that Arfy' is talking about it

Dr Woods


Dr. Woods,

What I may or may not be concerned about is irrelevant as it has nothing to do with our discussion. This is not the place to discuss Arfy's issues as it has it's own separate and quite lengthy thread. All you have done throughout this thread is inject distractions and irrelevant points. It's all meaningless.

Arfy's case directly contradicts your claims, Dr. Woods. Arfy signed disclaimers before his surgery, as he states in his own words, yet he is still able to talk and I imagine he has talked more than any patient in history. If ever there was a case where a doctor wanted to file a lawsuit against a patient I would imagine it would be this one. According to everything you've said in this thread and others for the past decade there should be nothing to stop this from happening yet here is Arfy, one year later, sans legal muzzle talking about his case. How do you explain this? The evidence is conclusive. You're wrong.

Regarding what you do and do not tell patients before surgery, you have not demonstrated that you explain the problems that can happen with surgery REGARDLESS of whether or not the surgery is "bad".

"I tell patients to beware. FUE may seem less traumatic, but done incorrectly, it will be worse than bad strip....cobblestoning, nasty pits, dents, weird hair angles, severe scalp shock, and extreme global donor decimation ...all done in a few hours.
The doctors and tech teams doing this may be in a bazaar in turkey, or a flash glitzy address in LA, florida, New York etc....makes no difference.

I warn patients of the possible negative consequences of bad surgery. Doctors protect themselves from this. I do not. Because I will not do that to a fellow man"


I have not been asking if you inform patients of the possible complications from surgery in New York, LA or Florida. I have been asking you if you inform your patients of the potential complications that can arise from ANY surgery that YOU perform on them in your clinic. Assuming they are in your office before surgery it is difficult to see how discussing what can happen with other clinics has any bearing on your patients. You seem to have trouble understanding the difference.

I'm done here until I hear back from the Australia Board of Medicine regarding the requirements for what constitutes "informed consent" when dealing with FUE. If you don't have anything to say specifically regarding your points about disclaimers, to support your position, then everything else is irrelevant and useless. Finally, I have not made personal slants toward you in our discussion so please refrain from doing so with me. It is unbecoming of a doctor.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
21.05.2016, 02:38

@ JoeTillman

TL;DR

Interesting

Joe doesn't refer to or seem to care about Arfy's ordeal

He is more concerned that Arfy' is talking about it

Dr Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
19.05.2016, 23:51
(edited by JoeTillman, 20.05.2016, 00:24)

@ arfy

TL;DR

Hi Arfy,

I think your case is the ideal case to reference with regards to Dr. Woods's point about "gag orders". That is what I've been talking about and the rest of your statements/accusations/or whatever are not only inaccurate and wrong, they're irrelevant.

Here are his words just from THIS thread where he talks about how informed consent forms, which are required, are actually gag orders and by merely talking about a bad experience a doctor can sue. These aren't my words, they are his.

"So the patient will be located and told...". Hey buddy..you were well aware things could go horribly wrong...you signed those 15 pages of apple like clauses and went into this with full disclosure and knowledge...and unfortunately for you, things went seriously wrong......very very sad...but don't blame me or damage my reputation or practice by your unfortunate story or I am legally entitled to sue for defamation and financial loss to my business...."

"So sure, feel free to divulge, but expect a legal response with defamation and financial compensation demands ......so"

"In other words, the patient went in with full knowledge and disclosure that a disaster may occur..so dont blame the doctor.
And if you do, he is in his legal right to sue you for defamation and damages to reputation/income etc."

"There may not be a specific gag order, but if you talk, they sue...so, you don't talk, hence..gag"


So I will ask you, Arfy. With the blitzkrieg of negative press you have given Dr. Cole over the past year, the shock and awe campaign the likes of which have literally never been seen on any forum to the degree that you have carried it, tell us about the lawsuit that Dr. Cole filed to "silence" you. Tell us about the army of hair transplant attorneys that lined up, salivating at the chance to take you to court because of a violation to the disclaimer you signed.

