Author Topic: Dr. Schendel?  (Read 6244 times)

molestrip

  • Private
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: 40
Re: Dr. Schendel?
« Reply #15 on: December 14, 2015, 09:27:36 AM »
It's an irritant.  It can chip, crumble and cause a ton of swelling.

@PloskoPlus doesn't reply to my messages anymore (:P) but he's absolutely right here. I hate to speak against a surgeon online, especially one that I like otherwise, but these HA augmentations are begging for trouble long term and deliver mediocre results short term. 50 years is a really, really long time to live with a foreign body people. Look around you and tell me what physical things you see that don't show substantial degredation over that time period. Removal is not an option, increasingly so as surgery becomes too risky with age. No one can predict what 30+ years is going to look like with this stuff in your face. Even that new CT-bone product is probably wrought with problems, think what happens when the underlying facial bone changes shape but the augmentation cannot because of the unchanging scaffold. What's nice about standard implants, which cause problems too, is that they can be easily removed, though usually the aesthetic result is even worse afterwards. This is the main reason that most surgeons don't do this crap. Technology hasn't advanced beyond s**tty options yet. Personally, I believe we'll get there but we need another 10-15 years. When it comes to your health, you don't want anything less than 95%+ success rates, 99%+ even for an elective procedure like this.

Schrödingers Jaw

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
  • Karma: 6
Re: Dr. Schendel?
« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2015, 11:54:12 AM »
@PloskoPlus doesn't reply to my messages anymore (:P) but he's absolutely right here. I hate to speak against a surgeon online, especially one that I like otherwise, but these HA augmentations are begging for trouble long term and deliver mediocre results short term. 50 years is a really, really long time to live with a foreign body people. Look around you and tell me what physical things you see that don't show substantial degredation over that time period. Removal is not an option, increasingly so as surgery becomes too risky with age. No one can predict what 30+ years is going to look like with this stuff in your face. Even that new CT-bone product is probably wrought with problems, think what happens when the underlying facial bone changes shape but the augmentation cannot because of the unchanging scaffold. What's nice about standard implants, which cause problems too, is that they can be easily removed, though usually the aesthetic result is even worse afterwards. This is the main reason that most surgeons don't do this crap. Technology hasn't advanced beyond s**tty options yet. Personally, I believe we'll get there but we need another 10-15 years. When it comes to your health, you don't want anything less than 95%+ success rates, 99%+ even for an elective procedure like this.

What are the alternatives though, apart from doing nothing?

ForeverDet

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
  • Karma: 9
Re: Dr. Schendel?
« Reply #17 on: December 16, 2015, 08:00:09 PM »
It's a I'd opt out of HA paste augmentations.

It's an irritant.  It can chip, crumble and cause a ton of swelling.

+1

I will almost always recommend against it and I had HA paste applied successfully to give me prominent cheekbones.

But the results seem inconsistent, the costs of it can be stupid high and the abnormal swelling it sometimes causes is just f**ked up.

Now I'm 2.5 years post-op and my cheeks look good, no degradation. But I still have residual swelling one one side and still can remember the horror of my basketball sized face post-op and the months of anxiety/shame/frustration until my face looked normal enough not for ppl to know something was off.

molestrip

  • Private
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Karma: 40
Re: Dr. Schendel?
« Reply #18 on: December 17, 2015, 10:24:03 AM »
What are the alternatives though, apart from doing nothing?

Doing nothing is a fine alternative. Surgery changes. Wait until a product or procedure hits the market that you're comfortable with. Anything less than high 90s satisfaction rates isn't worth the risk. You want it to be routine and well studied. And, ideally, you want to wait until you can cover up some of the losses of aging. That's right, whatever you get is only going to look good for some time, as facial bones recede with age. Best case, you need more augmentation. Worst case, that s**t separates from the bone and turns into a mess of shards you can never get rid of. Good as new is hard to come by.

The main reason to consider jaw surgery is that the alternatives are often worse and overall it can improve your health despite the problems it may cause. As it happens, it is a well studied problem with high success rates now. Other than surgical risks biggest issues are with fixation problems, easily addressed later, and thinning of bone.