• Welcome to Hair loss Experiences hair loss forum.

    Free impartial hair loss advice, hair transplant advice, hair loss medications and hair loss news.
    You can contact us directly at [email protected] if you experience any problems.

Why should USA have monopoly - request for debate

Dr Arvind

Dr Arvind

Valued member
A request to debate (why USA should have monopoly).

Those who are not aware, ISHRS (so called International society) was and to a large extent remains dominated by USA and is often USA centric.

To say that it is because advances were all made in USA is a fallacy.
They were not.

1. How many of the total meetings of conference were held in USA? Were any ever held in China, Japan, India etc.?

2. Why should any member of ishrs have to face the humilation of having to settle for ABHRS (american board of hair restoration) when it should have been IBHRS (International board of hair restoration).

3. How many of the key positions in the governing board or council are non Caucasian?

The fault may also lie with the members of other nations that they never asserted their rights and indeed the old boy's club was thus formed with important posts doing a merry go round among select people.

There are more questions and there is need to change this status quo to make it more equitable. Looking forward to any constructive suggestions on how these societies can be made more just and equitable (right now its like the security council of UN with veto rights in hand of a select few for infinity).

Regards,
Dr. A
 
Arnold6

Arnold6

member
I`m not sure what skin color has to do with anything unless you are classing them a racist organization. I looked on their website, the list they produce shows 2 international conferences, one in Malaysia, one in Thailand which were both recent.
The members are not forced to join or attend this organization, it is optional. However, a possible voting system on venues and board members could solve any issues.
I agree that the ABHRS would be better suited if renamed to IBHRS. There is no reason a doctor who resides outside the United States has to be accredited by them. I don`t know the legal ramifications of this, this is just my opinion on a quick look.
 
B

Bessam Farjo

Valued member
With regards to the ABHRS there seems to be misinformation here. They have always as far as I can remember offered their certification as either ABHRS or IBHRS completely up to the individual doctor. I should know as I used to be a Board Director many years ago. I believe they actually have 2 board directors currently from India
With regards to the ISHRS, their world congress rotates around the world and even more do now as the international memberships expands around the world. The current Treasurer and almost definite future President is from India.
 
D

Dr Kapil Dua

member
Hi..I am Dr. Kapil Dua, hair transplant surgeon from India..I happened to click on this link and want to share the latest information, on the above 2 issues. Being the Board of Director of ABHRS, I would like to share that ABHRS, after clearing the exam, offers the certificate either as Diplomate of International Board Hair Restoration Surgery or American Board Hair Restoration Surgery and there are 4 people from Asia who are now on the Board of ABHRS..
Regarding ISHRS, being the Treasurer of ISHRS, we have a policy of rotating the World Congress every year and it will be coming down to Asia again in 2023...
 
JoeTillman

JoeTillman

Valued member
I think that when the history of the ISHRS is reviewed it makes more sense why it is a North American-centric organization. It was started in the US and at a time when the US was the dominant destination for most things related to cosmetic surgery. That was then however, and if the ISHRS were to follow modern trends, perhaps a more broadly based representation of all member countries would sit on the board.

But why does it matter to you? The ISHRS is not the police of the industry. The ISHRS is not the overseer of the industry and, with all due respect, has zero influence on the progression of the field. Any influence has come from individuals acting on their own behalf. In fact, the ISHRS is not recognized by any ABMS associated board. It is, for all intents and purposes, a club. When you look at the history of FUE, for example, it has only gotten where it is due to three things:

1. Pioneers that refused to give in to the pressure of the ISHRS to consider FUE as only a minor adjunct to FUT. I consider you to be one of them.
2. Patient demand. This is the first time that the patients influenced the direction of a medical industry, that I'm aware of.
3. Device manufacturers, that for better or for worse, made FUE more accessible to untrained physicians. This however also goes hand in hand with point #1 due to inaction by the ISHRS to offer guidance and training to these early adopters.

MISSION & VISION
The mission of the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery is to achieve excellence in medical and surgical outcomes by promoting member education, international collegiality, research, ethics, and public awareness. The vision is to establish the ISHRS as a leading unbiased authority in medical and surgical hair restoration.

CORE PURPOSE
Improving quality of life for people with hair loss.

CORE VALUES
Ethical conduct
Free exchange of knowledge
Pursuit of excellence
Honesty and integrity
Diversity
I think it is safe to say that they are not unbiased and there is not a free exchange of knowledge as it all has to be approved first by any number of committees that take place before each conference/workshop. Hair transplant surgery is supposed to be medicine, not a monopoly so I think any concern about the ISHRS being a US centric organization, while not entirely untrue, is meaningless in the grand scheme of things. There are so many individual organizations that are free to operate autonomously without any oversight from an unrelated organization such as the ISHRS. Whether it be the Asian Society, the Indian Society, the Italian Society, etc., they all should feel free to operate as they see fit without undue influence from an outside entity. To do so, especially given the lack of real world credentialing and leadership, should be considered demeaning.

The ISHRS has the potential to be a phenomenal resource, and I enjoyed my experience (mostly) trying to guide them with one of their campaigns last year. They have been providing great information for new doctors through various workshops and of course the collective knowledge base but I think to be concerned about their lack of inclusiveness, among other issues, is not worth your time.
 
Dr. A s Clinic

Dr. A s Clinic

Valued member
Thank you Joe.
Finally got an answer that can be considered reasonable.
Not answers going in DEFENCE mode.

1. Its good that finally after 22+ conferences, someone decided to shift the venue outside North America. (imagine all american/european/indian doctors to have to take a Visa to China for every annual conference).

2. You have correctly said that it should not make any difference to me. It does not.
But it does/should to the new generation.
They do not know that legally ishrs and ABHRS have no standing/worth in a legal/consumer case. The certificates will not stand the scrutiny of the court if a patient sues the doctor.

3. They create an illusion that by merely attending conference or a workshop one can become a hair transplant surgeon.

--------------------------------------------
For the rest of the doctors who answered, please remember that this is not meant to be an argument but a debate.

When you put out statistics, please put it in context. If 1or 2 out of 22 conferences were held out of North America, then say so.
Its good that mistakes are being corrected. But accepting is the first step. Not contradicting.

Regards,
Dr. A
 
Top