I'll tell you where it is. It is nowhere because it DOES.NOT.EXIST. If it did, if he were in a position to sue you because of what you signed, you would not be taking part in this thread. Period.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
arfy

Homepage

19.05.2016, 09:35

@ Dr. Woods

TL;DR

If you read Dr Woods' opening posts, they are completely reasonable, and do not warrant Joe Tillman's nit-picking sentence-by-sentence criticisms.

It's ironic to see that Joe Tillman is a professional consultant for less-experienced FUE doctors now, since he was one of the most vocal skeptics about FUE when it first emerged internationally 15 years ago, or so. Joe Tillman's past track record with FUE really kind of sucks. He has discouraged lots of guys from getting FUE in favor of strip. He encouraged lots of guys to get transplants in general. He is on the wrong side of history with FUE. Joe Tillman should not be posting in this thread at all.

Dr Cole makes patients fill out a form saying that graft yields might be lower than ___% (different levels of graft failure depending on when the surgery occurred). Everybody knows that this clause is a "get out of jail free card" in a court of law. At least Cole provides the legal disclaimer in advance - many clinics only show it to you on the day of surgery (which should be illegal). If I'm not mistaken, some of the doctors now have a clause that the patient cannot publicly complain. Dr Woods has no legal disclaimer at all.

Over the past 15 years, I've seen a couple of patients who said they were disappointed with Dr Woods yield, but these patients only received a limited number of grafts. I am not aware of any Woods patients who had virtual TOTAL GRAFT FAILURE after paying for megasession graft counts, as I experienced with Dr Cole. I am not aware of any patients who experienced serious shock fallout, which is a real risk with strip surgeries. I have not seen any Woods patients with massive scarring, as patients of Dr Brandy, Puig and Mangubat have. Dr Woods does not have the same kind of "screwups" that some other doctors do, as Joe Tillman is implying in this thread. For Joe Tillman to suggest there is some kind of comparison there is not just misleading, it's highly offensive.

In my opinion, while not perfect, Dr Woods is one of the very few ethical doctors in the entire field, and over time he has been proven right about key issues with FUE. These were some of Dr Woods' predictions about the future of FUE, which were dismissed or called "self-serving" by industry insiders like Joe Tillman at the time (roughly 2001, 2002):

- Unethical doctors will apply "hair mill" salesmanship and conveyor-belt surgical techniques to FUE in an effort to maximize profits, while carelessly exposing the patients to risk of failure.

- Inexperienced FUE doctors will attempt too-large sessions which will have lousy percentages of graft survival, and will inadvertently damage surrounding hairs in the donor area.

- In many cases the new FUE patients will be unaware of the damage for years - the wasted donor area and loss of viable surrounding hair.


Unfortunately, I have been a victim of all of these predictions. The root problem with hair transplants goes far beyond a comparison of techniques like "FUE vs strip". It's a highly corrupt and immoral industry which at it's core is based around exploiting the insecurity of self-conscious guys with too much money and not enough common sense.




arfy is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

---
Dr. Cole Botched My Corrective Surgery

http://www.angelfire.com/indie/hairtransplant/


Post reply
Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
18.05.2016, 00:24

@ JoeTillman

what you need to know

I tell patients to beware. FUE may seem less traumatic, but done incorrectly, it will be worse than bad strip....cobblestoning, nasty pits, dents, weird hair angles, severe scalp shock, and extreme global donor decimation ...all done in a few hours.
The doctors and tech teams doing this may be in a bazaar in turkey, or a flash glitzy address in LA, florida, New York etc....makes no difference.

I warn patients of the possible negative consequences of bad surgery. Doctors protect themselves from this. I do not. Because I will not do that to a fellow man

If patients proceed with me, I check for potential cardiac problems, keloid, etc..they Fill in appropriate forms, blood tests are done, and thorough video is taken explaining what is and is not possible, and what to be aware of....ie dont run a marathon the next day

But I do NOT cover myself with the ironclad disclaimers protecting other doctors in their safe production line clinics ....

