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 -

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

To Joe Tillman (Hair Transplant)

posted by JoeTillman, Vancouver, BC Canada, 27.05.2016, 02:31


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.


"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 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

Complete thread:

120100 Postings in 12546 Threads, 6039 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 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|