Done correctly, it is much longer, skilful , involved , and less profitable...but the patient is safe

Hence, no disclaimer required.

When I began promoting the " declaration of patient rights" in 2002 " , despite seminars in the USA in 2002 to 2005, costing me personally over 500k, we failed to get air time...blocked and black balled at every turn...the boys joe is aware of have some major influence.

If it wasn't for HAIRSITE, no one would have heard of it

So yes, all care and due diligence is taken, but I do not, and will not cover myself for the consequences of deliberate and conscious bad production line surgery. I don't do that.
Joe knows doctors that do...and relentlessly and obsessively needs to justify what they are doing

Mans gotta make a living somehow

Dr Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
17.05.2016, 18:00

@ Dr. Woods

what you need to know

"Done correctly , serious or significant scarring will not, and has never occurred in 25 years.

When the nasty scarring and side effects occur, there is a good reason for it."


I'm not asking if it has happened. I'm asking if you inform your patients that scarring, as well as other side effects, CAN happen. There is a big difference between the two and you are required by the laws of your own country and state to inform your patients of these potential side effects.

"Can be avoided, but way too much work , its too skillful and too costly...how can the clinics operate without unskilled cheap labour...."

You're not the only doctor in the world doing the procedure yourself but regardless, your point is moot and has no bearing on the issue.

"Trust me, if I were doing what they were all doing, patients would be signing a telephone book of disclaimers as well..but I am not, never have, and never will subject a patient to that kind of "äcceptable risk " you are so passionately defending."

I am not defending anything. I am dismantling your claim that "every" doctor that is not you requires "legal forms" before surgery so they can sue their patients if they talk about being unhappy. I am dismantling the notion that your refusal to require legal forms before surgery is an indicator of quality. The reason why you don't require legal forms before surgery is because NSW does not see FUE as surgery thus you are not required by your regulatory body to obtain signed informed consent. Most doctors in North America and the EU do. This is a fact but you are using it to your marketing advantage as if it is a qualifier of the ethical differences between you and the rest of the world.

Dr. Woods, come October 1 of this year you will have no choice but to have "waivers" or disclaimers" as you call it. Your country calls it verified informed consent and very soon it will be a requirement to document informed consent with a signature.

"If I were to knowingly expose a patient to a significant risk, I would be covering my butt. But I am not."

By using local anaesthesia you are exposing your patients to potential side effects. By piercing the skin up to 600 times a day to a depth of 3mm to 6mm you are exposing them to potential side effects. By transplanting follicular units from the donor zone to the recipient zone you are exposing your patients to potential side effects. Many side effects are beyond your control so I hope for your sake you are setting your ego aside and informing them of this.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
17.05.2016, 06:48

@ Dr. Woods

what you need to know

, "My doctor screwed up and I'm unhappy with my results. He is not board certified and his diploma is a fake." It would be up to the doctor to present proof that he is board certified and he does have a real diploma and then he would be free to sue his patient for defamation.



So according to Joe, its perfectly OK for a doctor to seriously screw you up, as long as he is board certified and has a real diploma..a license to maim, and get away absolutely free, and sue the victim for complaining.....is there something I am missing here??...

Dr Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
17.05.2016, 05:48

@ JoeTillman

what you need to know

Done correctly , serious or significant scarring will not, and has never occurred in 25 years.

When the nasty scarring and side effects occur, there is a good reason for it .

Can be avoided, but way too much work , its too skillful and too costly...how can the clinics operate without unskilled cheap labour....

Trust me, if I were doing what they were all doing, patients would be signing a telephone book of disclaimers as well..but I am not, never have, and never will subject a patient to that kind of "äcceptable risk " you are so passionately defending.

If I were to knowingly expose a patient to a significant risk, I would be covering my butt. But I am not.

And every doctor in Australia has to renew registration every few years. They send out the paper work several months in advance.

As far as the other stuff your trying to dig for, I am planning it for season 2 of Hair Wars"..

Dr Ray Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
17.05.2016, 03:38

@ ObamamanIsStevieDee

what you need to know

OiSD,

Independent does not mean unbiased. The link you referenced talks about "private" advocates. I'll never take money from patients for what I do. I'm not pushing hair-growth schemes. I'm independent in that I am not beholden to any single doctor and if I disagree with any of the doctors that want to be a part of what I do (it's happened a few times already) the ability to provide for my family is not put in jeopardy if/when I decide to walk (and I have walked). I don't have to deal with childish temper tantrums, over bearing egos or any of the other things that go on when one is strapped to a desk at one clinic. I get to choose whom I want to work with based on a set of parameters that allow me to sleep at night.

Dr. Woods,

"There is no getting through to jotronic...waste of time"

You can get through to me by speaking to me like an adult. All I'm doing is pointing out some facts and asking you some point blank questions of which the answers should be quite easy to provide. Everything up to now has been evasion and distraction, which are things which you accuse clinics of doing with their videos and photos. Was Dr Pethebridge right? Ironic.

Here is why doctors cannot sue patients for speaking about their procedures.

1. It is a patient's right to say they had a surgery with their doctor, no different than is their right to say they went shopping at Macy's. It is also a patient's right to state their degree of satisfaction, or lack thereof, about their treatment or their final outcome. If someone signs a piece of paper acknowledging they have been informed that one of several problems may occur before they have surgery, stating online that such a problem did in fact occur does not warrant or justify legal action by a doctor. The patient is simply stating as fact that they had a procedure and they are not happy about the outcome that they were told may happen. Without embellishing the issue, a patient has no legal boundaries when discussing their own personal experience. It is the embellishments and assumptions stated as fact that can get people into trouble. It is also stating something as being their opinion when it is an opinion about something which they have no reasonable expectations of knowing enough about to form an opinion. One example would be if a patient said "It is my opinion that my doctor did not use hypothermosol as a holding solution." There is no way for the patient to know one way or the other unless they have factual proof. This does not qualify as an opinion.

2. You may be referring to bullying litigation as a way to intimidate a patient. There is this idea that suits can be filed by the rich and powerful doctor just to keep the poor patient tied up with paperwork and legal bills even when they know they don't really have a case. This can't happen in North America, and I think in the EU as well, due to anti-SLAPP legislation. A "SLAPP" suit (strategic lawsuit against public participation) is a suit designed for intimidation and for silence. In most jurisdictions if one feels they are being unnecessarily targeted by a SLAPP suit they need not worry about long drawn out and expensive court battles. Anti-SLAPP motions usually bypass the normal court system and go straight to a judge that looks at all the evidence and makes a decision. If the evidence shows that the suit is frivolous and intended to intimidate only, the judge will not only throw out the suit they will also award attorney fees and potential damages to the patient that the doctor will have to pay. I have experience with SLAPP issues and while the details I've presented here may not be exact (depending on jurisdiction) it is, in general, factually accurate.

A doctor can sue a patient if that patient speaks about the procedure in a manner that knowingly uses false information or states assumed information as being factual when it is not. This is defamation and it would be a valid basis for a suit if the patient went online and said, "My doctor screwed up and I'm unhappy with my results. He is not board certified and his diploma is a fake." It would be up to the doctor to present proof that he is board certified and he does have a real diploma and then he would be free to sue his patient for defamation.

In summary, a doctor CANNOT sue his patient for going online and saying he's unhappy just because the patient signed a required informed consent form before surgery. CAN'T. HAPPEN. PERIOD. No way, no how.

I just got off the phone with the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency. Nice people. I was asking them about informed consent and they did confirm that it is an absolute across the board in your country. You must obtain informed consent from your patients. This would require you to inform them of the possible complications that can arise from your surgery such as the various forms of scarring that can occur. These include pitting, cobble stoning and ridging. Patients can also experience poor to no growth. Having surgery of any kind can result in the formation of keloid scarring not to mention the activation of previously undiagnosed lichen planopilaris. Anesthesia used for pain reduction can lead to "pins and needles" sensations and even long term numbness. The use of adrenaline injections can have cardiac related side effects.

These are not side effects unique to YOUR surgery. These are side effects that can occur with any FUE surgery. Are you informing your patients about this?

What size punch(es) are you using? Any other clinic in the world would be happy to disclose this but you don't. Why do you knot disclose this? I know that in August of 2007 you made a modification to the "mechanized portion" of your FUE procedure (that's what the report says). Do you still employ a mechanized device for your FUE procedure or have you switched back to full manual, if you ever used full manual to begin with?

I'm only asking these questions because you claim transparency and you've been making false statements about the use of legal forms for years. Instead of answering my initial questions you decide to insult me and play games so now I want to get to the bottom of this. I'm waiting for more in depth information from the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency regarding informed consent. I'm also waiting to hear back about practice scope and specialities, among other things.

By the way, your license is set to expire in September, 2016 so don't forget to renew.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
16.05.2016, 01:43

@ ObamamanIsStevieDee

what you need to know

There is no getting through to jotronic...waste of time,

There may not be a specific gag order, but if you talk, they sue...so, you don't talk, hence..gag

Jotronic refuses to accept the blatant legal reality which has shielded the worst butchers for decades like a protected species

Keep it up jotronic and I am writing you out of the reality tv show and replacing you with a hot chick..I will call her jilltronic...and no, don't ask how I thought of the name

And regarding the tv show..how is it coming along ??

Do I need to call the Donald to get things happening ???

Dr Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
ObamamanIsStevieDee

15.05.2016, 06:45

@ JoeTillman

what you need to know

Originally Posted by JoeTillman


Don't confuse "affiliated" with "represent". I represent no one. I work for no one.


http://aphadvocates.org/resources/articles/berthoudjuly5.pdf

"Unlike professionals who are termed as patient advocates on staff at a hospital or insurance company, an independent and
private patient advocate is not affiliated with or paid by a potential conflict of interest organization. A private patient advocate is typically paid directly by the individual
or the family to help find and decide on the best options to prevent a crisis and/or manage a care situation with their client’s interest as the priority."

---------------------------------------------------------------

You can say you're selective with your affiliate partners but saying you represent no one is just bullpoo - they pay you ;-)

Remove the words "independent patient advocate" from your website or alternatively take your fee directly from the patient and you're golden; I don't why you can't take any constructive criticism.




ObamamanIsStevieDee is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
15.05.2016, 03:56

@ JoeTillman

what you need to know

Yeah joe..for someone not representing someone you sure as hell seem to be representing someone

Ejj, send it to me. I will take the heat

Now, there must be at least, I dunno, 5 people watching this thread, so in the tradition of the Donald, let's make an apprentice type thing

Contestants, your job is to get a meeting with the head of all syndicated reality tv shows

Gerry zuckerfistinbutenberger.....his friends call him ger..but don't do that

It may be a stretch and there may be pain...but if you fail..YOUR FIRED...I'm not sure from what, haven't thought that through

but , if you succeed, you get to be assistant assistant director with all the ham sandwiches and vodka you need to get through the day...I know, it sounds too good to be true

Ok guys, your time starts ...NOW

Dr Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
15.05.2016, 03:31

@ Dr. Woods

what you need to know

"No Legal Disclaimer Required To our knowledge we are the only Hair Transplantation Clinic in the world where legal disclaimers and waivers are not required. This is your guarantee of our ethical approach, confidence in our procedure and commitment that we are providing the safest and most perfect Hair Transplantation method possible."

http://woodstechnique.com.au/hair-transplantation/[/b]

How does not being required to collect legal disclaimers by your medical authorities correlate to having the most perfect hair transplant possible?

What is the range of punch sized you use to score follicular units for your patients?

Do you discuss possible complications of FUE surgery with each patient before you begin surgery?




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
15.05.2016, 03:24

@ ejj

what you need to know

EJJ,

How well one is protected or not is irrelevant. Dr. Woods claimed that every other clinic has pre-surgical gag orders. I refuted it. He then admitted that this is not the case. He's been saying this however for at least eight years and people have been believing it.


He then said pre-surgical consent forms are in essence acting as gag orders. This is incorrect. Now his own state will require informed consent in a matter of a few months and at that time the Turkish clinics can say THEY are the only ones that don't require consent forms.


Don't confuse "affiliated" with "represent". I represent no one. I work for no one. Therefore, I'm not concerned with what you copy and paste because it doesn't affect me one way or the other. You are obviously chomping at the bit to post something since this is the second taunt you've thrown so have at it. The question is, if your copy/paste is so damning why haven't you posted it before now?




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
Dr. Woods

Homepage E-mail

Australia,
15.05.2016, 02:13

@ ejj

what you need to know

Go for it ejj

And rassman took credit for work legitamitely done by Dr Bob Limmer

I have one question....where the hell is our reality tv show ...NBC, CNN, ABC..anyone ?..

This affects 50 % of the population and needs air...joe and I can play good cop bad cop in turns

Move over kardasians....new show in town

Dr Woods




Dr. Woods is located in AUSTRALIA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
website: www.woodstechnique.com.au
email: drwoods@thewoodstechnique.com
Inventor & Pioneer: FUE & BHT Hair Transplant
===
Dr. Ray Woods is a sponsor of HairSite. Rankings on HairSite are based on # of successful patient results posted and not affected by sponsorship. Any clinic or doctor can post their patient results in HairSite forum and earn a point for every successful result posted. It is not the mandate of HairSite to track failed or unsuccessful results, readers are advised to do their own research carefully before making a decision about hair transplant and not rely solely on our ranking system.


Post reply
ejj

15.05.2016, 01:45

@ JoeTillman

what you need to know

Joe
Do you really want to go down this road? The doctors you represent
are the most legally protected that I have come across in 25 years

Do you want me to disclose more about the releases they use to silence
clients ? Its all here at a cut and a paste




ejj is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
14.05.2016, 23:36

@ JoeTillman

what you need to know

From my most recent research it appears that written informed consent has not been a requirement, at least on the federal level, in Australia. In NSW, the state where Dr. Woods is established, it is also not a requirement.

April 20, 2011 NSW Policy Directive PDF File

"Consent
Patients must give consent before receiving treatment.
In most cases this will be verbal consent. It is NSW Health
policy that written consent is given for some procedures,
such as surgery."


Also interesting. I believe this would be language that would allow FUE to be considered a minor procedure...

NSW Policies PDF File

"Signed consent forms are not required for minor procedures performed under local anesthesia, eg insertion of IV cannulae, urethral catheterisation, or suture of minor lacerations. However, the criteria for obtaining a valid consent must still be met, the procedure must still be explained to the patient and it is advisable for a written note to be made in the patient’s medical records to this effect."

We have a situation where Dr. Woods has been extolling his virtuous decision to not require "legal forms" aka "informed consent forms" while in North America this has not even been an option. I suspect it is the same situation in the EU but I'd rather not spend more time researching this today.

Further, in the US (and Canada) just because one has signed an informed consent form does not mean that they are out of luck if the procedure does not turn out as expected. I found several references to "written consent" not being enough to protect a doctor. Keep that in mind, guys.

Regardless, it appears that as of October 1, 2016, Dr. Woods will have no choice but to obtain informed consent for even minor surgery as new laws go into effect thereby rendering his unfair ( not to mention undisclosed) so called advantage null and void.

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/156989/20160510/australian-medical-board-issues-new-guidelines-cosmetic-surgery-industry.htm

"Patients will benefit particularly from the improved informed consent provisions. Cosmetic medicine and surgery are almost always self-referred, and there is a greater need for the stronger informed consent guidelines announced today by the Medical Board of Australia," said Dr. Ron Bezic, college president."

While signed informed consent is not required in NSW it is strongly encouraged and is considered part of the basic medical ethic.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
14.05.2016, 21:58

@ JoeTillman

what you need to know

When referring to the United States, from Clinical Review of Surgery

[image]


"The legal requirement is not the same from state to state but it is the generally accepted rule as laid out in the above image. The legal standards are further met by obtaining this consent with a discussion of the pertinent information, establishing WRITTEN CONSENT stating the patient's agreement to the procedure offered, and again this consent in a manner free from coercion."




From HealthCareFindLaw.com


"When medical care or treatment is provided, medical practitioners are required in many situations to obtain a patient's "informed consent." But what does this term mean? What can happen if proper informed consent is not given?

A Definition

Although the specific definition of informed consent may vary from state to state, it basically means that a physician (or other medical provider) must tell a patient all of the potential benefits, risks, and alternatives involved in any surgical procedure, medical procedure, or other course of treatment, and must obtain the patient's written consent to proceed. The concept is based on the principle that a physician has a duty to disclose information to the patient so he or she can make a reasonable decision regarding treatment."


This should settle the issue of acknowledged informed consent and the law in the United States.




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply
JoeTillman

Vancouver, BC Canada,
14.05.2016, 18:42

@ Lucky

what you need to know

Fortunately I was mistaken regarding the history of FUE in Dr. Lam's book. You are in fact mentioned but it was hardly befitting, really. You are somewhat of a footnote which is unfortunate.

[image]

The overall issue of requiring informed consent is difficult to confirm online. I could swear I located a reference to minor procedures not needing such consent in NSW Australia but I can no longer find it. I'll add this to my questions.

What is the legal requirement regarding informed consent in NSW?

What size punch do you use for your FUE procedure? To adapt to the follicles you are working with, what is the range of punch sizes you have at your disposal and regularly use?

Do you inform your patients of possible complications or risks from having FUE surgery? This can include various forms of scarring such as pitting/ridging/cobble stoning, etc. There can also be post-operative issues that develop as a result of surgery such as keloid formation as well as LPP.

Do you mention potential cardiac complications as a result from adrenaline injections? Do you point out potential side effects from local anesthesia? These can include dizziness, headaches, blurred vision, twitching muscles and even continued numbness or "pins and needles".




JoeTillman is located in VANCOUVER, BC CANADA and he is available to meet: YES
email hairsite@aol.com to arrange a meeting.

---
Joe Tillman
aka "Jotronic"
Hair Transplant Mentor™

My Affiliations:
- Dr. Jerry Cooley, Charlotte NC USA
- Dr. Emorane Lupanzula, Brussels Belgium
- Dr. Bernard Arocha, Houston Texas
- Dr. Ron Shapiro
- Beauty Medical, Milan Italy


Post reply

Thread view  Order  «  
 
120100 Postings in 12546 Threads, 6032 registered users
Hair Loss Forum | Admin contact

 
This is a READ ONLY forum.
Access our brand new platform at HairSite New Forum to continue the discussion on these topics. All contents and discussions have been transferred to
HairSite New Forum

Disclosure: This is an advertising site for our paid sponsors & advertisers. The contents, videos & photos on HairSite are provided by paid sponsors and are not endorsed by HairSite in any way. The recommendations, results, and representations made by our sponsors/advertisers do not reflect the opinions of HairSite. This site is to showcase successful hair restoration results only. It is not the mandate of this site to engage in the discussion of failed, unsuccessful procedures, lawsuits, litigations or complaint cases; comments of such nature, including external links, may be removed from the forum. Notify hairsite@aol.com any false, defamatory, misleading or inappropriate user generated contents for immediate removal from the forum. Also read Terms of Use & Privacy Statement |  HairSite advertisers: ASMED | Dr. Bhatti | Dr. Bisanga | Dr. Cole | Dr. Hakan Doganay | Dr.Epstein | Dr. Jones | Dr. Halder | Hasson & Wong | Dr. Klein | Dr. Madhu | Dr. Mwamba | Dr. Donald Ng| Dr. Poswal | Dr. Rahal | Dr. Razack | Dr. Reddy | Dr. Umar | Dr. Woods | DHI Global | HDC Clinic | |Lasercomb | Reviva Clinic | Ziering Medical|